Personally, I do not believe Obamacare will lower anything other than the number of hours people work. When the floodgates open, and people who currently do not have insurance and have been neglecting the treatments (surgeries and medical supplies) they need, how will the paltry sum they are paying come anywhere near covering the cost? It will not. The only solution will be to raise the price the following year.
As an example; I went in for a routine visit to my ENT. I have pretty severe allergies as many people in the Midwest do. They did a “routine” flushing of my sinus cavity. The cost? $28,000 for the “surgery” that really wasn’t a surgery. Doctors are already pushing people with allergies to have this done. It did work, and work well, but how can the healthcare system pay for a simple procedure like this if suddenly hundreds of thousands of people all opt for this procedure too? It would be impossible. I pay a boatload in premiums per year for United Healthcare. Currently it costs me right at $3,000 per year, which doesn’t include the co-pays, deductible or the other million little things they refuse to pay. Will Obamacare be similar in the fact it will nickel and dime the already working poor to death? This is going to be an epic failure and has ‘Titanic’ written all over it. Wait and see if the working people aren’t asked to pay more to make up for the “underemployed”.
Sarting to see employers who have 20-50 workers set up new companies (split there employees between two companies) to avoid paying for health care. They currently are paying for this but they feel they can’t afford this once Obamacare takes place.
TX, employers with less than 50 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Employees do not have to worry about the penalties for not providing healthcare. And there are regs that address common ownership amongs separate entities, so splitting up companies for those that ARE over 50 FTE may not make any difference at all.
Obamacare is a complete mess. No one understands, rates have not been released. The working class will pay for the susidies and the intent of Obamacare is simple, permanent Govt. control of Health Care. Like any other governement entity, this will be a mess in 3-5 years.
How Obamacare could affect P/C Ins? Duh…when the carriers cost goes up to pay for their own employees ins, who the heck do you think they will pass the cost to? THE CUSTOMERS you democrat jackwagons.
$28,000 for doing what a Neti-pot can do for a few cents? You are crazy, and your doctor is immoral, but then, it’s not your $$$, if you had an HSA you’d buy the Neti-pot for $18.00 since you’d be spending your $.
The law of unintended consequences. A law the Democrats will never understand even though they bump up against it time and time and time again. Must be dense or something.
Dave, I believe we are going to lose a percent of small businesses who will not be able to afford coverage under this scheme. If they go by the wayside, I think that means that P&C premiums will go down because of fewer insureds to write and renew. There is no doubt that payroll will be cut by laying off workers and reducing hours. This means Workers Comp policies will be smaller and some GL based on payroll will as well. Obamacare is bad news for business and there is no way around that conclusion.
What do I see for P&C Insurance in America with Obama Care now in place?
Twenty five years ago I was in a Eastern Block (Communist at that time) country engaged in an insurance conversation with a Cab driver (Hey, I work in the insurance field). His cab insurance cost him roughly $60 a year (cheap by US standards even back then). The insurance company paid for parts to repair accidental automobile damage. Payment was scheduled – he would receive only the amount the government listed in their official parts price list (I think Progressive did this at one time) – which he said was about one fourth of the actual cost of the part. Normally he had to buy them on the black market, if in fact he could even find the right parts. Nothing was paid for body shop labor to remove and replace the damaged parts – nothing wrong with you, DIY. Property damage for at fault accidents? – No fault physical damage coverage – everyone paid for their own part repair/replacement if not insured – no clogging the courts to determine liability. Medical? All citizens are covered by national health care. Disability? All disability claims were evaluated and dispensed by the government – as long as you were healthy enough to sit on a corner and beg you were not going to get disability. Payments for pain and suffering? I had to describe what these were – he just laughed.
According to the opinion section in the Washington Times the application is up to 21 pages (I have also seen 15). Additionally, there is a 61 page explanatory document. Here is an excerpt-
“The enrollment season begins Oct. 1, and the health bureaucrats have quietly posted a 21-page draft of the application for Obamacare. It’s accompanied by a 61-page explanatory document. The form offers 23 racial identities to choose from — including “other” — and individuals are encouraged to “check all that apply.” Detailed information about a person’s sources of income and expenses must be provided, so the government will know how much comes from alimony, how much from rentals, even how much revenue comes from fishing.”
Can anyone say IRS type bureaucracy? inefficiency, cost driven upward year after year (cost currently forecast at $4 trillion, up from Obamas 2009 forecast of $900 Billion). This is another government disaster just like Social Security funding, Medicaid, Medicare funding, the broke post office, illegal immigration and illegal alien aid etc etc. If you have a job it will cost you.
The article said it might impact WC rates. How? I have it figured out.
By the time an employee figures out what the application is looking for, fills it out, has it sent back 14 times, reads through the 61 page explanatory document, gets a background check, has their credit score and financials “pinged” they will have carpal tunnel and the onset of a mental impairment, file a WC claim never to be seen again.
