Video: Will ObamaCare drive businesses out of providing health insurance?

posted at 2:10 pm on March 24, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

In a word, yes, and that’s not just me talking. Last night, CBS did a perspective on how ObamaCare’s mandates and tax incentives will impact small businesses, which Democrats insist will see benefits from the ObamaCare largesse. The only problem is that the system actually incentivizes businesses to pay penalties and throw their employees into the government-run exchanges:


Watch CBS News Videos Online

• Businesses with fewer than 25 employees that pay an average of no more than $40,000 will get a tax credit – up to 35 percent of the company’s share of their total health care premium.

• Companies with 26-49 workers are unaffected.

• Businesses with 50 or more workers must offer coverage or pay $750 per worker. That penalty applies for every employee if even one signs up for government-subsidized insurance.

But there are potential problems. Case in point: It would be much cheaper for Dick Bus to drop the generous coverage he now offers and take the hit at $750 a head for his 120 workers. The penalty would be $90,000 a year. He’s currently spending $480,000.

Bus would save $390,000, but canceling his plan would force his workers to the health plan exchange and could cost more than they’re paying now. The Senate is considering an increase in the $750 penalty to prevent that scenario.

Bus insists that he won’t cut his employees loose, which is certainly noble, but unrealistic. If his competitors do it and lower their costs, allowing them to lower prices on their products and services, Bus will have to follow suit or go out of business. Small businesses already operate on tight margins, and this will be an easy business decision for those companies, at least when their CEO isn’t on camera.

In an otherwise good and balanced report, CBS misses another strange incentive. As listed above, small businesses only become eligible for the credits if their average salary remains below $40,000. That means a decision to give raises not only carries the cost of the raise itself to the business, but also a potential loss of that 35% subsidy ObamaCare grants. This will have the overall effect of suppressing salaries and putting experienced workers at a disadvantage in hiring decisions. It also provides an incentive to keep the workforce under 26 people; the 26th hire eliminates that 35% subsidy as well, making it a very expensive new position.

ObamaCare sets all of its incentives to oppose growth. Can anyone wonder at the impact this will have on the economy?

Update: One other anti-growth incentive, as Mark the Great points out in the comments: businesses with 50-60 workers have a big incentive now to downsize.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

I’m selling cans of dehydrated water, $1 per can this week only.

Bishop on March 24, 2010 at 2:55 PM

Is that healthy dehydrated water? Put me down for a gross — Uncle Sugar will pay for it.

hillbillyjim on March 24, 2010 at 2:57 PM

I know you all will hate me (once again) for this,

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:46 PM

No, we are embarrassed for you…you have no idea what you are posting about, it is disjointed, and rather pathetic attempt at being relevant.
The unemployment isn’t resolved with “free lancers”, it is because govt. is removing incentives to be in business…they are sucking the profits, and stuffing the Washington coffers.
You don’t understand that concept…Washington produces or creates nothing, they can only consume.
Free lancers and consultants work for businesses, you don’t get that common thread?
Very few “people” hire consultants, businesses hire consultants, businesses hire “free lancers.

right2bright on March 24, 2010 at 2:57 PM

You really should consider changing your handle:

robertnyc212 on March 24, 2010 at 2:47 PM

You really should get a brain.

MarkTheGreat on March 24, 2010 at 2:57 PM

makaput on March 24, 2010 at 2:56 PM

what info?

darwin on March 24, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Oh and here’s a little fun factoid: when I was employed full time, my insurance cost me $220 a month. When I left that place and went back to being an indie, I had the same coverage more or less from the same insurance company and my premium was $240. But I could deduct the $240 as a business expense and so my real cost was more like $180.

In other words Jimmie, I was better off buying my own private insurance than I was getting it from my employer.

But why let facts get in the way of a good Jimbo3 story?

angryed on March 24, 2010 at 2:56 PM

–And how old were you and did you have any pre-existing conditions that either raised the price of individual insuurance or stopped you from getting individual insurance (I think not, but let us know)?

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:58 PM

It’s not like many of you haven’t been saying how important it is to cut the link between health insurance and employment???

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:54 PM

You can do that without turning millions of former regular employees into newly unemployed freelance consultants. That is what was so preposterous about your earlier ridiculous claim about the benefits of our new Obamatopia.

jwolf on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

From the Heritage foundation….The House Health Fix Even Higher Tax Penalties for Employers

makaput on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

upinak on March 24, 2010 at 2:47 PM

MRE’s are kept inside and I dehydrate my own food from time to time. Mostly to make deer jerky…yummm. I live in Florida so I try to keep it out of the humidity too.

milwife88 on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

Maybe robert has a man-crush thing going, ever think of that?

Bishop on March 24, 2010 at 2:57 PM

No, I didn’t. I was just thinking that if I wanted my screen name to be hoochiemama, who would he be to tell me different?

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

Does anyone know if the info from the Heritage Foundation is true?

makaput on March 24, 2010 at 2:56 PM

I believe they are legal, and constitutional scholars…and know what they’re doing!

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

LOL…..2010’s Small business Krystallnacht. They won’t come for me!

Limerick on March 24, 2010 at 2:45 PM

Limerick: They will follow your horse hoof tracks!!hehe:)

canopfor on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

canopfor on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

Not if I eat the horse! (dehydrated, of course)

Limerick on March 24, 2010 at 3:00 PM

No, I didn’t. I was just thinking that if I wanted my screen name to be hoochiemama, who would he be to tell me different?

