Local governments cutting hours over Obamacare costs
Many cash-strapped cities and counties facing the prospect of shelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars in new health-care costs under the Affordable Care Act are opting instead to reduce the number of hours their part-time employees work.
Local governments cutting hours over Obamacare costs
Many cash-strapped cities and counties facing the prospect of shelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars in new health-care costs under the Affordable Care Act are opting instead to reduce the number of hours their part-time employees work.
As of right now, the only thing happening is premiums continuing to rise- That is nothing new- For sure, projected increases / changes should be a cause for concern- but I have yet to see any tangible evidence that anyone is currently paying more specifically because of ACA-
Hi.
The other things that are happening, and this has been documented extensively here, is that people are losing health insurance and getting their hours cut.
There is no disputing the ACA has caused premiums to rise, so I have no idea where you are getting this information.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Dsn150:
As of right now, the only thing happening is premiums continuing to rise- That is nothing new- For sure, projected increases / changes should be a cause for concern- but I have yet to see any tangible evidence that anyone is currently paying more specifically because of ACA-
Hi.
The other things that are happening, and this has been documented extensively here, is that people are losing health insurance and getting their hours cut.
There is no disputing the ACA has caused premiums to rise, so I have no idea where you are getting this information.
Healthcare reform isn't supposed to benefit the healthy. It is designed to serve needs of the sickest and most vulnerable. Obamacare prevents insurers denying coverage. Guaranteed coverage is supported by a majority of Americans.
So health care "reform" is supposed to punish the healthy then?
Remember when Obama said all of that?
0
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Healthcare reform isn't supposed to benefit the healthy. It is designed to serve needs of the sickest and most vulnerable. Obamacare prevents insurers denying coverage. Guaranteed coverage is supported by a majority of Americans.
So health care "reform" is supposed to punish the healthy then?
I dont know how you do it man. 14 beats you in every thread. EVERY single one. He knows more about this than you do. Sure, you sound intelligent, but all your post come back to "i dont believe it " or "i dont believe your proof".
Honestly, I dont know why he argues with you. I guess maybe because you represent the american public that thinks they know whats going on becuase they watch cnn .....
Thank you.
And since Wall Street revealed his is just trolling, there is no point in responding to anything he says.
0
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
I dont know how you do it man. 14 beats you in every thread. EVERY single one. He knows more about this than you do. Sure, you sound intelligent, but all your post come back to "i dont believe it " or "i dont believe your proof".
Honestly, I dont know why he argues with you. I guess maybe because you represent the american public that thinks they know whats going on becuase they watch cnn .....
Thank you.
And since Wall Street revealed his is just trolling, there is no point in responding to anything he says.
Nothing has happened yet to make a reaction like this, it is to a degree very speculative..nothing is known and there are many changes which will come.
UPS does not need to take this action, some corps will and some wont. Some will and make a public event of it, others will do so without the fanfare.
The larger issue is not the change, rather if you dislike the change what would you suggest that might make a systemic improvement?
Tort reform is not a systemic solution, so lets hear what solutions there are instead of the non-stop complaining..
Why dont they? Have you sat in on there meeting or know their future plans? Where is your proof they dont need to do this? You nor I know what the future holds, and neither does UPS. Maybe they are planning on keeping all of their employees employed, in the worst case scenario that the health care cost is more expensive in the near & distant future.
Just like you wouldnt listen about Joe Flacco 8 months ago, some people know more about things than you, just like you are wise about things others arent. I'm not here to "pick a fight" or be the "internet tough guy". I just happen to think you are way off base, so of course that should put you on the defensive, its human nature.
bol wall
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
See I dont buy that..
Nothing has happened yet to make a reaction like this, it is to a degree very speculative..nothing is known and there are many changes which will come.
UPS does not need to take this action, some corps will and some wont. Some will and make a public event of it, others will do so without the fanfare.
The larger issue is not the change, rather if you dislike the change what would you suggest that might make a systemic improvement?
Tort reform is not a systemic solution, so lets hear what solutions there are instead of the non-stop complaining..
Why dont they? Have you sat in on there meeting or know their future plans? Where is your proof they dont need to do this? You nor I know what the future holds, and neither does UPS. Maybe they are planning on keeping all of their employees employed, in the worst case scenario that the health care cost is more expensive in the near & distant future.
