Health Care

[Kev3188]

I agree E..

http://freemarketcur...epayermyths.php

This law will eventually pull a SS/Medicare type TAX right out of everyone's paycheck and a bureaucrat will decide our benefits.

It is unbelievable to me how anyone can support this law.

You know who decides your benefits now, right?

It's unbelievable to me how anyone could think the current system is acceptable...

While Obamacare is deeply flawed and very disappointing (thanks to the insurance lobbyists and the right) its easier to change the direction of a moving object than a stationary one.

Exactly. The focus should be on getting back to the original intent-not the watered down current version- as opposed to whether it should exist or not.

And you would rather have a committee of government bureaucrats "determining YOUR benifits?"

As opposed to corporate boards, lobbyists, Big Pharma, et al? Yes.

given the governments track record in running any program, I can't imagine anyone wanting them involved in their healthcare.

*Any* program? That's pretty broad. Let's see...

The water I used to make the coffee I'm drinking was clean, thanks to a government program.

As I type this, my son's reading a book. He learned to read in part through government employees.

The road we're going to take in a little bit to run errands is passable thanks to a government program.

In addition, a large section of it has been improved both for safety *and* to boost economic activity. Yep, that's a government program.

It's gonna be hot as hell here this weekend (Ok, maybe not N.C. hot, but still), so we'll likely be a government run pool.


See where I'm going here?

 

[WorldTraveler]

Good post but the disdain for government is not the issue but that government programs that involve entitlement and wealth transfer are never popular.

The health care system in the US is broken except for those who think ANY PRICE is acceptable. For the vast majority of the people, that is not a realistic situation.

As much as Obama wants to say otherwise, the simple fact is that there will be losers in Obamacare in order to fund care for those who don't have it. You can't add X% more people to the system and expect the rest to continue to bear the burden which is what happens when you take a predominantly private pay system like what has existed in the US for non-seniors and move significant parts of that system to government control.

 

[OldGuy@AA]

Latest news on Obamacare: UPS to cancel health Insurance for full time employee spouses, do to Obamacare, as was stated by Company representatives.-------- So you don't think it could happen at AA? Think again!

I would like to know exactly what part of Obamacare is the problem. I also think if the house and senate would work together to fix what is wrong with it we would be much better off. You can bet AA won't miss this one. Anything to pi$$ on the employees is their agenda. It would also be interesting to know if the medical coverage is free for UPS non union (management) employees. Many wives have health care offered with their jobs but it is cost prohibitive. AA is not giving us this free (not since 89) so it should not be denied to spouses.

 

[WorldTraveler]

The problem from an economic standpoint is that healthcare in the US for non-seniors has been predominantly private pay system in which the free market (more or less) determines the level of service provided. The more or less is because consumers don't really make health care decisions but instead their health care providers do. If you can spend someone else's money, there is very little to be attentive to the cost. But American health care is first rate in the world, at least for those who have access to it.

The ECONOMIC problem is that health care under Obamacare is moving from being a consumer driven service to one in which the gov't determines who can get service and the gov't will interfere with free market forces that set prices and levels of service.

Health care is moving from being a consumer-driven service to an entitlement program that is required by the government.

And, because of Medicare, healthcare for all seniors is basically an entitlement program with a private pay option on the side for those who can afford it. But far fewer seniors than non-seniors go without health care coverage.

The US has some of the most efficient and best government services for things that Kev mentions above. However, the US government is far less efficient and not much different from other countries in delivering entitlement programs.

When you take a privately run system where the free market has generally been free to operate (companies and individuals can buy coverage or not) and suddenly require that people who have not paid for health care be covered, the economics of the system no longer work, in part because the primary additional costs come from adding higher costs to current users to cover people who weren't in the system.

I'm not arguing that the current system is correct or that health care isn't something that every person in a modern society should or shouldn't have access to. I am simply saying the fundamental arguments that were used to say that Obamacare are economically incorrect.
And, the very reason why polls show that the majority of Americans are not happy with Obamacare is because the majority of Americans do participate in the current private pay health care system and will see their levels of service fall and/or prices increase in order to fund more people in the system.

BTW,
DL says that its health care costs will increase by $100M under Obamacare and they provide some of the specific reasons why.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/22/delta-air-lines-next-year-our-health-care-costs-will-increase-by-nearly-100-million/?partner=yahootix

 

[Kev3188]

I also think if the house and senate would work together to fix what is wrong with it we would be much better off.

You & ~300m other Americans. We should be so lucky!

You can bet AA won't miss this one.

