Employers May Drop Health Care and Pay Penalty

That health insurance reform pushed by that ‘communist’ in the White House may be a blessing to the business community.  Too bad that the Chamber of Commerce fought so hard against the reforms because it appears that small businesses will reap great financial rewards from not having to cover their employees.  The $2K fine is cheaper.

The Columbus Dispatch yesterday reported:

The new health-reform law promises to penalize companies with more than 50 workers that don’t provide employee health insurance.

But the hit – $2,000 a year per worker – would cost less than providing health insurance. Some worry that employers would rather pay the fine than pay the insurance costs.

The average annual individual employee premium last year was $4,824, and for families, $13,375, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Employers typically pay 73 percent to 83 percent of those costs.

So much for ‘communism’ or even socialism for that matter.

Now, what’s that cute Tea Party jingle again= the one about the communist living in the White House?


7 thoughts on “Employers May Drop Health Care and Pay Penalty

  1. That’s what I’ve been saying all along! If you take this healthcare burdon off the backs of US industry – an act that can only work to increase US business competitiveness with other industrialized nations that subsidize health care – a very capitalist concept. Capitalism relies on robust infrastructure. Theoretically you can consider the American worker a part of the infrastructure of the economic capacity of the nation. An investment into this “infrastructure” via affordable health care – can only increase the US’s productive capability. If health care is quantized and standardized across the board amongst all strata of society and amongst all taxpayers, that can only improve the efficiancy of health care.

    I think there is some kind of neocon objection to supporting the US worker and supporting US manufacturing – the chief benificiary of subsidized health care. I think they have it in their mind that the US should be a post manufacturing economy and that manufacturing workers are not really worthwile as an investment. I think the neocons are ideologically focused on exporting capitalism via creating worker states such as China, India, Central and South America; and that is the mindset of the chamber of commerce. That’s why bailouts for the Financial and Insurance industry = OK, but bailout for Detroit = Bad. I don’t have any proof of my theory, I just think there is something deeper than just “government takeover of healthcare” in the ruling class’s objections.

  2. But, the problem is the workers are getting it free. It’s not like social security where they pay a share of the future benefit. Here the employer, who has risked everything starting the business and making it viable is the payor. Why should talented, creative and risk taking individuals who put people to work be targeted to pay the bill? Without them there would be no job; why should this business man keep on going when his tax bill amounts to 45+%.? It seems to me if health care is a right and not a privilege, then the government should provide it either totally free or paid for under equitable taxes or in the case of the 50% who pay no taxes some type of community work. The give-aways must stop and so too the continued increase of taxes, fees, and pass through expenses to the business class.

  3. Why should talented, creative and risk taking individuals who put people to work be targeted to pay the bill?

    Good point and further, why should an employer have to pay for the health insurance of its employee? Who mandated that in the first place? None of the EU entrepreneurs have to do that, and I’m sure that Chinese businesses don’t either.

    It’s a stupid idea that has long past its worthiness. Universal health coverage- by the government is the only way that small business will get out from under that burden. So tell me, UtF, why was the Chamber of Commerce participants in the “Kill the Bill” rallies???

  4. I give up, why? Maybe, it’s socialism, eh?

    Well, what can we say, M_R. I think we both new with fossilified thinking like this, no wonder we are going down the tubes. The situation, my friend, is no longer serious; it is dire. Where is the leader, the politician, who will stand up and say or write that we have to cut programs and raise taxes? Who is going to stand up for cutting complete programs from the Department of War, that is, the marine corps, the air force, and the navy. Really, all we need is the army with the army air corps. Why do we allocate billions of dollars for the air force and the navy to move men around, when the army loads them up on their planes and moves them to where they are needed? The navy is sitting ducks on a pond in this day of GPS. We need another aircraft carrier like we need a hole in the head!

    And, my friend, if we are not going to centralize education, as the rest of the world has done, why then keep the Department of Education? Either we centralize education with mandate courses from Washington with appropriate staffing and pay, end the school boards, end teacher unions, and any local control of the education process, yes, even parents, or we might as well eliminate the education bureaucracy.

    While we are at it, my friend, we ought to stop all the airline subsidies and let them all fail. We then could one grand modern airtransportation fleet owned by the United States. Lets not forget how the process worked out. Government subsidized Wells Fargo and the Pony Express to move mail, then it took the subsidy away from them and gave it to the railroads to make them successful, then the subsidy was taken from the railroads and given to the airline companies to move mail. Again, the ’50s, our golden time,
    we can remember buying a airmail stamp to have it go by air instead of rail or by the continental busing companies. However, soon there were no airmail stamps, the government just ended the subsidies to railroads and the bus companies and gave it all to the airlines. Ah, yes, my friend, all these businesses were such rugged individualist, eh? I bet the Chambers of Commerce weren’t calling this socialism!

    Moreover, there are the huge subsidies given to the the agricultural interests. Just think of sugar beets, corn, Nafta. OH, i have to stop, maybe some one will pick up the baton on agriculture and the tremendous welfare payments, oops pardon me, deficiency payments is what it is called by this rugged individualist. OMG, socialism to the farmer. Where’s GB, lol……

  5. UptheFlag- you paint a sad scenario and a hopeless one too. Who? you ask? No one that I know of. Perhaps it will come from a small group of non-politicians, a group of very wealthy Americans who are not afraid of ‘losing’ anything be speaking out. How about Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Steve Jobs, Jack Welch and Michael Bloomberg?

    What the hell, they’ve got nothing to lose and our nation to gain!

Comments are closed.