Meanwhile the illegal alien and the deadbeats will have it filled out for them and given cash, a drivers license, free education for the little ones and an updated iphone.
What a country.
Sargent, the application you’re discussing is for INDIVIDUALS applying for coverage through the Exchange/Marketplace. An EMPLOYEE who is still being offered coverage through his/her employer won’t have any difference in their application/enrollment process than they do right now.
The Feds are constantly cutting what they pay for medical care. Who do you think the costs will be passed on to? The employers will elect to pay the fine and when Obamacare has driven the medical profession into the ground, we’ll all suffer. The only way to add millions to the rolls and keep costs down is to limit treatments. The era of living to a ‘ripe old age will be a memory’
The bright side is we’ll save social security because they’ll cut 20 years off life expectancy. Problem solved….
Normct, The system is due to evolve into what Great Britain already is doing with their “Pathway to Death” for seniors. They robbed Medicare of $700 Billion to fund Obamacare so the era of rationed care is right around the corner. Instead of treating serious illnesses for seniors, they will say to take a pain pill and wait for Hospice and die. If they can get rid of enough seniors this way, they hope to save Social Security. Quite a plan, huh.
Am I the only one that sees Europe as a complete failure?
EUR growth over the last ten years has hovered around 1% of GDP since 1995.
EUR unemployment has averaged 9.29 percent unemployment since 1995, with it never dropping below 7 percent.
It seems we really are following Europe Agent. Large spending, high unemployment, bad GDP growth.
I once read that even 1% off our GDP growth average would have cut our economy in half between the great depression and now (that was about 5 years ago) We’ve averaged closer to 4%. Imagine how much worse off we would be with 3% in the long term.
Side comment: How in the hell is the Euro consistently worth more than our dollar?
April 5, 2013 at 7:13 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sigh,
Long day. I got 90% of this post wrong in wording.
They have hovered 1% behind us since 1995. Since 95 we are closer to 4%. Imagine if we were 3% long term. Fixed.
April 9, 2013 at 3:55 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, the latest stat I saw was unemployment in Europe at 13%. I wonder if they don’t include the ones who give up looking like the US does. Our real rate is between 15-20% of unemployed or underemployed.
The answer to your side comment is: Perhaps Bernanke is printing money at a faster clip than the Euro. He devalues our money at a faster clip. This is what the Wiemar Republic in Germany tried after WW1 and they needed wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread. Not a happy prospect.
April 1, 2013 at 10:10 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
So Sargent, I saw an article this morning that said that Middle Class income is 7.3% lower than when the recession started. Wait until these people get their 32% increase on their health premiums and see how it declines. The Administration is surprised their numbers aren’t better. By now, the country should be “back”. Hello! With what they have implemented, the misery index will continue to escalate.
I believe I saw in another article that the State of Connecticut is considering adding “Mental Anguish” as a covered injury for Workers Compensation. After all these employees try to fill out a 16 page app for Health Insurance, they will have so much mental anguish, they will have to file a Workers Compensation claim. There goes the Loss Ratio for many businesses.
They are also passing a gun law, adament that larger clip ammo all be somehow given back to the government, considering the ban will not have a grand father clause for people who already own it. Are they planning on purchasing that ammo back that those people bought or just stealing it? And for that matter if the citizens refuse to give it up (their constitutional right), do they intend on using large clips of ammo to gun them down? I remember people talking about the war on terror (premptive measures) as a bad measure. More lives are spent from neglecting to take action in the war on terror than neglecting to collect large clip magazines. Liberals are hypocrites.
The application you’re discussing is for INDIVIDUALS applying for coverage through the Exchange/Marketplace. An EMPLOYEE who is still being offered coverage through his/her employer won’t have any difference in their application/enrollment process than they do right now.
Get over the backward notion of increased work comp claims as a result of the ACA.
Its almost humorous reading the posts as to what people “believe” or “think” or “foresee” or “imagine” the ACA is going to do. The ACA has now been blamed for causing everything but the mud slides in California, and the diminishing rain forest in South America … I “imagine” we’ll eventually get around to that as well.
Here’s what I see. I see a million unsubstantiated and undocumented comments being generated daily to try to confuse and scare people about ACA coming from the Right Wing. What I don’t see are any suggestions from them as to how to fix the growing number of uninsured in the USA except continuing to feed the insurance companies and allowing them to cherry pick their customers.
Kinda sounds like Obama and the Democrats blaming Bush for everything as much of us had to endure for the past 5 years. Much of it false. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Face it, Obama is in way over his head he has single-handedly made this the worst post-war recovery. The man has run nothing in his life. And this abomination of Obamacare proves it. So yeah, we will call him out on it.
