Wal-Mart trims some U.S. employee health coverage

[jedi]

Wal-Mart trims some U.S. employee health coverage - Yahoo! News

Wal-Mart say's its too expensive to cover some employees with the new upcoming laws so cuts away. Now we saw that coming right?

 

[Drunken Yak inc]

Tip of the ice burg if Obamacare gets fully implamented... I'm willing to bet it never will be though.

 

[Bunnykid68]

No surprise.

 

[jgreiner]

And so it begins...we will see MANY companies/entities get rid of their health care plans.....

 

[jgreiner]

Tip of the ice burg if Obamacare gets fully implamented... I'm willing to bet it never will be though.

Exactly

 

[indykid]

I was told by a couple of CEOs that it would be cheaper to pay the penalty imposed by obama-care than it would to insure their workers.

Either obama-messiah is really stupid or he hates America that much!


Or all of the above!

 

[jgreiner]

I was told by a couple of CEOs that it would be cheaper to pay the penalty imposed by obama-care than it would to insure their workers.

Either obama-messiah is really stupid or he hates America that much!


Or all of the above!

He WANTS single payer..meaning that he WANTS all the orgs to DROP their coverage and use the Gov'ts.

 

[Drunken Yak inc]

I was told by a couple of CEOs that it would be cheaper to pay the penalty imposed by obama-care than it would to insure their workers.

Either obama-messiah is really stupid or he hates America that much!


Or all of the above!

Unfortunately, I believe he hates America that much... It depresses me to have to say that about our President... It saddens me that some still refuse to see it.

 

[jedi]

Unfortunately, I believe he hates America that much... It depresses me to have to say that about our President... It saddens me that some still refuse to see it.

He does not HATE America. His version of America is just different than your version. He promised CHANGE when he was elected and that is exactly what he is doing.

It may not be the change you or I like however.

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

I was told by a couple of CEOs that it would be cheaper to pay the penalty imposed by obama-care than it would to insure their workers.

Either obama-messiah is really stupid or he hates America that much!


Or all of the above!

Or hes a genius! That fine money goes into the gov coffers, not too the people of the US .... unless They take that money and use it in social programs

 

[thej27]

When they told us the other day in the benefits meeting the plans were changing the first thing I said was because of obamacare. Although if I remember right the tobacco users rates were higher than just $10 more. The company is also pushing for associates who smoke to quit by providing health counselors and paying for a nicotine gum. They did expand some of their dental coverage.

 

[Bummer]

I'm confused. How is this Obama's fault? The cost of health care was rocketing upward long before Obama gained office.

Insurance companies exist to make money for their stock holders and the CEO. Nothing wrong with that, exactly. The thing is, doing it skims money out of what the insurance companies take in. In the dreams of Insurance Compeny CEOs, everybody buys insurance but nobody gets sick. Cha-ching, profit. Again, since we're all happy capitalists, there's nothing wrong with that. It does, however, kind of put a crimp in that whole "insurance pays" concept.

Insurance companies use their size to force a reduction in the amount they pay for services. Since providers are businesses too they need to make a profit. That means they have to raise prices for those not covered by the big insurance companies, in order to compensate for what the insured don't have to pay. Ultimately this ratchets up the cost of health care for everyone. Yet again, that's the way it works in a capitalistic system. But it does seem to be a system that feeds upon itself.

So, help me understand. I'm just a simple working guy. Why isn't this the result of the Insurance companies being for-profit entities? Why isn't the constant upward spiral of prices a natural result of capitalism as it works in the real world? Why isn't this thread about WalMart finding another way to pay employees less in a tough job market while executive compensation rises?

 

[radonc73]

Because he wants a singlepayer system your and my taxes/ the Gov in charge of healthcare. By making the "penalty" less than the cost of paying for it he is forcing people into the Gov programs and then the Gov decides if Grandma gets a new hip or cateract surgery. They will pay Drs less money so less people are going to run up $500,000 in school loans to make what the Gov pays them. What will happen is that you will wait months longer for cancer treatments, or just to see a Dr. that will take what the Gov pays. Like Canadas wonderful system where the rich are coming here and paying for the medical care, same thing will hapen here a larger divide between the have and have nots. However they have seen fit to exclude Congress from Obamacare.

 

[RockofStrength]

I'm confused. How is this Obama's fault? The cost of health care was rocketing upward long before Obama gained office.

Insurance companies exist to make money for their stock holders and the CEO. Nothing wrong with that, exactly. The thing is, doing it skims money out of what the insurance companies take in. In the dreams of Insurance Compeny CEOs, everybody buys insurance but nobody gets sick. Cha-ching, profit. Again, since we're all happy capitalists, there's nothing wrong with that. It does, however, kind of put a crimp in that whole "insurance pays" concept.

Insurance companies use their size to force a reduction in the amount they pay for services. Since providers are businesses too they need to make a profit. That means they have to raise prices for those not covered by the big insurance companies, in order to compensate for what the insured don't have to pay. Ultimately this ratchets up the cost of health care for everyone. Yet again, that's the way it works in a capitalistic system. But it does seem to be a system that feeds upon itself.

So, help me understand. I'm just a simple working guy. Why isn't this the result of the Insurance companies being for-profit entities? Why isn't the constant upward spiral of prices a natural result of capitalism as it works in the real world? Why isn't this thread about WalMart finding another way to pay employees less in a tough job market while executive compensation rises?

Because many changes are taking place not merely because of economic woes or other turmoil in the market, but rather to prepare for the incoming banhammer of regulation.

 

[Bitter Clinger]

I'm confused. How is this Obama's fault? The cost of health care was rocketing upward long before Obama gained office.