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

Exactly! Excellent comment!

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 3:00 PM

No, we are embarrassed for you…you have no idea what you are posting about, it is disjointed, and rather pathetic attempt at being relevant.
The unemployment isn’t resolved with “free lancers”, it is because govt. is removing incentives to be in business…they are sucking the profits, and stuffing the Washington coffers.
You don’t understand that concept…Washington produces or creates nothing, they can only consume.
Free lancers and consultants work for businesses, you don’t get that common thread?
Very few “people” hire consultants, businesses hire consultants, businesses hire “free lancers.

right2bright on March 24, 2010 at 2:57 PM

–Right2bright, many businesses for the last few years have been hiring temporary/consultant/part time employees rather than full-time employees during this downturn. Some of that was way before Obamacare was even on the horizon. How did this bill cause that to happen?

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:01 PM

Why don’t you lay off his screen name. He already explained that his kids call him that. Who cares what meaning you attach to it?

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:53 PM

I know more than one guy named “Mack”.

ladyingray on March 24, 2010 at 3:01 PM

Why don’t you lay off his screen name.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:53 PM

He’s trying to cover up the fact that he has nothing worthwhile to say.

MarkTheGreat on March 24, 2010 at 3:01 PM

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Cr*p and Tax next to destroy the oil and coal industries.

chemman on March 24, 2010 at 3:02 PM

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:53 PM

I just thought it was ironic that someone with a pimp sounding username would accuse me of being on the gov’t dole, a drug dealer or both. Nothing personal.

robertnyc212 on March 24, 2010 at 3:03 PM

When it’s all implemented, it won’t matter how many employees each business has. They will all be lumped in together as a single unit.

That 7/11 franchise you work for that employes 15 people will be a conglomerate of 250,000 employees.

(BTW, I don’t know how many people an averge 7/11 employs, how many employees the entire company employs, if franchises are available or even if they are still in business. It was just the first name off the top of my head.)

ConservativeTony on March 24, 2010 at 3:03 PM

You can do that without turning millions of former regular employees into newly unemployed freelance consultants. That is what was so preposterous about your earlier ridiculous claim about the benefits of our new Obamatopia.

jwolf on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

–Read what I said again. It is a big benefit for people to have access to relatively affordable insurance outside of their workplace. Having more freelancers/temporary employees/consultants available should give employers more flexibility. Small employers now generally favor those types of workers over full time employees.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM

Cr*p and Tax next to destroy the oil and coal industries.

chemman on March 24, 2010 at 3:02 PM

I am looking forward to destitution and poverty. I want my share of the government cheese. What are they going to do when all the producers just sit down and say make me?

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM

Cr*p and Tax next to destroy the oil and coal industries.

chemman on March 24, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Meanwhile, the Russians are in the gulf….sucking up all the oil. Smart power ya know!

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM

Have two friends (both smart and able-bodied) drawing unemployment benefits.

I never have and never will.

IndieDogg on March 24, 2010 at 2:56 PM

Might as well, your employer has been taking money out of your paycheck to pay the insurance premiums for years.

MarkTheGreat on March 24, 2010 at 3:05 PM

How would you have done it, thinking about both the transition issues and the ongoing issues?

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:56 PM

There are many ways that I have heard that are acceptable to me.

- McCain’s idea of making health insurance taxable and then providing an income tax credit to individuals.
- Allowing individuals to puy insurance with the same tax deductions that companies receive.

I am sure there are others. I would still foresee groups buying insurance since I cannot think of any law that would stop people voluntarily pooling their purchase power\business and requesting quotes from insurance companies (e.g., a parish/church).

WashJeff on March 24, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Cr*p and Tax next to destroy the oil and coal industries all our industry.

chemman on March 24, 2010 at 3:02 PM

FIFY. Cap and Trade will tax the energy used for 99 percent of all industry, commerce and transportation of goods and commodities.

O/T

Hoyer is saying Members of Congress are getting Death Threats. I am shocked, shocked I tell you.

Holger on March 24, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Read what I said again. It is a big benefit for people to have access to relatively affordable insurance outside of their workplace. Having more freelancers/temporary employees/consultants available should give employers more flexibility. Small employers now generally favor those types of workers over full time employees.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM

I hear what you’re saying, and it’s a nice idea. But that is not what this is about. That is not what’s going to happen here. That is not what this bill was about. If you could open your mind here, and consider the possibility that this is a takeover of everyones freedoms, and liberties, and opportunities, you might see this for what it truly is.

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 3:06 PM

I’m afraid that most of you are trying to give CPR to a cadaver.

Limerick on March 24, 2010 at 3:07 PM

There are many ways that I have heard that are acceptable to me.

- McCain’s idea of making health insurance taxable and then providing an income tax credit to individuals.
- Allowing individuals to puy insurance with the same tax deductions that companies receive.

I am sure there are others. I would still foresee groups buying insurance since I cannot think of any law that would stop people voluntarily pooling their purchase power\business and requesting quotes from insurance companies (e.g., a parish/church).

WashJeff on March 24, 2010 at 3:05 PM

–McCain’s proposals really only handled one part of the equation, though. There’s nothing in his proposal that would have required the insurance to be made available if the insurance companies decided not to offer it.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Meanwhile, the Russians are in the gulf….sucking up all the oil. Smart power ya know!