The republicans did submit a CBO rated plan which was rated to decrease the cost of healthcare by 9% from the norm where as Obama’s was rated to increase it by 9% from the norm.
It also left the option to get coverage, and covered pre-existing conditions.
They have plans. To label the left as the party of no ideas is absurd.
While we have been stuck on a one way method of retirement (social security) republicans are the ones who “tried” to make it better or a change. Social security isn’t working. Why not try something new? Or are you just using talking points?
Medicare is going bankrupt. The voucher system could force the hospitals to compete for your voucher. It could lower costs, as according to CBO. That’s a new idea. Why not try something new? Or are you just a hypocrite? Sticking to the “failed” policies of the past that are bankrupting the nation?
Your premise was flawed, in that republicans have submitted ideas.
Your conclusion was flawed in that republicans have submitted many ideas to change the system, whereas democrats have maintained the status quo since the 1940’s.
Moving forward: It’s actually estimated the premiums will go up on this plan for the young the most. There is actually wording that says that premium differences cannot exceed 300% between the youth and the old (currently can go to 600%) and that there can be no “experience mod”. This will explode premiums on the youth up to 30’s to 40’s. Moreover, the subsidy is not efficient.
Many of us in that age group who make $40,000 a year to $70,000 (AKA the middle class) currently get our insurance from our employer. Let’s say the cost of premiums double for that age group (a very likely possibility when they try to equal out premiums) employers are not going to pay that difference. They will pay the same, and leave the other half to the employee, or throw the employee to the market with subsidies.
Now in both cases, like my case: Currently my boss pays for my healthcare. If our 30 year olds doubled, it would be $75,000 dollars. Who is he going to fire? How is he going to operate? Or if he doesn’t pay it, in my case that results in between $4,000 – $6,000 extra premium (family of three making $70,000, currently all paid for. The law only pays for past 9.5% of income. If you already have your insurance paid for, and now $4,000 is coming your way which doesn’t exceed 9.5% you’re getting hit with that full bill).
This will harm a very specific group. And you will likely be in that group David. This is a bad law.
Doing something, when it wrecks the system, is not better than nothing.
If they wanted to give the subsidies to help people then how about they just give subsidies? We don’t need to put in laws that ensure certain people will have their premium double. And it is a fact: This will increase the cost of premiums. There was no reason to do it this way.
Bob, I think (but am not 100% certain, so not saying for sure) that the 3:1 ratio in rates for age only applies to individual & family plans, not group plans. We should both research this.
From what I’ve seen, the younger individuals may be hit with higher rates the worst, although they will have the option to purchase a catastrophic plan. And from what I’ve seen, the groups will see increases but not as extreme. I don’t think you’ll see employers let go of younger employees – they still help the demographics of the group much more than older employees do.
The cost of insurance for the youth will go up, that is not at all debatable. So let’s keep the focus on two items:
Item one: Premiums will go up for the youth more than the average.
Item two: Many people in that clase currently pay nothing for insurance. So any increases under $4,000 they will now be handling themselves. (9.5% of 40,000 is roughly $4,000)
I’m not saying people will be dropped, I listed the only two possibilities while I definitely was pushing toward the more likely of the two (the employee having a new cost).
In my case the $4,000 $6,000 isn’t even a 50% increase. $5,500 premium for two adults: $11,000 one child at $230 per month $2,760. That’s $13,760. Even 20% is $2,752. This is not a cost I can afford. $2,752 coming out of my annual investments is substantial. That’s an absolute minimum of increase. And again:
The group plans are the area I’m targeting for a reason. Many people in the $40k to $70k range currently have their insurance paid for by their employers. Even starbucks offers this. Most firms currently pay for all of it. 97% of employees are employed by small businesses. This qualifies as 50 employees or under. Do you write commercial insurance? I certainly do. $100,000 per employee of revenues is the norm. There is not a large profit margin for these firms. They will likely have the costs past on to their employees. I must reiterate that I’m actually saying that is more likely that the employee will pay those new costs rather than having them thrown to get their own insurance. I think you’re too used to typical republican comments. Mine clearly are not.
It’s not a debate that what I listed will happen, it’s only how much it will happen. And if it happens at all, the law should not have been passed.
Again: Give out subsidies, while not trying to influence what costs what to who. Or go with a public option.
The only reason this was passed, the insult that it is, was for Obama to gain public opinion for having done “something”. It is not the democrat way to go (public option, which I would support)
It is not the republican way to go.
It’s not the smart way to go.
And it will end up costing the group I mentioned an amount that will harm them considerably.
Just take a look at a profit loss sheet and it will tell you all you need to know. When have you ever seen a profit loss sheet for small business with extra money laying around in excess of $2,000 per employee? It just doesn’t happen even upwards of $5/m in revenues. (which would have to be $100,000 from a likely number of 50 employees)
When have you seen a profit loss sheet that would allow the business to pay the extra costs when they cover the full costs of insurance for the employees?