Just like you wouldnt listen about Joe Flacco 8 months ago, some people know more about things than you, just like you are wise about things others arent. I'm not here to "pick a fight" or be the "internet tough guy". I just happen to think you are way off base, so of course that should put you on the defensive, its human nature.
We all know something had to be done with health care. Why not start with a plan(s) to help just the uninsured at 1st.
The problem is nobody read the entire law before it was passed and now we are dealing with the fallout. Remember this is the tip of the iceberg with this law. We have yet to hit 2018 when the law is enacted to its full extent. I would rather scrap it now and start with something on a smaller scale than this massive boondoggle. My company insures 25 employees, their spouses and kids as needed without a surcharge. We wil have to review the rates, plans and options when our agent brings is the info later this year. Renewal date is 1/1/2014 so time will tell. Carry on good people of covers
0
We all know something had to be done with health care. Why not start with a plan(s) to help just the uninsured at 1st.
The problem is nobody read the entire law before it was passed and now we are dealing with the fallout. Remember this is the tip of the iceberg with this law. We have yet to hit 2018 when the law is enacted to its full extent. I would rather scrap it now and start with something on a smaller scale than this massive boondoggle. My company insures 25 employees, their spouses and kids as needed without a surcharge. We wil have to review the rates, plans and options when our agent brings is the info later this year. Renewal date is 1/1/2014 so time will tell. Carry on good people of covers
We all know something had to be done with health care. Why not start with a plan(s) to help just the uninsured at 1st.
The problem is nobody read the entire law before it was passed and now we are dealing with the fallout. Remember this is the tip of the iceberg with this law. We have yet to hit 2018 when the law is enacted to its full extent. I would rather scrap it now and start with something on a smaller scale than this massive boondoggle. My company insures 25 employees, their spouses and kids as needed without a surcharge. We wil have to review the rates, plans and options when our agent brings is the info later this year. Renewal date is 1/1/2014 so time will tell. Carry on good people of covers
I concur. The problem is, as shown by some in this thread, doing absolutely nothing is a "option". I would love to see both sides working on the issue instead of just pointing fingers.
0
Quote Originally Posted by lordspoint:
We all know something had to be done with health care. Why not start with a plan(s) to help just the uninsured at 1st.
The problem is nobody read the entire law before it was passed and now we are dealing with the fallout. Remember this is the tip of the iceberg with this law. We have yet to hit 2018 when the law is enacted to its full extent. I would rather scrap it now and start with something on a smaller scale than this massive boondoggle. My company insures 25 employees, their spouses and kids as needed without a surcharge. We wil have to review the rates, plans and options when our agent brings is the info later this year. Renewal date is 1/1/2014 so time will tell. Carry on good people of covers
I concur. The problem is, as shown by some in this thread, doing absolutely nothing is a "option". I would love to see both sides working on the issue instead of just pointing fingers.
Any update on the Conservative plan other than "not Obamacare"?
a couple of repub senators have suggested having workers
take their health plans from job to job supposedly giving a tax advantage and
making coverage more affordable.
another guy wants to allow small companies to pool their
risk thereby getting bigger discounts from ins providers.
allowing policies to be sold across state lines is another
idea.
some repubs want to increase the amnt families can save (tax
free) for medical expenses…along with health savings accounts this can put
health care within reach of many more families.
another repub rep has
advocated medical liability reform which
could save as much as 56 billion.
yet other repub lawmakers have proposed bills which
establisish transparity of pricing and medical costs so patients can compare prices
and choose more effectively.
another guy has introduced legislation (a tex rep I think) to allow Medicaid patients
to convert government benefits to cover private coverage.