Of course they won't. Neither will DL, who are already working to manage expectations...

 

[WorldTraveler]

TO be clear, DL, along with several other large Atlanta companies, participated in a meeting with the Obama Administration at Grady Hospital, a public hospital in downtown Atlanta run by Fulton and Dekalb counties.

Yes, DL is saying that the increase in costs is of concern to them and they undoubtedly are passing on the letter to their employees to let them know that DL, just like UPS (also an Atlanta company) cannot simply absorb costs.

Here is the letter for those who haven't clicked thru to the article:
I have highlighted key portions which are mine (not DL's highlights) and which reflect answers to the questions in this post about what is wrong with Obamacare.

Delta Air Lines letter to the Obama administration

June 13, 2013

I want to thank you for the opportunity to meet with you at Grady Hospital in Atlanta recently to discuss the impact of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on Delta Air Lines. The small group setting allowed for a good exchange of ideas that I found very valuable. As you know, I and the other large employer representatives in attendance did not agree with your initial assessment that the ACA means “business as usual” for large employers. Since you committed to share our concerns with Secretary Sebelius and the President, I thought it might be helpful to summarize the major points for you here.

As you heard from many of us, the ACA will result in increasing costs, for both our companies and our employees, and will also reduce the benefits provided. Here are some of the major drivers of these effects:
The Reinsurance Fee — The ACA requires large employers to pay an annual fee of $63 per covered participant in 2014. For Delta’s roughly 160,000 enrolled active and retired employees and their family members, this represents more than $10 million added to the cost of providing health care next year. As we discussed, this fee, which is meant to help stabilize the state exchanges as they get started, provides absolutely zero direct benefit to our participants. It is, essentially, a direct subsidy form us and our employees to those who participate in the exchanges.
Covering Children Until Age 26 – There is no doubt that this has been a popular provision nationwide and at Delta we have seen more than 8,000 children added to our rolls resulting in a permanent increase in our overall costs of about $14 million per year. We are required to charge the same for these children as we do for any other children covered by our plan. However, our experience shows that, on average, these children are consuming considerably more health care than other children we cover. In essence, we are experiencing adverse selection in this population and that is having an impact on the costs that we and our employees pay for coverage.
The Individual Mandate – As you know, in 2014, the individual mandate under the ACA kicks in and those not currently covered under any plan must enroll or pay a penalty to the Federal government. Our actuaries have estimated how many of those who currently opt out of our coverage will now opt in. Their estimates are that this requirement will add another $14 Million in costs to our plan each year, net of the premiums paid by these individuals.
Thirty Hour Rule – As you heard at the meeting, many employers are planning to reduce employees’ hours to less than thirty per week in order to avoid the requirements to either provide health coverage or pay fees for those employees. Delta is not one of those employers, and we do not plan to force employees to work fewer hours as a result of the ACA. For others, however, this represents one of the negative unintended consequences of the ACA and we support efforts to raise the limit to 40 hours per week rather than thirty.Pay or Play Penalties – The group health coverage Delta provides to its full time employees more than meets the definition of “affordable coverage” as defined by the ACA. However, the proposed regulations that implement this provision of the law are very complex and, when finalized, may unnecessarily impose HR information systems changes that will be costly to build and maintain. In addition, there are many unsettled principles surrounding this provision of ACA and based on the fact that it is already June, employers will not have time to react should final regulations be issued this year. This puts employers at risk of being assessed these penalties in innocent situations (such as when employees take voluntary leaves of absences) and imposes additional costs, even in those situations where the vast majority of employees are offered affordable, comprehensive coverage.
Cadillac Tax – Recent data released is evidence of what you heard in the meeting–employers are reducing or eliminating rich plan designs in order to ensure they do not pay the tax, since doing so would represent a significant waste of money. At Delta, we did that last year as we eliminated one of the plan designs available to our pilot group specifically because it would have risked being subject to the Cadillac tax. However, keep in mind that, eventually, it is not just the “rich” plan designs that will be affected. Essentially, the Cadillac tax level represents a “ceiling” on the value of benefits provided in health plans. However, that ceiling rises each year only at the rate of the consumer price index (CPI). On the other hand, medical inflation is rising at a higher rate than CPI. The way the math works, given enough years, all plans will eventually risk being subject to the Cadillac Tax and as they do, the natural reaction will be to continually reduce benefits provided in order to avoid the tax.