I just go an application yesterday. The firm has $2.5 million in revenues. They have $45,000 left over. Wages are included along with expenditures. This firm has 25 employees. currently, as I explained, the health costs are all paid by the employer. They have no cost, and are the middle class. 97% of businesses are like this one. If they had even $2,000 of more costs per employee, that would amount to $50,000 AKA all their company profit. They either would have no money to invest, would have to cut wages, or have the employees pay the extra cost.
DS my numbers are 100% accurate. This will happen, this is an issue.
You democrats really need to wake up and think about this on your own, rather than listening to what these idiots are telling you in charge.
I should note that in those 2.5 million revenues firms, the owners are never making more than $250,000 a year, it’s rare for them to even make above $125,000 among what in that size range is generally 3 partners. So to state it’s the fault of the business at that point for being greedy is inaccurate.
Side comment: I do find it funny how the wealthiest 1% can be the problem for 97% of all businesses. Do the math and consider how people are paid at those businesses and analyze the profit margins. There’s no money left over for the small busineses to randomly pay more. The left’s idea of what is wrong with America can’t be the case, and it’s what the left say.
But then do the math on how much tax increases would take out of those companies. I have done it, I’ve shown it to planet.
I’ve shown both the corporate tax rate effect, and then if they filed under marginal rates (which democrats increased) on the revenues.
In the corporate, you effectively take huge sums, equal to the entire amount of the remaining profits with a 30+ rate. And only the large corporations get the lower effective rate. The small guys don’t have deductions and thus pay the full rate.
In the marginal, the difference between 28% and 36.9 as they wanted to revert is also enermous. Sit down, and do the math DS.
The health law may very well break businesses. The tax increases at the same time will hinder businesses. There are real reasons this should not be happening. There are real resons this economy is not recovering. And there are real reasons why the economy did recover under Regan, with the same tax rates that Paul Ryan and Romney suggested. I might add, that debt as a percentage of GDP under Reagan did not surpass Obama’s. This means larger growth, less debt, tax cuts worked. Larger debt, less growth, spending and putting in place more regulations and tax codes and healthcare effects that harm small businesses did not work.
Bob, the late great Margaret Thatcher took on the Socialists and Unions in Great Britain and received a lot of criticism for it. For a while, the unemployment rate stayed high and she was villified. Guess what, after a few years, the rate fell from 13+% to 5.6% and the economy started booming. She did away with nationalization of industries and lowered taxes and that was the tonic the country needed. Unfortunately, the Progressive Socialists eventually returned to power and they are in the process of running the country back into the ground. Thatcher was one of the great leaders of the world along with Ronald Reagan. They knew what it took and had the courage and fortitude to weather the storm.
April 5, 2013 at 3:38 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
DS:
I’ll tell you what, in the event that democrats trim back spending to Clinton levels as a percentage of gdp,
And in the event that this plan does not increase premiums,
I will be ok with Obama as well as the healthcare plan.
If you don’t see any solutions from the right you’ll not looking. Senator Grassley worked with the Demo’s with ideas, proposals and suggestions that were ultimately rejected to the point where he couldn’t vote for the act. The media promotes the liberal message that conservatives offere no answers – just complaints and messages like yours just help spread their misrepresentations.
The Feds want to crash the healthcare market to make it a single payer system. The Feds will then say, we can do Workers Comp as a single payer system. It is coming.
It’s the best way to guaranty a vote. I’m an odd republican in the fact that I wouldn’t mind a public system for the poor, as long as we keep an option that is a true private system. In other words eliminating this healthcare plan.
Obama should have just gone with the public option (when they wanted a system that had both). I’m a little dissappointed that the republicans didn’t go with the offer.
Bob, This country could have established Pools for the PreX people at a fraction of the cost of ACA. Instead, we are stuck with a one size fits all bad news bill that will cost close to $3Trillion that we don’t have.
This is an amazing opportunity for insurance agents to demonstrate their professionalism. Instead, everyone is complaining about what this bill is going to do to the world. Face it, Obamacare sucks, but they gave you a 3000 page content manual. Take that content read it, spin it, comment on it, and turn it into fodder for your website or blog. We’re less than a year a way from implementation, and everyone is still complaining about it. Take lemons and turn them into lemon aid!
That is kind of a grim way to look at things all while staying positive somehow. I don’t believe we just have to take anything the government pushes on us and make the best of it. There is such thing as nullification. The state can do it and hell even juries can do it. People have power to nullify laws and more people should be aware of it. I doubt it will really happen but it would be encouraging to see some states nullify the fed’s ACA law.
Personally, I do not believe Obamacare will lower anything other than the number of hours people work. When the floodgates open, and people who currently do not have insurance and have been neglecting the treatments (surgeries and medical supplies) they need, how will the paltry sum they are paying come anywhere near covering the cost? It will not. The only solution will be to raise the price the following year.
