Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ending Employer-Based Health Insurance Is a Good Idea
Reason Online ^ | October 16, 2007 | ald Bailey

Posted on 10/17/2007 10:34:27 PM PDT by Lorianne

"The U.S. employer-based health-insurance system is failing," declares a new report by the Committee for Economic Development (CED). The CED is a Washington, D.C.-based policy think tank comprised of business and education leaders. And it is right: Employer-based health-insurance is indeed failing.

Between 2000 and 2007, the percentage of firms offering health insurance benefits fell from 69 percent to 60 percent. The percentage of people under age 65 with employer provided insurance dropped by 68 to 63 percent. In absolute numbers, those covered by job-based insurance fell from 179.4 million to 177.2 million.

Employers are jettisoning health insurance because costs are out of control. Since 2001, premiums for family coverage have increased 78 percent, while wages have gone up 19 percent and inflation is up 17 percent. The consequence is that health insurance is the number one domestic policy issue in the 2008 presidential race.

So what is the CED's prescription for our ailing health insurance system? The report promisingly begins by recommending the creation of "a system of market-based universal health insurance." In order to achieve this, the CED would make health insurance mandatory for every American.

The CED proposal envisions the creation of independent regional exchanges that would act as a single point of entry for each individual to choose among competing private health plans. The exchanges would set minimum benefit plans. The exchanges would also cut through the thickets of state health insurance regulations that add substantially to the costs of insurance. Individuals could purchase insurance above and beyond the minimum benefit plans with after tax dollars.

(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government
KEYWORDS: benefits; healthcare; healthinsurance; socializedhealthcare; socializedmedicine; workplace
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-243 next last
To: stephenjohnbanker
just as long as every single civil service employee..federal, state, county, school district, police, fire, postal...you name it...they ALL must lose their medical benefits too.....

my impression is that some here on FR could care less what we peasants out here do, as long as they got their bennies and their pensions, who cares, right?

21 posted on 10/17/2007 11:18:40 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom
more expensive = less Options

defintn of Freedom: having Options
(real ones, as opposed to unaffordable ones)
22 posted on 10/17/2007 11:26:55 PM PDT by modican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cherry

“just as long as every single civil service employee..federal, state, county, school district, police, fire, postal...you name it...they ALL must lose their medical benefits too.....”

That will be a neat trick......I can see em screaming now :-)


23 posted on 10/17/2007 11:28:48 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Pray for, and support our troops(heroes) !! And vote out the RINO's!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Sure, they’re jettisoning the group health plans only to create a demand for wage increases. The idea that corporations find it a burden to insure through a third party or via self-funded insurance is absurd. The cost to the employees would be much greater outside the group plan and would in turn force salaries upwards, create ill-will, and an attraction to competing organizations that offer such benefits. The managed benefits of corporations providing health insurance (and savings plans) to their employees is win for both the employee and employer. The costs get covered one way or another.


24 posted on 10/17/2007 11:29:02 PM PDT by Gene Eric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: modican

more wealth=more options


25 posted on 10/17/2007 11:30:00 PM PDT by ari-freedom (I am for traditional moral values, a strong national defense, and free markets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: durasell
"Business wants it, the insurance companies want it and the folks that are un-insured or paying a ton out of pocket for insurance want it."

My Marine Corps father used to say, "people in hell want ice water."

"Beyond that, some form of very basic universal healthcare is inevitable at this point."

I hope it's not inevitable. Insurance costs will go up, mandatory coverage will go up. Some people will never pay for insurance, so you will still have to deal with those who are uninsured. Everyone will be paying a ton for insurance. One sure way to make certain something goes up is to make sure everyone must have it.

The best way to insure prices go down is to eliminate insurance completely and make everyone pay for services out of pocket. I have a orthodontist in my area who refuses to take insurance from any provider. He has the lowest costs of any of them. He has fewer office workers -- no need to deal with insurers and his prices are fair. We had dental insurance but we chose to go with him -- he's a very good dentist, smart too.

But I'm not naive enough to think insurance will be eliminated. I just hope that we can continue to have a choice and don't get forced into one of these one size fits all systems that never reduces anyone's cost and ultimately doesn't work for anyone except those wealthy enough to avoid it.

26 posted on 10/17/2007 11:30:23 PM PDT by Waryone (Constantly amazed by society's downhill slide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

I hope you got it.


27 posted on 10/17/2007 11:35:06 PM PDT by modican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: modican

cutting taxes gets it


28 posted on 10/17/2007 11:37:05 PM PDT by ari-freedom (I am for traditional moral values, a strong national defense, and free markets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom
Yes, it’s all about the spread. Anything else is just talk / relative.
29 posted on 10/17/2007 11:43:26 PM PDT by modican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Waryone

One of the fastest growing segments in medicine is boutique or concierge medicine. It’s all out of pocket and very, very pricey — but no waiting (ever) and the doctors make house and office calls.

The way I see it shaking out is that medicaid/medicare etc. etc. go away. Everyone that wants can sign up for basic care. Private insurers and the boutique doctors pick up the slack with private coverage that supplements the basic care.