A Georgia
rep, tom price introduced an alternative to the affordable care act that
includes many of the above.
a pol named enzi introduced his package in 2007
most Americans disapprove of obamacare with everyone wanting
an exemption and even unions are withdrawing support once, after they paased it
they started to figure out what was in it.
a lot of dems oppose ideas that put the patient in charge
instead of the government….
ideas that will increase competition among ins providers and
strengthen market forces rather than weaken them.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Cool_Arrow:
Any update on the Conservative plan other than "not Obamacare"?
a couple of repub senators have suggested having workers
take their health plans from job to job supposedly giving a tax advantage and
making coverage more affordable.
another guy wants to allow small companies to pool their
risk thereby getting bigger discounts from ins providers.
allowing policies to be sold across state lines is another
idea.
some repubs want to increase the amnt families can save (tax
free) for medical expenses…along with health savings accounts this can put
health care within reach of many more families.
another repub rep has
advocated medical liability reform which
could save as much as 56 billion.
yet other repub lawmakers have proposed bills which
establisish transparity of pricing and medical costs so patients can compare prices
and choose more effectively.
another guy has introduced legislation (a tex rep I think) to allow Medicaid patients
to convert government benefits to cover private coverage.
A Georgia
rep, tom price introduced an alternative to the affordable care act that
includes many of the above.
a pol named enzi introduced his package in 2007
most Americans disapprove of obamacare with everyone wanting
an exemption and even unions are withdrawing support once, after they paased it
they started to figure out what was in it.
a lot of dems oppose ideas that put the patient in charge
instead of the government….
ideas that will increase competition among ins providers and
strengthen market forces rather than weaken them.
This bill has nothing to do with the delivery of healthcare. The patient and doctor have no power. Your fate will be determined by an overweight govt employee who smokes 2 packs a day and cannot benchpress 5 pounds. Liberalism is a mental disorder and it is the Enemy Within!
0
This bill has nothing to do with the delivery of healthcare. The patient and doctor have no power. Your fate will be determined by an overweight govt employee who smokes 2 packs a day and cannot benchpress 5 pounds. Liberalism is a mental disorder and it is the Enemy Within!
For decades, costs have been rising out of control. There is little that any U.S. government can do. Although according to US department of health and Society of actuaries, 2014 insurance premiums are expected to be lower in online exchanges of at least 10 States.
The real problem of rising costs lies in healthcare providers. Hospitals charge high prices because they can. Competitive market forces that drive prices lower are mostly non-existent in US healthcare. Countries that succeeded in restraining inflation have greater government intervention.
0
For decades, costs have been rising out of control. There is little that any U.S. government can do. Although according to US department of health and Society of actuaries, 2014 insurance premiums are expected to be lower in online exchanges of at least 10 States.
The real problem of rising costs lies in healthcare providers. Hospitals charge high prices because they can. Competitive market forces that drive prices lower are mostly non-existent in US healthcare. Countries that succeeded in restraining inflation have greater government intervention.
This bill has nothing to do with the delivery of healthcare. The patient and doctor have no power. Your fate will be determined by an overweight govt employee who smokes 2 packs a day and cannot benchpress 5 pounds. Liberalism is a mental disorder and it is the Enemy Within!
It could be but my friend's doctor have been argued for tests needed for my friend over the phone with an insurance administer with absolutely no medical background over the past 4 years almost each time one needed to be done under the CURRENT system so what's the difference?
0
Quote Originally Posted by sundance:
This bill has nothing to do with the delivery of healthcare. The patient and doctor have no power. Your fate will be determined by an overweight govt employee who smokes 2 packs a day and cannot benchpress 5 pounds. Liberalism is a mental disorder and it is the Enemy Within!
It could be but my friend's doctor have been argued for tests needed for my friend over the phone with an insurance administer with absolutely no medical background over the past 4 years almost each time one needed to be done under the CURRENT system so what's the difference?
For decades, costs have been rising out of control. There is little that any U.S. government can do. Although according to US department of health and Society of actuaries, 2014 insurance premiums are expected to be lower in online exchanges of at least 10 States.
The real problem of rising costs lies in healthcare providers. Hospitals charge high prices because they can. Competitive market forces that drive prices lower are mostly non-existent in US healthcare. Countries that succeeded in restraining inflation have greater government intervention.
Well played Sir.
0
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
For decades, costs have been rising out of control. There is little that any U.S. government can do. Although according to US department of health and Society of actuaries, 2014 insurance premiums are expected to be lower in online exchanges of at least 10 States.
The real problem of rising costs lies in healthcare providers. Hospitals charge high prices because they can. Competitive market forces that drive prices lower are mostly non-existent in US healthcare. Countries that succeeded in restraining inflation have greater government intervention.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