As an example; I went in for a routine visit to my ENT. I have pretty severe allergies as many people in the Midwest do. They did a “routine” flushing of my sinus cavity. The cost? $28,000 for the “surgery” that really wasn’t a surgery. Doctors are already pushing people with allergies to have this done. It did work, and work well, but how can the healthcare system pay for a simple procedure like this if suddenly hundreds of thousands of people all opt for this procedure too? It would be impossible. I pay a boatload in premiums per year for United Healthcare. Currently it costs me right at $3,000 per year, which doesn’t include the co-pays, deductible or the other million little things they refuse to pay. Will Obamacare be similar in the fact it will nickel and dime the already working poor to death? This is going to be an epic failure and has ‘Titanic’ written all over it. Wait and see if the working people aren’t asked to pay more to make up for the “underemployed”.
Sarting to see employers who have 20-50 workers set up new companies (split there employees between two companies) to avoid paying for health care. They currently are paying for this but they feel they can’t afford this once Obamacare takes place.
TX, employers with less than 50 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Employees do not have to worry about the penalties for not providing healthcare. And there are regs that address common ownership amongs separate entities, so splitting up companies for those that ARE over 50 FTE may not make any difference at all.
Obamacare is a complete mess. No one understands, rates have not been released. The working class will pay for the susidies and the intent of Obamacare is simple, permanent Govt. control of Health Care. Like any other governement entity, this will be a mess in 3-5 years.
How Obamacare could affect P/C Ins? Duh…when the carriers cost goes up to pay for their own employees ins, who the heck do you think they will pass the cost to? THE CUSTOMERS you democrat jackwagons.
$28,000 for doing what a Neti-pot can do for a few cents? You are crazy, and your doctor is immoral, but then, it’s not your $$$, if you had an HSA you’d buy the Neti-pot for $18.00 since you’d be spending your $.
The law of unintended consequences. A law the Democrats will never understand even though they bump up against it time and time and time again. Must be dense or something.
Dave, I believe we are going to lose a percent of small businesses who will not be able to afford coverage under this scheme. If they go by the wayside, I think that means that P&C premiums will go down because of fewer insureds to write and renew. There is no doubt that payroll will be cut by laying off workers and reducing hours. This means Workers Comp policies will be smaller and some GL based on payroll will as well. Obamacare is bad news for business and there is no way around that conclusion.
What do I see for P&C Insurance in America with Obama Care now in place?
Twenty five years ago I was in a Eastern Block (Communist at that time) country engaged in an insurance conversation with a Cab driver (Hey, I work in the insurance field). His cab insurance cost him roughly $60 a year (cheap by US standards even back then). The insurance company paid for parts to repair accidental automobile damage. Payment was scheduled – he would receive only the amount the government listed in their official parts price list (I think Progressive did this at one time) – which he said was about one fourth of the actual cost of the part. Normally he had to buy them on the black market, if in fact he could even find the right parts. Nothing was paid for body shop labor to remove and replace the damaged parts – nothing wrong with you, DIY. Property damage for at fault accidents? – No fault physical damage coverage – everyone paid for their own part repair/replacement if not insured – no clogging the courts to determine liability. Medical? All citizens are covered by national health care. Disability? All disability claims were evaluated and dispensed by the government – as long as you were healthy enough to sit on a corner and beg you were not going to get disability. Payments for pain and suffering? I had to describe what these were – he just laughed.
Just a random question original bob, how long have you been on this site?
I don’t think it’s accurate that you are original Bob. I’ve been here since 2006.
;)
According to the opinion section in the Washington Times the application is up to 21 pages (I have also seen 15). Additionally, there is a 61 page explanatory document. Here is an excerpt-
“The enrollment season begins Oct. 1, and the health bureaucrats have quietly posted a 21-page draft of the application for Obamacare. It’s accompanied by a 61-page explanatory document. The form offers 23 racial identities to choose from — including “other” — and individuals are encouraged to “check all that apply.” Detailed information about a person’s sources of income and expenses must be provided, so the government will know how much comes from alimony, how much from rentals, even how much revenue comes from fishing.”
Can anyone say IRS type bureaucracy? inefficiency, cost driven upward year after year (cost currently forecast at $4 trillion, up from Obamas 2009 forecast of $900 Billion). This is another government disaster just like Social Security funding, Medicaid, Medicare funding, the broke post office, illegal immigration and illegal alien aid etc etc. If you have a job it will cost you.
The article said it might impact WC rates. How? I have it figured out.
By the time an employee figures out what the application is looking for, fills it out, has it sent back 14 times, reads through the 61 page explanatory document, gets a background check, has their credit score and financials “pinged” they will have carpal tunnel and the onset of a mental impairment, file a WC claim never to be seen again.
Meanwhile the illegal alien and the deadbeats will have it filled out for them and given cash, a drivers license, free education for the little ones and an updated iphone.
What a country.
What a country
Sargent, the application you’re discussing is for INDIVIDUALS applying for coverage through the Exchange/Marketplace. An EMPLOYEE who is still being offered coverage through his/her employer won’t have any difference in their application/enrollment process than they do right now.
Sorry, no possible work comp claims here.
The Feds are constantly cutting what they pay for medical care. Who do you think the costs will be passed on to? The employers will elect to pay the fine and when Obamacare has driven the medical profession into the ground, we’ll all suffer. The only way to add millions to the rolls and keep costs down is to limit treatments. The era of living to a ‘ripe old age will be a memory’
The bright side is we’ll save social security because they’ll cut 20 years off life expectancy. Problem solved….
Normct, The system is due to evolve into what Great Britain already is doing with their “Pathway to Death” for seniors. They robbed Medicare of $700 Billion to fund Obamacare so the era of rationed care is right around the corner. Instead of treating serious illnesses for seniors, they will say to take a pain pill and wait for Hospice and die. If they can get rid of enough seniors this way, they hope to save Social Security. Quite a plan, huh.
Am I the only one that sees Europe as a complete failure?
EUR growth over the last ten years has hovered around 1% of GDP since 1995.
EUR unemployment has averaged 9.29 percent unemployment since 1995, with it never dropping below 7 percent.
It seems we really are following Europe Agent. Large spending, high unemployment, bad GDP growth.
I once read that even 1% off our GDP growth average would have cut our economy in half between the great depression and now (that was about 5 years ago) We’ve averaged closer to 4%. Imagine how much worse off we would be with 3% in the long term.
Side comment: How in the hell is the Euro consistently worth more than our dollar?
Sigh,
Long day. I got 90% of this post wrong in wording.
They have hovered 1% behind us since 1995. Since 95 we are closer to 4%. Imagine if we were 3% long term. Fixed.
Bob, the latest stat I saw was unemployment in Europe at 13%. I wonder if they don’t include the ones who give up looking like the US does. Our real rate is between 15-20% of unemployed or underemployed.
The answer to your side comment is: Perhaps Bernanke is printing money at a faster clip than the Euro. He devalues our money at a faster clip. This is what the Wiemar Republic in Germany tried after WW1 and they needed wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread. Not a happy prospect.
So Sargent, I saw an article this morning that said that Middle Class income is 7.3% lower than when the recession started. Wait until these people get their 32% increase on their health premiums and see how it declines. The Administration is surprised their numbers aren’t better. By now, the country should be “back”. Hello! With what they have implemented, the misery index will continue to escalate.
I believe I saw in another article that the State of Connecticut is considering adding “Mental Anguish” as a covered injury for Workers Compensation. After all these employees try to fill out a 16 page app for Health Insurance, they will have so much mental anguish, they will have to file a Workers Compensation claim. There goes the Loss Ratio for many businesses.
Agent,
They are also passing a gun law, adament that larger clip ammo all be somehow given back to the government, considering the ban will not have a grand father clause for people who already own it. Are they planning on purchasing that ammo back that those people bought or just stealing it? And for that matter if the citizens refuse to give it up (their constitutional right), do they intend on using large clips of ammo to gun them down? I remember people talking about the war on terror (premptive measures) as a bad measure. More lives are spent from neglecting to take action in the war on terror than neglecting to collect large clip magazines. Liberals are hypocrites.
Never let a good tragedy go to waste, eh?
Agent, see my comment to Sargent above:
The application you’re discussing is for INDIVIDUALS applying for coverage through the Exchange/Marketplace. An EMPLOYEE who is still being offered coverage through his/her employer won’t have any difference in their application/enrollment process than they do right now.
Get over the backward notion of increased work comp claims as a result of the ACA.
Its almost humorous reading the posts as to what people “believe” or “think” or “foresee” or “imagine” the ACA is going to do. The ACA has now been blamed for causing everything but the mud slides in California, and the diminishing rain forest in South America … I “imagine” we’ll eventually get around to that as well.
Here’s what I see. I see a million unsubstantiated and undocumented comments being generated daily to try to confuse and scare people about ACA coming from the Right Wing. What I don’t see are any suggestions from them as to how to fix the growing number of uninsured in the USA except continuing to feed the insurance companies and allowing them to cherry pick their customers.
Kinda sounds like Obama and the Democrats blaming Bush for everything as much of us had to endure for the past 5 years. Much of it false. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Face it, Obama is in way over his head he has single-handedly made this the worst post-war recovery. The man has run nothing in his life. And this abomination of Obamacare proves it. So yeah, we will call him out on it.
Dave:
I meant to say to label the “right” not the left.
David:
The republicans did submit a CBO rated plan which was rated to decrease the cost of healthcare by 9% from the norm where as Obama’s was rated to increase it by 9% from the norm.
It also left the option to get coverage, and covered pre-existing conditions.
They have plans. To label the left as the party of no ideas is absurd.
While we have been stuck on a one way method of retirement (social security) republicans are the ones who “tried” to make it better or a change. Social security isn’t working. Why not try something new? Or are you just using talking points?
Medicare is going bankrupt. The voucher system could force the hospitals to compete for your voucher. It could lower costs, as according to CBO. That’s a new idea. Why not try something new? Or are you just a hypocrite? Sticking to the “failed” policies of the past that are bankrupting the nation?
Your premise was flawed, in that republicans have submitted ideas.
Your conclusion was flawed in that republicans have submitted many ideas to change the system, whereas democrats have maintained the status quo since the 1940’s.
Moving forward: It’s actually estimated the premiums will go up on this plan for the young the most. There is actually wording that says that premium differences cannot exceed 300% between the youth and the old (currently can go to 600%) and that there can be no “experience mod”. This will explode premiums on the youth up to 30’s to 40’s. Moreover, the subsidy is not efficient.
Many of us in that age group who make $40,000 a year to $70,000 (AKA the middle class) currently get our insurance from our employer. Let’s say the cost of premiums double for that age group (a very likely possibility when they try to equal out premiums) employers are not going to pay that difference. They will pay the same, and leave the other half to the employee, or throw the employee to the market with subsidies.
Now in both cases, like my case: Currently my boss pays for my healthcare. If our 30 year olds doubled, it would be $75,000 dollars. Who is he going to fire? How is he going to operate? Or if he doesn’t pay it, in my case that results in between $4,000 – $6,000 extra premium (family of three making $70,000, currently all paid for. The law only pays for past 9.5% of income. If you already have your insurance paid for, and now $4,000 is coming your way which doesn’t exceed 9.5% you’re getting hit with that full bill).
This will harm a very specific group. And you will likely be in that group David. This is a bad law.
Doing something, when it wrecks the system, is not better than nothing.
If they wanted to give the subsidies to help people then how about they just give subsidies? We don’t need to put in laws that ensure certain people will have their premium double. And it is a fact: This will increase the cost of premiums. There was no reason to do it this way.
Bob, I think (but am not 100% certain, so not saying for sure) that the 3:1 ratio in rates for age only applies to individual & family plans, not group plans. We should both research this.
From what I’ve seen, the younger individuals may be hit with higher rates the worst, although they will have the option to purchase a catastrophic plan. And from what I’ve seen, the groups will see increases but not as extreme. I don’t think you’ll see employers let go of younger employees – they still help the demographics of the group much more than older employees do.
DS:
The cost of insurance for the youth will go up, that is not at all debatable. So let’s keep the focus on two items:
Item one: Premiums will go up for the youth more than the average.
Item two: Many people in that clase currently pay nothing for insurance. So any increases under $4,000 they will now be handling themselves. (9.5% of 40,000 is roughly $4,000)
I’m not saying people will be dropped, I listed the only two possibilities while I definitely was pushing toward the more likely of the two (the employee having a new cost).
In my case the $4,000 $6,000 isn’t even a 50% increase. $5,500 premium for two adults: $11,000 one child at $230 per month $2,760. That’s $13,760. Even 20% is $2,752. This is not a cost I can afford. $2,752 coming out of my annual investments is substantial. That’s an absolute minimum of increase. And again:
The group plans are the area I’m targeting for a reason. Many people in the $40k to $70k range currently have their insurance paid for by their employers. Even starbucks offers this. Most firms currently pay for all of it. 97% of employees are employed by small businesses. This qualifies as 50 employees or under. Do you write commercial insurance? I certainly do. $100,000 per employee of revenues is the norm. There is not a large profit margin for these firms. They will likely have the costs past on to their employees. I must reiterate that I’m actually saying that is more likely that the employee will pay those new costs rather than having them thrown to get their own insurance. I think you’re too used to typical republican comments. Mine clearly are not.
It’s not a debate that what I listed will happen, it’s only how much it will happen. And if it happens at all, the law should not have been passed.
Again: Give out subsidies, while not trying to influence what costs what to who. Or go with a public option.
The only reason this was passed, the insult that it is, was for Obama to gain public opinion for having done “something”. It is not the democrat way to go (public option, which I would support)
It is not the republican way to go.
It’s not the smart way to go.
And it will end up costing the group I mentioned an amount that will harm them considerably.
DS:
Just take a look at a profit loss sheet and it will tell you all you need to know. When have you ever seen a profit loss sheet for small business with extra money laying around in excess of $2,000 per employee? It just doesn’t happen even upwards of $5/m in revenues. (which would have to be $100,000 from a likely number of 50 employees)
When have you seen a profit loss sheet that would allow the business to pay the extra costs when they cover the full costs of insurance for the employees?