At Delta we are doing a lot of positive things to provide a platform for our employees to live healthier, more productive lives. We offer free preventive coverage, we offer telemedicine services, a concierge nurse line and great tools that provide vital data (such as it exists) on quality and cost among the provider community. We provide incentives that reward employees for doing the things that help lead to better long-term health. But make no mistake—the costs imposed on Delta and our employees are very real and they are escalating. The costs mentioned above, when combined with normal medical inflation and the end of the [Early Retiree Reinsurance] program mean that the cost of providing health care to our employees will increase by nearly $100,000,000 next year. Delta will have to absorb the vast majority of that increase in costs so that we continue providing a high value, high quality health plan, but some of it will have to be shared with our employees as well. And of course, the balance that the company pays simply means less left over for other investments that make our business stronger.

In closing, the ACA is anything but business as usual for large employers like Delta. It represents real and significant changes that provide real challenges for both our company and our employees. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this input. If I can be of assistance in any other way, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Respectfully,

Robert L. Kight
Vice President, Global HR Services & Labor Relations
Delta Air Lines

 

[Thomas Paine]

So, even though it is " deeply flawed and very disappointing" your solution is to add more regulations to the 18,000+ now on the books? And you would rather have a committee of government bureaucrats "determining YOUR benifits?" How do you think that will work out? ----You're quick to criticize, but don't contribute to any realistic solutions!

"Government bureaucrats", who we can vote out of office, vs "Corporate executives looking to cheat us out of benefits entirely"? Is there really a question there? Sure many of the bureaucrats are bought off but we still have a better shot than going straight to the wolves themselves. Quick to criticize? didn't this start with me responding to your criticism? Like I said its easier to change the direction of a moving object than a stationary one, I say getting things moving with the current version of Obamacare, as disappointing and deeply flawed as it is, is a better solution than doing nothing and staying with what we have.

 

[MCI transplant]

So, you think AA will dodge the Obamacare bullet? -------- Costs go up, profits go down, so how do you think AA will make it up the difference? Say, didn't Obama say the cost of health care would go "down" under obamacare? And if you like your present policy, you could keep it? ------- Humm! What else was he wrong on?

 

[Thomas Paine]

Social Security

and more. http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=7

 

[Thomas Paine]

So, you think AA will dodge the Obamacare bullet? -------- Costs go up, profits go down, so how do you think AA will make it up the difference? Say, didn't Obama say the cost of health care would go "down" under obamacare? And if you like your present policy, you could keep it? ------- Humm! What else was he wrong on?

Who likes their present policy?

 

[MCI transplant]

"Government bureaucrats", who we can vote out of office, vs "Corporate executives looking to cheat us out of benefits entirely"? Is there really a question there? Sure many of the bureaucrats are bought off but we still have a better shot than going straight to the wolves themselves. Quick to criticize? didn't this start with me responding to your criticism? Like I said its easier to change the direction of a moving object than a stationary one, I say getting things moving with the current version of Obamacare, as disappointing and deeply flawed as it is, is a better solution than doing nothing and staying with what we have.

You can't "vote them out of office" if your dead! Or would you rather wait for an election, while one of your family is waiting on a Committee to make a determination if they'll get the care they need to survive? Besides, I believe these committee members are appointed, not elected to their positions!, You know! Like the top brass of the TWU!!!------ As for your cute suggestion on "a moving object", ------ I've got one for you! How about starting off with a clean sheet of paper?

 

[MCI transplant]

Who likes their present policy?

Apparently, the majority of the American people!--------- Believe it or not, there is a whole big world out there that doesn't revolve around AA's policies!!!!

 

[Thomas Paine]

How about starting off with a clean sheet of paper?

Who has proposed that? At the moment you have two options, Obamacare or do nothing.

 

[Thomas Paine]

Apparently, the majority of the American people!

I doubt that, I have yet to hear anyone say they like their plan. As for panels deciding what care you should get you have that now, except all the people making the decisions are working for the Insurance company. People are denied all the time. What people are hearing as far as these so called "Death Panels" put out by right wing pro-insurance company lobbyists is a gross distortion of what does happen in some of these Socialized Medicine countries, such as if a 90 year old man is found to have Colon Cancer they wont cut out his Colon and dose him full of Chemo and cook him with radiation, instead they will let the cancer run its course, more than likely he will die from something other than Cancer, and just provide him pain relief instead. In this country even young children are denied coverage for treatment from their insurance providers all the time. http://www.cnbc.com/id/100840148

 

[MCI transplant]

Who has proposed that? At the moment you have two options, Obamacare or do nothing.

"At the moment," that is true! ------ But I hear there are rumors that the "big, bad," Republicans are working on an alternative, and they will have it ready just in time for the next, up and coming, Congressional elections.