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM

Obama has blocked drilling off the coast in deeper waters for ten years. I get so sick of the argument that it would take ten years to establish a way to bring the oil to market. There have been so many innovations, but they want us off of fossil fuels and they would rather keeps us a slave to the Middle East supply of energy. Democrats will be the death of us all.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Of couse Obamacare is meant to force private Insurers out of business and leave only the Government as the sole health insurance provider.

Why else would the penalties be there? Why else demonize insurance companies before passage?

The only reason there is a 2 year wait is to get the government machine up and running (staffed, rules, committees offices, endless forms).

This is pure creeping socialism. Start at the edges, build support by demonizing the private sector providers, start nudging guidelines towards more limited care, bottleneck Doctor payments (aka Dr. Fix) to force Dr’s from practices.

The only thing people in power want, is more power. Power comes from control. The Fed is closing down independent/small banks. Big banks are under the Fed’s thumb, GM has already fallen and now health care and student loans are effectively nationalized. Public K-12 schools are being folded in slowly now with new “Federal Guidelines” across all states/districts.

Food is next, no more sweets for you! Its insidious and a lot of us voted for it and don’t care as long as we get our cable modems and 55″ big screen TVs and “free” health care.

Neo on March 24, 2010 at 3:08 PM

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:59 PM

Lol, we’d still love and respect you.

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Meanwhile, the Russians are in the gulf….sucking up all the oil. Smart power ya know!

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM

Didn’t they recently discover oil on their own soil? They are probably drilling it as we speak, AND drilling for oil we should be taking in the gulf. I guess Russia doesn’t really care what GreenPOS thinks.

ConservativeTony on March 24, 2010 at 3:09 PM

I just thought it was ironic that someone with a pimp sounding username would accuse me of being on the gov’t dole, a drug dealer or both. Nothing personal.
robertnyc212 on March 24, 2010 at 3:03 PM

How exactly does one define a “pimp-sounding” name?

Bishop on March 24, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Hoyer is saying Members of Congress are getting Death Threats. I am shocked, shocked I tell you.

Holger on March 24, 2010 at 3:05 PM

BFD Steny, Rush has been getting them for years…

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

I run the most well known website that matches small business owners seeking business loans with the lenders that provide them and have spoken to DOZENS of small business owners since the bill passed.

The overwhelming majority say they plan on having their CFO’s determine if dropping their plans and simply giving a stipend for employees to buy through the exchanges will save them money and if it will, that is what they will do.

This is the gateway to “single-payer” as the exchanges will be overwhelmed and premiums will rise so dramatically, that the only way out is for the Government to take it over like the did Fannie-Mae.

Opposite Day on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

You really should consider changing your handle:

robertnyc212 on March 24, 2010 at 2:47 PM

You should really consider changing your diaper…your bradky really does stink.

Laura in Maryland on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

It’s clear from so many posts on this subject that supporters of O-Care either don’t get the points against it, poo-pooed our concerns against it, don’t care about those concerns, have made up their minds that we’re full of it for our continued opposition, or any combination thereof.

Even the MSM are starting to point out, since Monday of course, premiums will rise by 300% before most ‘benefits’ become available years from now.

Supporters just don’t want to believe it, and that’s the end of it for them. They know all the underhanded machinations used to get us to this point, all the exemptions that set some apart for special dispensations, yet they argue and argue that this is a great thing.

I say to let time tell. Let it happen if we can’t get this mess repealed, because a supporter will go from one point to another in the middle of debating a single detail at hand. We have no choice but to let it all happen if repeal is impossible.

If it works out that we’re right, expect the same supporters to fight just as hard over proposed ‘fixes’ when they say this was great to begin with.

I’d say it would be comedy gold but we’ll be cashing in aluminum cans to pay bills instead of having any gold.

Hey–maybe when the gold reserve is gone, too, we can turn Fort Knox into low-rent housing.

Liam on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

There’s nothing in his proposal that would have required the insurance to be made available if the insurance companies decided not to offer it.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:07 PM

If you are talking high-risk pools, State’s can do, and I think some do, that. Not everything has to be done at the federal level.

And honestly I do not know the down and dirty details of his plan. Maybe it did cover that, maybe it did not.

WashJeff on March 24, 2010 at 3:12 PM

Are you ready for The Health Police?

The National Prevention, Health Promotion and Public Health Council would be created to coordinate federal prevention, wellness, and public health activities. Develop a national strategy to improve the nation’s health. A Prevention and Public Health Fund would be established to expand and sustain funding for prevention and public health programs. (Initial appropriation in fiscal year 2010) Create task forces on Preventive Services and Community Preventive Services to develop, update, and disseminate evidenced‐based recommendations on the use of clinical and community prevention services. (Effective upon enactment) (§1201: ERISA §702, PHSA §2702,

kingsjester on March 24, 2010 at 3:13 PM

Laura in Maryland on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

+1000

ladyingray on March 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM

BFD Steny, Rush has been getting them for years…

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

I know!

The Left issues such threats as a matter of course, the only people who issue more threats are Islamic Terrorists.

But they get threatened and OMG the AnninCAing horror!

Holger on March 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM

Lol, we’d still love and respect you.

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Everyone but Bradky, that is. I couldn’t believe what he said.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM

This is all entirely as designed. As employers cut loose their employees, expect to see the word “crisis” reappear, with the only solution being Government Insurance (the Orwellian “Public Option”). And when the Government plan is used to leverage all private insurance into bankruptcy, coupled with plummeting supplies of physicians and soaring prices of care, expect to see the word “crisis” appear all over again, this time with the only solution being “single payer.” It isn’t a slippery slope. It’s a conscious strategy.

Blacklake on March 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM

kingsjester on March 24, 2010 at 3:13 PM

You are a savior! Just think of the kickbacks, as a Health Policeman, for turning the other cheek as Bubba eats a Ding Dong! Move over Don Corleone!

Limerick on March 24, 2010 at 3:15 PM

ladyingray on March 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM

I *heart* LiG, but not in that weird and creepy bradky kind of way.

Laura in Maryland on March 24, 2010 at 3:16 PM

Obama has blocked drilling off the coast in deeper waters for ten years. I get so sick of the argument that it would take ten years to establish a way to bring the oil to market. There have been so many innovations, but they want us off of fossil fuels and they would rather keeps us a slave to the Middle East supply of energy. Democrats will be the death of us all.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:08 PM

–Considering he’s been president for only 15 months and was elected to the Senate in 2004, it’s a huge achievement for him to have singlehandedly blocked this for ten years…..

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:16 PM

God, I just love the HotAir Babes!
Conservative women ROCK!

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:17 PM

You really should get a brain.

MarkTheGreat on March 24, 2010 at 2:57 PM

He did. It was in the jar with Abby Normal’s name on it.

Aviator on March 24, 2010 at 3:17 PM

I say to let time tell. Let it happen if we can’t get this mess repealed, because a supporter will go from one point to another in the middle of debating a single detail at hand. We have no choice but to let it all happen if repeal is impossible.

Liam on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

That won’t work, because any flaws will be blamed on a lack of sufficient government control. The Left never sees the failure of its policies. That’s why they keep doing more of the same thing whenever a thing fails to produce the desired result.

To wit: government regulation of the health care industry didn’t reduce premiums, so now they’re going to regulate that industry even more.

hawksruleva on March 24, 2010 at 3:17 PM

Limerick on March 24, 2010 at 3:15 PM

As a 2nd yr Health Insurance Agent at the young age of 51, I thank you. I’ve got a 19 pg summary from a prestegious law firm that breaks this obamanation down very well.

kingsjester on March 24, 2010 at 3:17 PM

Are you ready for The Health Police?

The National Prevention, Health Promotion and Public Health Council would be created to coordinate federal prevention, wellness, and public health activities. Develop a national strategy to improve the nation’s health. A Prevention and Public Health Fund would be established to expand and sustain funding for prevention and public health programs. (Initial appropriation in fiscal year 2010) Create task forces on Preventive Services and Community Preventive Services to develop, update, and disseminate evidenced‐based recommendations on the use of clinical and community prevention services. (Effective upon enactment) (§1201: ERISA §702, PHSA §2702,
kingsjester on March 24, 2010 at 3:13 PM

–It looks like they’re in charge of public relations, not the police force.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:18 PM

–Considering he’s been president for only 15 months and was elected to the Senate in 2004, it’s a huge achievement for him to have singlehandedly blocked this for ten years…..

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:16 PM

Going forward, Einstein…Lord help us all if you are what the legal system is made of.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:18 PM

2. Get a 1099 and pay your own taxes, healthcare and so forth, while they can pay you as a contractor.

Watch.. it will happen.

upinak on March 24, 2010 at 2:29 PM

There are certain laws which regulate whom you can pay with a 1099…

Consequences of Treating an Employee as an Independent Contractor
If you classify an employee as an independent contractor and you have no reasonable basis for doing so, you may be held liable for employment taxes for that worker (the relief provisions, discussed below, will not apply). See Internal Revenue Code section 3509 for more information.

So, I doubt that could happen as much as you think.

MississippiMom on March 24, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Beat me to it. Also, I think it’s pretty easy to get around the independant contractor vs. employee rules.

I’m not saying it’s a good idea, these businesses would most likely have to up the amount they pay overall to make up for things like no 401ks, and no matching funds for same…but the American people are extraordinarily inventive.

Chewy the Lab on March 24, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Not sure about all states, but there are strict limits here in CT about how long and how much work and independent contractor can do for one company before they are considered a full time employee. It’s pretty low on the hours IIRC. haven’t looked it up since the wife used to do 1099 work, but there are state limits that prevent you from doing full time for one single company.

Johnnyreb on March 24, 2010 at 2:49 PM

The IRS objects to people using this as a tax dodge. Which doesn’t mean you can’t do it, but you’ll have to be very aware of how the IRS determines whether you’re really a contractor or just claiming to be one so your company doesn’t have to pay benefits.

I believe there are about a dozen rules that the IRS uses to decide if you’re legitimately a contractor or actually an employee. Some of the bigger guidelines are whether you work exclusively for one company, whether that company provides your equipment and pays your expenses, and whether the company provides you a workplace. Even consultants with their own company can wind up being classified as an employee if they don’t pay attention to the rules, and watch their client get classified as their employer and get stuck with huge tax expenses.

Like most government regulations, it gets complicated quickly.

tom on March 24, 2010 at 3:18 PM

it’s a huge achievement for him to have singlehandedly blocked this for ten years…..

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:16 PM

That’s ten in the binary system, which is two in the decimal system. ;-)

WashJeff on March 24, 2010 at 3:18 PM

Where the AnninCA did Ann go?

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:19 PM

I don’t doubt members of Congress are getting threats, but I wouldn’t be surprised if members repeatedly get threatened. (Reminds me how the media portrayed attempts to get into the WH [just to be with all the cool people] now that Obama was president as “unprecedented” and “dangerous” when that same thing happend to previous presidents)

Trust me, members of Congress are more upset by being called idiots or tools. They know they have police protection, it’s their egos that are weak and in constant need of reassuring. Calling them the morons that they are hurts them more than any stick or stone ever could.

ConservativeTony on March 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM

That’s ten in the binary system, which is two in the decimal system. ;-)

WashJeff on March 24, 2010 at 3:18 PM

Read my response before you start bashing too.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM

One other anti-growth incentive, as Mark the Great points out in the comments: businesses with 50-60 workers have a big incentive now to downsize.

No…you don’t understand….Nancy Pelosi said this law will increase employment. How on earth could anyone disagree with her?

olesparkie on March 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:19 PM

National Health Care mandated pap smear (with a weed wacker)

Limerick on March 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM

kingsjester on March 24, 2010 at 3:13 PM

Yup, and if you’re pudgy and vote for the R’s you’ll be wisked away to Camp Prevention. Where you’ll be stripped, tatto…err measured. Then off for a welcome beatin…errr massage. After that…you’ll dine on bread scra….delicious meals low in fat, and calories, but high in taste. Next….the gas chambers….ummmm I meant the gym. Yes. That’s it! The gym.

I’d bet even the healthiest persons who vote for R’s will get this magnificent opportunity, for the greater good.

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM

Where the AnninCA did Ann go?

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Dang…you are glutton for punishment. ;-)

WashJeff on March 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM

2. Get a 1099 and pay your own taxes, healthcare and so forth, while they can pay you as a contractor.

Watch.. it will happen.

upinak on March 24, 2010 at 2:29 PM

There are certain laws which regulate whom you can pay with a 1099…

Consequences of Treating an Employee as an Independent Contractor
If you classify an employee as an independent contractor and you have no reasonable basis for doing so, you may be held liable for employment taxes for that worker (the relief provisions, discussed below, will not apply). See Internal Revenue Code section 3509 for more information.

So, I doubt that could happen as much as you think.

MississippiMom on March 24, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Beat me to it. Also, I think it’s pretty easy to get around the independant contractor vs. employee rules.

I’m not saying it’s a good idea, these businesses would most likely have to up the amount they pay overall to make up for things like no 401ks, and no matching funds for same…but the American people are extraordinarily inventive.

Chewy the Lab on March 24, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Not sure about all states, but there are strict limits here in CT about how long and how much work and independent contractor can do for one company before they are considered a full time employee. It’s pretty low on the hours IIRC. haven’t looked it up since the wife used to do 1099 work, but there are state limits that prevent you from doing full time for one single company.

Johnnyreb on March 24, 2010 at 2:49 PM

The IRS objects to people using this as a tax dodge. Which doesn’t mean you can’t do it, but you’ll have to be very aware of how the IRS determines whether you’re really a contractor or just claiming to be one so your company doesn’t have to pay benefits.

I believe there are about a dozen rules that the IRS uses to decide if you’re legitimately a contractor or actually an employee. Some of the bigger guidelines are whether you work exclusively for one company, whether that company provides your equipment and pays your expenses, and whether the company provides you a workplace. Even consultants with their own company can wind up being classified as an employee if they don’t pay attention to the rules, and watch their client get classified as their employer and get stuck with huge tax expenses.

Like most government regulations, it gets complicated quickly.

tom on March 24, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Sorry for double-post, but one too many blockquotes made the first post very confusing

tom on March 24, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Just for Jimbo03:

A grant program would be created to support the delivery of evidence‐based and community‐based prevention and wellness services aimed at strengthening prevention activities, reducing chronic disease rates and addressing health disparities, especially in rural and frontier areas. Funds would be appropriated for five years beginning in FY 2010. (§1201: ERISA §702, PHSA §2702, IRC §9802)
Wellness Grants for Small Employers
Provide grants for up to five years to small employers that establish wellness programs. (Funds appropriated for five years beginning in FY 2011) (§10408)
Wellness Assistance for all Employers
Technical assistance and other resources would be provided to evaluate employer based wellness programs. HHS would conduct a national worksite health policies and programs survey, within two years following enactment, to assess employer‐based health policies and programs.
(§4303: PSHA §4102)
Wellness Subsidies for all Employers
Employers would be permitted to offer employees rewards of up to 30% of the cost of coverage for participating in a wellness program and meeting certain health‐related standards. The rewards may take the form of premium discounts, waivers of cost‐sharing requirements, or benefits that would otherwise not be provided. Employers must offer an alternative standard for individuals for whom it is unreasonably difficult or inadvisable to meet the standard. The reward limit may be increased to 50% of the cost of coverage if deemed appropriate. (Effective 1/1/2014)
A state pilot program will be created by July 2014 to permit participating states to apply similar rewards for participating in wellness programs in the individual market. The program would be expanded in 2017 if it is effective. Reporting on effectiveness and impact of wellness programs would be required. (Report due three years following enactment) (§4202)
Qualified health plans would be required to provide coverage without cost‐sharing for preventive services rated A or B by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, recommended immunizations, and preventive care for infants, children, and adolescents. (Effective six months following enactment)

kingsjester on March 24, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Where the AnninCA did Ann go?

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Off to take advantage of the free colonoscopies, mammograms, and MRI’s?

capejasmine on March 24, 2010 at 3:22 PM

This is all entirely as designed. As employers cut loose their employees, expect to see the word “crisis” reappear, with the only solution being Government Insurance (the Orwellian “Public Option”). And when the Government plan is used to leverage all private insurance into bankruptcy, coupled with plummeting supplies of physicians and soaring prices of care, expect to see the word “crisis” appear all over again, this time with the only solution being “single payer.” It isn’t a slippery slope. It’s a conscious strategy.

Blacklake on March 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM

It’ll be easier than that. The legislation already calls for a government plan for certain individuals who can’t find insurance. They’ll just expand the definition of who qualifies for that group.

hawksruleva on March 24, 2010 at 3:23 PM

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:19 PM

You used to be cool, man. Dude, what happened to you?

;)

Laura in Maryland on March 24, 2010 at 3:24 PM

hawksruleva on March 24, 2010 at 2:54 PM

cs89 on March 24, 2010 at 2:53 PM

Thanks guys.

Bobbertsan on March 24, 2010 at 3:24 PM

–And how old were you and did you have any pre-existing conditions that either raised the price of individual insuurance or stopped you from getting individual insurance (I think not, but let us know)?

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Yes I had pre-existing conditions. I got insurance, I just paid more than what I would have paid without it. My $240 would have been more like $150 sans pre-existing condition.

The left makes it sound like nobody that has ever got the flu can ever get insurance again. Plenty of people get insurance every day with pre-existing conditions. They just pay more for it.

What ObamaCare does is forbid that difference in price. And let me tell you the day that goes into effect I am canceling my policy. If I get sick, I’ll call up and start it up again.

And to avoid the penalty, I’ll also call up on Dec 30th, get insurance, then cancel on Jan 2nd. Then for both years I will have had insurance, and the IRS can’t fine me.

Isn’t life under ObamaCare great? I get to commit insurance fraud and it’s all 100% legit. Woo hoo!!

angryed on March 24, 2010 at 3:25 PM

Read my response before you start bashing too.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM

Gotta have some fun too or we are going drive ourselves into rage and less politically involved people will tune us out.

But I do agree that Democrats have been blocking exploration for years. MOre than ten years actually. I think the Dems will use the federal holding of lands (and sea) that contain energy to bribe lawmakers for future initiatives. Push land ownerships back to the states should be done to prevent future abuse at the federal level.

WashJeff on March 24, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Considering he’s been president for only 15 months and was elected to the Senate in 2004, it’s a huge achievement for him to have singlehandedly blocked this for ten years…..

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:16 PM

He signed an Executive Order last week chief.

thomasaur on March 24, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Liam on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

The trolls always show up and direct the thread into any argument they can that distracts from the real point: Obamacare is an assault on our basic freedoms and is about control, any healthcare is an aside.

Aviator on March 24, 2010 at 3:26 PM

He signed an Executive Order last week chief.

thomasaur on March 24, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Thank you, good buddy. I like it when they try to make me look ignorant and they are talking out their a$$.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:28 PM

I still think that the reason Obumble’s college records are sealed is because he flunked economics.

JayVee on March 24, 2010 at 3:29 PM

Isn’t life under ObamaCare great? I get to commit insurance fraud and it’s all 100% legit. Woo hoo!!

angryed on March 24, 2010 at 3:25 PM

Make sure you are getting paid under the table or bartering your services. All ObamaCare insurance premiums will be pulled directly from your paycheck.

ConservativeTony on March 24, 2010 at 3:29 PM

http://article.wn.com/view/2010/03/12/No_offshore_drilling_says_Obama_administration/
Here jimmy, I knew you’d ask.

thomasaur on March 24, 2010 at 3:30 PM

–Read what I said again. It is a big benefit for people to have access to relatively affordable insurance outside of their workplace. Having more freelancers/temporary employees/consultants available should give employers more flexibility. Small employers now generally favor those types of workers over full time employees.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM

NO. THEY. DO. NOT.

Large conglomerates favor consultants and independent contractors. Consultants work on large scale projects that cost millions of dollars to implement. Consultants are brought in because it is cheaper to bring in someone for 6-12 months then they leave when the project is over vs. hiring a full time employee with whom you’re stuck once the project is over.

How many small businesses do you know that have multi-million dollar projects going on?

Again, I ask do you have any clue what you’re talking about when it comes to the business world? Have you ever even been an employee in the private sector? Sounds to me like you haven’t given the nonsense you’re spewing.

angryed on March 24, 2010 at 3:30 PM

milwife88 on March 24, 2010 at 2:31 PM

Jill says her daughter, a pro-life advocate, was given a pass, put in a taxi and sent off to have an abortion during school hours all without her family knowing.

Why on earth did she go through with it????

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 2:36 PM

Another Stupak moment?

Electrongod on March 24, 2010 at 3:30 PM

http://article.wn.com/view/2010/03/12/No_offshore_drilling_says_Obama_administration/
Here jimmy, I knew you’d ask.

thomasaur on March 24, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Jimbo -Read this one, too.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM

Will we ever know what Stupak go paid under the table for his vote? Was he stupaked? Did he stupak back?

ConservativeTony on March 24, 2010 at 3:35 PM

Aviator on March 24, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Like teenager, many libs can’t see past their own wants.

It’s said that a person’s emotional development stops around the age at which they started using drugs with some frequency. Maybe that’s why so many libs in their thirties are about as well-balanced as a fourteen-year-old.

Liam on March 24, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Jimbo -Read this one, too.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM

He went to another thread so he could be the smartest AnninCaer there too.

thomasaur on March 24, 2010 at 3:38 PM

NO. THEY. DO. NOT.

Large conglomerates favor consultants and independent contractors. Consultants work on large scale projects that cost millions of dollars to implement. Consultants are brought in because it is cheaper to bring in someone for 6-12 months then they leave when the project is over vs. hiring a full time employee with whom you’re stuck once the project is over.

How many small businesses do you know that have multi-million dollar projects going on?

Again, I ask do you have any clue what you’re talking about when it comes to the business world? Have you ever even been an employee in the private sector? Sounds to me like you haven’t given the nonsense you’re spewing.

angryed on March 24, 2010 at 3:30 PM

–I’ve been an employee in the private sector for thirty years. Large companies have consultants for large projects but they’re generally not hiring individuals. Instead, large companies generally hire consulting or similar firms to work on those projects and it’s the employees from those firms that work on those projects. That’s different from the individual independent contractors/consultants/part-timers that I’m talking about.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Laura in Maryland on March 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM

Only if you change your diaper/pad first.

robertnyc212 on March 24, 2010 at 3:39 PM

Only if you change your diaper/pad first.

robertnyc212 on March 24, 2010 at 3:39 PM

Seriously? This is what you to say to this woman? That says all I need to know about you.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Jimbo -Read this one, too.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM
He went to another thread so he could be the smartest AnninCaer there too.

thomasaur on March 24, 2010 at 3:38 PM

–I did read it. But here’s what I initially reacted to:

Obama has blocked drilling off the coast in deeper waters for ten years.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Jimbo, the effects of FMLA are not uncontroversial (Link).

I know on personal reflection (I work for a small government contractor) we thought long and hard about crossing the 50-employee threshold.

I also know that if our competitors drop coverage, their indirect rates will fall significantly and we’ll no longer be cost-competitive unless we do the same thing. I’m all for increasing portability, so I’m not particularly troubled by people moving to the exchanges unless there’s a public option (which would inevitably be subsidized, but that’s a whole different argument).

You should also note that all those freelancers wind up in the nongroup market, where premia are expected to rise 10-13% before subsidies. So maybe some freelancers are better off, but those near the phaseout limits for the subsidies are going to face some pretty wicked effective marginal tax rates.

DrSteve on March 24, 2010 at 3:43 PM

The IRS objects to people using this as a tax dodge.
tom on March 24, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Guess what, it is still legal and in most cases if the person is smart enough…. you make more money in the long run.

They can’t complain about something they designed LOL!

upinak on March 24, 2010 at 3:43 PM

The left makes it sound like nobody that has ever got the flu can ever get insurance again. Plenty of people get insurance every day with pre-existing conditions. They just pay more for it.

What ObamaCare does is forbid that difference in price. And let me tell you the day that goes into effect I am canceling my policy. If I get sick, I’ll call up and start it up again.

And to avoid the penalty, I’ll also call up on Dec 30th, get insurance, then cancel on Jan 2nd. Then for both years I will have had insurance, and the IRS can’t fine me.

Isn’t life under ObamaCare great? I get to commit insurance fraud and it’s all 100% legit. Woo hoo!!

angryed on March 24, 2010 at 3:25 PM

–There’s no doubt that some people with pre-existing conditions can still get insurance in the private market at a higher rate. But there’s also no doubt that some pre-existing conditions make it impossible to get insurance for now in the private market at any price.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:43 PM

–Read what I said again. It is a big benefit for people to have access to relatively affordable insurance outside of their workplace. Having more freelancers/temporary employees/consultants available should give employers more flexibility. Small employers now generally favor those types of workers over full time employees.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/fact-sheet-the-truth-abou_b_506026.html

Annual premiums in 2016: status quo / with bill:
Individual market, single: $5,500 / $5,800
Individual market, family: $13,100 / $15,200

Look at those savings. $13,100 without the bill, but only $15,200 with the bill. Who wouldn’t want to be forced to spend another $2,1000 a year? Crazy right-wing nutjobs, that’s who.

Yo know what, send me $2,100 and you can have those savings this year and not have to wait for this bill to kick in. I’m so generous, I’ll take that $2,100 off your hands for free.

But hurry, if you wait too long I might no longer be willing to take that money off your hands for free.

gekkobear on March 24, 2010 at 3:44 PM

–I did read it. But here’s what I initially reacted to:

Obama has blocked drilling off the coast in deeper waters for ten years.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Okay, Jimbo. This is 2010, right? Ten years from now will be 2020? There is ten years.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:44 PM

Obama has blocked drilling off the coast in deeper waters for ten years.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:41 PM

In your opinion is this a good thing?

thomasaur on March 24, 2010 at 3:46 PM

–There’s no doubt that some people with pre-existing conditions can still get insurance in the private market at a higher rate. But there’s also no doubt that some pre-existing conditions make it impossible to get insurance for now in the private market at any price.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:43 PM

But this bill will change all that… right? Especially for the children… think of the children.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Gap-in-health-care-laws-apf-4272209396.html?x=0&.v=1

Under the new law, insurance companies still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem, said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main congressional panels that wrote the bill Obama signed into law Tuesday.

We really did have to pass the law to find out what was in it. One thing that was in it is refusing coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.

But I’m sure Obama is right and the people who read and helped write the bill are wrong. You’re fine.

gekkobear on March 24, 2010 at 3:47 PM

–I’ve been an employee in the private sector for thirty years. Large companies have consultants for large projects but they’re generally not hiring individuals. Instead, large companies generally hire consulting or similar firms to work on those projects and it’s the employees from those firms that work on those projects. That’s different from the individual independent contractors/consultants/part-timers that I’m talking about.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Wrong once again Jimmie. Man this is getting boring here.

You really have no clue.

The vast majority of consultants are independent. They are however hired through a 3rd party. That 3rd party is a “consulting company” but they are nothing more than a recruiter in most cases.

Even the Deloittes and KPMGs of the world have armies of independent contractors that they use.

If you truly have worked in the private sector for 30 years, you should know this. I can see where your confusion may lie though. Often times a project will bring in 10 people and those 10 people will be “Consulting Company” consultants. The cube dwellers often assume all those consultants work for Consulting Company as full timers. And a lot of times that is sort of implied. But more often than not 7 of those 10 will be indies sub-contracted.

angryed on March 24, 2010 at 3:47 PM

robertnyc212 on March 24, 2010 at 3:39 PM

You are lower than dog$hit, scum.

OmahaConservative on March 24, 2010 at 3:51 PM

Jimbo, the effects of FMLA are not uncontroversial (Link).

I know on personal reflection (I work for a small government contractor) we thought long and hard about crossing the 50-employee threshold.

I also know that if our competitors drop coverage, their indirect rates will fall significantly and we’ll no longer be cost-competitive unless we do the same thing. I’m all for increasing portability, so I’m not particularly troubled by people moving to the exchanges unless there’s a public option (which would inevitably be subsidized, but that’s a whole different argument).

You should also note that all those freelancers wind up in the nongroup market, where premia are expected to rise 10-13% before subsidies. So maybe some freelancers are better off, but those near the phaseout limits for the subsidies are going to face some pretty wicked effective marginal tax rates.

DrSteve on March 24, 2010 at 3:43 PM

–Steve, we’re in agreement on FLMA (although the effects were no where near as bad as feared) and on the effect at the margin. But why wouldn’t your competitors drop health insurance now if they thought they could retain/hire good employees? Does the fact that there will be (in a few years) a more-ready option mean that all your competitors will suddenly decide to drop coverage? Because it sure seems to me that you and other companies might come in and try to swoop up employees from the one(s) that did drop coverage, especially if that company won’t have any guarantees that the other companies in your industry will follow suit.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:52 PM

The vast majority of consultants are independent. They are however hired through a 3rd party. That 3rd party is a “consulting company” but they are nothing more than a recruiter in most cases.

Even the Deloittes and KPMGs of the world have armies of independent contractors that they use.

–It all depends on the type of project and the consultants. Some of those people may be employees or partners of the consulting firms for the larger accounting, tax and finance projects. But for the smaller IT and finance jobs, many of those people are placed by “body shops” and are temporary employees of the body shop who receive salary and (usually minimal) benefits through the body shop. Some may not even be employees of the body shop, but can be independent consultants to the body shop. Many companies have also decided not to hire any individual temporary consultants for more than a six month or so period because of the risk of those people being deemed an employee. In those cases, those people are then generally hired by a recruiting agency and made an employee of that agency.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:57 PM

–I did read it. But here’s what I initially reacted to:

Obama has blocked drilling off the coast in deeper waters for ten years.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:41 PM
Okay, Jimbo. This is 2010, right? Ten years from now will be 2020? There is ten years.

TXMomof3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:44 PM

–Aah. Got it. For the next ten years, not the past ones. My bad.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 3:59 PM

But there are potential problems. Case in point: It would be much cheaper for Dick Bus to drop the generous coverage he now offers and take the hit at $750 a head for his 120 workers. The penalty would be $90,000 a year. He’s currently spending $480,000.

What kind of business does Dick Bus operate? I can’t imagine how this company can compete with offshore competitors based on what he pays for health insurance.

bayam on March 24, 2010 at 4:00 PM

Annual premiums in 2016: status quo / with bill:
Individual market, single: $5,500 / $5,800
Individual market, family: $13,100 / $15,200

Look at those savings. $13,100 without the bill, but only $15,200 with the bill. Who wouldn’t want to be forced to spend another $2,1000 a year? Crazy right-wing nutjobs, that’s who.

Yo know what, send me $2,100 and you can have those savings this year and not have to wait for this bill to kick in. I’m so generous, I’ll take that $2,100 off your hands for free.

But hurry, if you wait too long I might no longer be willing to take that money off your hands for free.

gekkobear on March 24, 2010 at 3:44 PM

–But you don’t have guaranteed issue (i.e. no pre-existing exclusion coverage) under the status quo. And the benefits are generally better than the status quo. So it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison.

Jimbo3 on March 24, 2010 at 4:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4