I just go an application yesterday. The firm has $2.5 million in revenues. They have $45,000 left over. Wages are included along with expenditures. This firm has 25 employees. currently, as I explained, the health costs are all paid by the employer. They have no cost, and are the middle class. 97% of businesses are like this one. If they had even $2,000 of more costs per employee, that would amount to $50,000 AKA all their company profit. They either would have no money to invest, would have to cut wages, or have the employees pay the extra cost.
DS my numbers are 100% accurate. This will happen, this is an issue.
You democrats really need to wake up and think about this on your own, rather than listening to what these idiots are telling you in charge.
This is a bad law.
DS:
I should note that in those 2.5 million revenues firms, the owners are never making more than $250,000 a year, it’s rare for them to even make above $125,000 among what in that size range is generally 3 partners. So to state it’s the fault of the business at that point for being greedy is inaccurate.
Side comment: I do find it funny how the wealthiest 1% can be the problem for 97% of all businesses. Do the math and consider how people are paid at those businesses and analyze the profit margins. There’s no money left over for the small busineses to randomly pay more. The left’s idea of what is wrong with America can’t be the case, and it’s what the left say.
But then do the math on how much tax increases would take out of those companies. I have done it, I’ve shown it to planet.
I’ve shown both the corporate tax rate effect, and then if they filed under marginal rates (which democrats increased) on the revenues.
In the corporate, you effectively take huge sums, equal to the entire amount of the remaining profits with a 30+ rate. And only the large corporations get the lower effective rate. The small guys don’t have deductions and thus pay the full rate.
In the marginal, the difference between 28% and 36.9 as they wanted to revert is also enermous. Sit down, and do the math DS.
The health law may very well break businesses. The tax increases at the same time will hinder businesses. There are real reasons this should not be happening. There are real resons this economy is not recovering. And there are real reasons why the economy did recover under Regan, with the same tax rates that Paul Ryan and Romney suggested. I might add, that debt as a percentage of GDP under Reagan did not surpass Obama’s. This means larger growth, less debt, tax cuts worked. Larger debt, less growth, spending and putting in place more regulations and tax codes and healthcare effects that harm small businesses did not work.
It’s time you guys on the left learn something.
Bob, the late great Margaret Thatcher took on the Socialists and Unions in Great Britain and received a lot of criticism for it. For a while, the unemployment rate stayed high and she was villified. Guess what, after a few years, the rate fell from 13+% to 5.6% and the economy started booming. She did away with nationalization of industries and lowered taxes and that was the tonic the country needed. Unfortunately, the Progressive Socialists eventually returned to power and they are in the process of running the country back into the ground. Thatcher was one of the great leaders of the world along with Ronald Reagan. They knew what it took and had the courage and fortitude to weather the storm.
DS:
I’ll tell you what, in the event that democrats trim back spending to Clinton levels as a percentage of gdp,
And in the event that this plan does not increase premiums,
I will be ok with Obama as well as the healthcare plan.
If you don’t see any solutions from the right you’ll not looking. Senator Grassley worked with the Demo’s with ideas, proposals and suggestions that were ultimately rejected to the point where he couldn’t vote for the act. The media promotes the liberal message that conservatives offere no answers – just complaints and messages like yours just help spread their misrepresentations.
The Feds want to crash the healthcare market to make it a single payer system. The Feds will then say, we can do Workers Comp as a single payer system. It is coming.
This is probably accurate.
It’s the best way to guaranty a vote. I’m an odd republican in the fact that I wouldn’t mind a public system for the poor, as long as we keep an option that is a true private system. In other words eliminating this healthcare plan.
Obama should have just gone with the public option (when they wanted a system that had both). I’m a little dissappointed that the republicans didn’t go with the offer.
Bob, This country could have established Pools for the PreX people at a fraction of the cost of ACA. Instead, we are stuck with a one size fits all bad news bill that will cost close to $3Trillion that we don’t have.
This is an amazing opportunity for insurance agents to demonstrate their professionalism. Instead, everyone is complaining about what this bill is going to do to the world. Face it, Obamacare sucks, but they gave you a 3000 page content manual. Take that content read it, spin it, comment on it, and turn it into fodder for your website or blog. We’re less than a year a way from implementation, and everyone is still complaining about it. Take lemons and turn them into lemon aid!
That is kind of a grim way to look at things all while staying positive somehow. I don’t believe we just have to take anything the government pushes on us and make the best of it. There is such thing as nullification. The state can do it and hell even juries can do it. People have power to nullify laws and more people should be aware of it. I doubt it will really happen but it would be encouraging to see some states nullify the fed’s ACA law.