Insurance companies exist to make money for their stock holders and the CEO. Nothing wrong with that, exactly. The thing is, doing it skims money out of what the insurance companies take in. In the dreams of Insurance Compeny CEOs, everybody buys insurance but nobody gets sick. Cha-ching, profit. Again, since we're all happy capitalists, there's nothing wrong with that. It does, however, kind of put a crimp in that whole "insurance pays" concept.

Insurance companies use their size to force a reduction in the amount they pay for services. Since providers are businesses too they need to make a profit. That means they have to raise prices for those not covered by the big insurance companies, in order to compensate for what the insured don't have to pay. Ultimately this ratchets up the cost of health care for everyone. Yet again, that's the way it works in a capitalistic system. But it does seem to be a system that feeds upon itself.

So, help me understand. I'm just a simple working guy. Why isn't this the result of the Insurance companies being for-profit entities? Why isn't the constant upward spiral of prices a natural result of capitalism as it works in the real world? Why isn't this thread about WalMart finding another way to pay employees less in a tough job market while executive compensation rises?

Your beloved Teleprompter-In-Chief is only interested in expanding government's control over you simple working guys. If he really wanted to reduce the cost of healthcare, it would only have required a one page bill, not the thousands of pages of obamacare that the 111th Congress shoved down our throats. All the law would need to do:

1) Tort reform to protect good doctors from ridiculous lawsuits.

2) Provide for health insurance to be sold across state lines, just like any other insurance.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Health care isn't a federal issue. I support federal research providing information to states to help craft plans and policies, but beyond that the federal government should stay out of it. I agree that states should pass laws limiting ridiculous lawsuits.

 

[NYFelon]

Because he wants a singlepayer system your and my taxes/ the Gov in charge of healthcare. By making the "penalty" less than the cost of paying for it he is forcing people into the Gov programs and then the Gov decides if Grandma gets a new hip or cateract surgery. They will pay Drs less money so less people are going to run up $500,000 in school loans to make what the Gov pays them. What will happen is that you will wait months longer for cancer treatments, or just to see a Dr. that will take what the Gov pays. Like Canadas wonderful system where the rich are coming here and paying for the medical care, same thing will hapen here a larger divide between the have and have nots. However they have seen fit to exclude Congress from Obamacare.

I disagree that it forces companies into dumping their insurance coverage plans. What it does is incentivizes those companies into dropping their insurance coverage, since as you said, the penalty for not carrying the minimum required coverage is less expensive than providing the insurance itself. As I've said since day one when the overall characteristics of the bill were made public. In the roundabout, the entire law is a scheme to raise tax revenue from taxpayers, as if you do not carry insurance on your own, you will pay a $600 tax. This is far less expensive than any quality family health insurance plan one can buy as a private purchaser of insurance, that is, one not participating in an employer offered group rate policy. Businesses also see an incentive to dump their employees onto the public dole because again, it is less expensive than providing insurance for their employees. So you get tax revenue from uninsured citizens or self-employed persons, and you get tax revenue from businesses whom cancel their coverage plans. All the while these same people get dumped into one of the federally run insurance exchanges.

Deregulation would go much further towards correcting the cost of medical insurance. Think about it, I can buy automobile, homeowners, life and almost every other kind of insurance from companies based anywhere in the country. Medical insurance though I must buy from a provider in my state, if I am not a group-rate participant. This gives the appearance of competition, but in effect sets in place quasi-monopolistic practices, because companies aren't really competing with one another. For instance a quality family care plan in my region ranges anywhere from 2 - 4K monthly. This accounts for most of the major insurance providers rates. If I go 350 miles north, the same exact coverages are anywhere from $500 - $1000. Now, open the market up entirely, make Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield compete with Mutual of Omaha or some other out of state providers, and the rates will be forced to come down. The market conditions made available to consumers will then force the in-state conglomerates to adjust their price schedules or lose all business.

just my

 

[Pyroponce]

I'm confused. How is this Obama's fault? The cost of health care was rocketing upward long before Obama gained office.

It's not his fault. People who don't like Obamacare will see the government's hand in this, and you can't change their mind about that. The price of healthcare has been going up for years (even before I heard about Obama). I do like the idea about purchasing health coverage across state lines, but won't that just lead to a race to the bottom of the uncomprehensive health coverage barrel? What state has the fewest health coverage regulations?

 

[Bummer]

Your beloved Teleprompter-In-Chief ...

Sigh. I didn't vote for Obama. I'm not a fan of Obama's. In fact, I'm a long time Ron Paul supporter. I just asked a question.

 

[Bummer]

Health care isn't a federal issue.

I agree.

I support federal research providing information to states to help craft plans and policies, but beyond that the federal government should stay out of it.

Why should there be federal research to help states craft plans and policies?

I agree that states should pass laws limiting ridiculous lawsuits.

Should legitimate lawsuits be limited as well? Seriously.

My daughter went to the emergency room with four out of five symptoms of the placenta separating from her uterus. The placenta had shifted blocking the fifth symptom. They patted her on the head and sat her in the corner for five and a half hours. When the doctor finally got there he immediately took the baby via cesarean section. The baby was without oxygen for at least 5 hours. He suffered serious brain damage and a saddle stroke. He was born blind and deaf with his left arm and leg pulled up tightly against his body. There are about five inches of medical paperwork documenting this. His medical expenses have been huge, from weeks in Riley neonatal ICU to four hours of therapy a week for three years so far. My daughter looked into suing the hospital for the cost of medical expenses. No house. No income. No big payoff. Just medical expenses. The lawyers wouldn't touch it. They blamed it on Indiana law.

It would seem that current Indiana law pretty much limits legitimate law suits. My grandson has been tossed out with the bathwater.

Do you feel that the law should protect incompetent health care providers?