30 posted on 10/17/2007 11:51:17 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

If you aren’t carrying non-catastrophic insurance, and the dr’s visit costs $200 per pop, not including any lab work, prescriptions, every one will find a way to make their routine visits catastrophic.

Any time insurance is mandatory, someone will find a way to drive up costs, resulting in the payer lowest on the totem pole paying.


31 posted on 10/17/2007 11:58:05 PM PDT by ican'tbelieveit ((Join FreeRepublic's Folding@Home team (Team# 36120), KW:Folding))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: durasell

Is that really different from what we have now? The only difference I see from what we have now is the part about Medicare/Medicaid going away. Again, I don’t really see that ever happening as there will always be people who never purchase any insurance yet they will become ill and injured. If the govt. has to pay for them, we still have Medicare/Medicaid.

And as far as “basic” insurance goes, I’m sure the govt will get to determine what basic is and that will be much more extensive than most basic insurance coverages today. Also, just like today, more and more people will be complaining as they see the rich get the special treatment with no waiting. They will want the same and will petition the govt to get it from the insurance companies. Can you say higher and higher costs?


32 posted on 10/18/2007 12:06:10 AM PDT by Waryone (Constantly amazed by society's downhill slide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ican'tbelieveit

If you aren’t carrying non-catastrophic insurance, and the dr’s visit costs $200 per pop, not including any lab work, prescriptions, every one will find a way to make their routine visits catastrophic.
-
yes I can see how that would be the case if government is putting $ to pay for it. But what if govt said “you have to have it but you have to figure out how to pay for it, like car insurance”?


33 posted on 10/18/2007 12:09:44 AM PDT by ari-freedom (I am for traditional moral values, a strong national defense, and free markets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: durasell
It’s all out of pocket and very, very pricey — but no waiting (ever) and the doctors make house and office calls.

I don't know about "very, very pricey." $2000/yr. is not nothing, but it's not "very, very pricey" either.

34 posted on 10/18/2007 12:13:28 AM PDT by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Waryone

What we have today is a large number of people over using emergency rooms. And ending up in ERs because they didn’t get basic checks ups when the problem was small. Yes, some of them are illegals, but many of them are just folks without insurance.


35 posted on 10/18/2007 12:20:23 AM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ican'tbelieveit
If you aren’t carrying non-catastrophic insurance, and the dr’s visit costs $200 per pop, not including any lab work, prescriptions, every one will find a way to make their routine visits catastrophic.

No insurance company pays a internal med doctor $200 for a visit. Maybe $50, maybe $75. I seriously doubt $200. If you are paying cash, you could see the doctor for probably $50, $75-$100 for a physical (in Midwest). One of the main sources of increased physician prices is their need to hire more staff to get money from managed care companies (read Medicare/Medicaid). Thus, the concierge doctors can run an office with 2 staff members and provide above average care. Little billing, little overhead. Plus, if you are paying only $250/mo. in premiums for your catastrophic insurance (total guess) vs. $1000/mo for full coverage, it doesn't take long to pay for some tests or prescriptions or doctor's visits. Plus it lowers utilization of healthcare (as it is real, not free money) and the lower the demand, the lower the price. Also, the patient will find which MRI center does an MRI for $800 and skip the one that charges $2000 (though the insurance company will pay for either without blinking). I could go on, but most people's eyes have glazed over by now.

36 posted on 10/18/2007 12:21:10 AM PDT by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: the808bass

Concierge medicine is more like $3,000 a month.


37 posted on 10/18/2007 12:21:42 AM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ican'tbelieveit

The other problem is that you don’t want people to avoid going to the doctor and miss a possible detection of cancer because they are cheap (especially after they reach 50) but on the other hand you don’t want people to go to the doctor every time they catch a cold.


38 posted on 10/18/2007 12:21:45 AM PDT by ari-freedom (I am for traditional moral values, a strong national defense, and free markets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: durasell
Yes, some of them are illegals, but many of them are just folks without insurance.

Actually, a lot of over-utilization of the ER comes from people with employer-paid health insurance. If benefit levels are lowered for ER claims, patients go to the ER less and yet still go when they should (they just don't go when they shouldn't). People with health savings accounts utilize the health system at a lower rate than people with employer-paid benefits (though they still have health as good as those in employer-paid plans).

39 posted on 10/18/2007 12:24:51 AM PDT by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Let me explain it to you like this. Is anyone jumping in to insure the folks who aren’t insured today, at a reasonable rate? Okay, then you know who will jump in to give you reasonable rate when businesses no longer provide the service. Nobody.

You will be paying over a $1000 per month for family coverage.

Now, do you think your employer will raise your wages since they won’t be providing health insurance any longer? If so, put down the bong pipe.

This is just one of the last employment perks to be stripped from employees.

We just priced adding me to my wife’s coverage at work. For one person it was going to be $380.00 per month without dental and optical coverage. And this wasn’t a premium coverage plan.


40 posted on 10/18/2007 12:27:32 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hillary has pay fever. There she goes now... "Ha Hsu, ha hsu, haaaa hsu, ha hsu...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-243 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson