And so it begins: One in ten employers already saying they’ll drop health coverage

posted at 3:21 pm on July 24, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

The Congressional Budget Office released their post-Supreme Court ruling reassessment of ObamaCare earlier today, and — unexpectedly — the latest numbers are even less attractive than we originally estimated. Who could’ve seen this coming?

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday said President Obama’s healthcare reform reduces the deficit by $109 billion over ten years.

This is a new re-estimate in light of June’s Supreme Court ruling upholding the law and it is a smaller deficit savings than CBO had previously projected.

CBO said the ruling added uncertainty to its estimates but it has put forward a number that comes down in the middle of possible outcomes.

In March 2011, CBO said that ‘Obamacare’ would reduce the deficit by $210 billion over ten years, despite increasing spending by $1.042 trillion over 10 years.

Despite their insistence that ObamaCare is going to help bring down the deficit (I remain wildly and incorrigibly skeptical), this is still just a fancy way of saying that ObamaCare is going to cost more than they originally thought — or, rather, more than they originally and miraculously managed to convince themselves it was going to cost.

I also wonder if there’s any way in heck they could possibly be taking into account all of the neighborhood effects that are going to come about as a result of ObamaCare, since there’s no possible way of knowing what all of those are going to be — and therein lies the trouble with massively intrusive behemoths of legislation that are enough to make the Founders roll over in their graves. The distorted incentives, regulations, many new taxes, and rampant uncertainty coming to fruition under the auspices of the PPACA are already rearing their ugly heads, and they’re not even finished writing all of the rules for the darn thing, let alone the mishaps that will come during actual implementation. Here’s just one fresh example:

About one in 10 employers plan to drop health coverage when key provisions of the new health care law kick in less than two years from now, according to a survey to be released Tuesday by the consulting company Deloitte.

Nine percent of companies said they expect to stop offering coverage to their workers in the next one to three years, the Wall Street Journal reported. Around 81 percent said they would continue providing benefits and 10 percent said they weren’t sure.

The companies, though, said a lot will depend on how future provisions of the law unfold, since most of the key parts are scheduled to take effect in 2014. One in three respondents said they could stop offering coverage if the law requires them to provide more generous benefits than they do now, if a tax on high-cost plans takes effect in 2018 as scheduled or if they decide it would be cheaper for them to pay the penalty for not providing insurance.

Oh joy, oh rapture. What other lovely little gems shall we discover if/when the ObamaCare saga continues to unfold?


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

Precisely what Obama wants, national health ‘care’.

Schadenfreude on July 24, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Thank you Roberts. May you suffer in all of your life and in eternity.

Schadenfreude on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

I think one out of ten is an underestimate.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Oh joy, oh rapture. What other lovely little gems shall we discover if/when the ObamaCare saga continues to unfold?

…just wait until the folks get a load of the taxes hidden in the bill!
I can’t wait for the trolls!

KOOLAID2 on July 24, 2012 at 3:25 PM

False cost projections are a pre-existing condition.

BRunner on July 24, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Well this is certainly unexpected.

coldwarrior on July 24, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Thank you Roberts. May you suffer in all of your life and in eternity.

Schadenfreude on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

How could he even call himself, “A student in the law”. Unamerican.

Oil Can on July 24, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Thank you Roberts. May you suffer in all of your life and in eternity.

Schadenfreude on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

…and may his thing fall off!

KOOLAID2 on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

10 in 10 employees where robbed in the libor scandal by world banks that now finance romney campaign and HOT AIR puts ZERO articles about it!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Single payer baby! Yeah!

Now, just get rid of that pesky constitution and the country is mine, all mine!

KMC1 on July 24, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Come to think of it, why should it be my employer’s job to pick and partially provide health insurance to me? Why my employer and not my church or my county or my neighborhood association?

Just a thought.

Time Lord on July 24, 2012 at 3:28 PM

I think one out of ten is an underestimate.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

.
Dittos.

Closer to 4 outta’ 10.

listens2glenn on July 24, 2012 at 3:29 PM

HHS has got it all covered apparently, no worries./H/T Drudge.

MontanaMmmm on July 24, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Around 81 percent said they would continue providing benefits

…until as Nazi Pelosi said…they find out “what’s in it”!

KOOLAID2 on July 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM

just hurry up and nationalize it already so when my parents, who are 77 and 71, need some major life saving surgery they can be kicked to the curb. oh well, they could always run over to canada. oh wait…..

GhoulAid on July 24, 2012 at 3:32 PM

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

really? that’s it? thats all you got? you’ve embarrassed all the kos kids.

chasdal on July 24, 2012 at 3:34 PM

As Nancy might say now “We have to implement it in order to find out what’s in it.”

Sort of like saying, “We have to step on the mine before we know if it will explode.”

BMF on July 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

10 in 10 employees where robbed in the libor scandal by world banks that now finance romney campaign and HOT AIR puts ZERO articles about it!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Loose fan belt.

CurtZHP on July 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

May the IPAB disallow any and all access to hemorrhoidectomies to every one of the more equal Pigs who foisted this national tragedy upon us all.

OhEssYouCowboys on July 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Wait until we get closer to this becoming reality.

You are an employer…you have to keep costs down or raise prices or lay off workers. The Feds say you have to provide coverage for all your employees…or face a $2000 per employee penalty.

You get together with your CFO and his/her team of accountants and discover that you are already paying about $5000 or more per employee for their present insurance.

What do you do? What do you do???

If you wish to keep in business…and at least keep a few more employees from the soup kitchen…you dump the insurance coverage, pay the fine, not lay off any employees and reap a small profit.

coldwarrior on July 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

GhoulAid on July 24, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Chances are, at 77 and 71 your parents are already on a nationalized health insurance plan called Medicare. At least most folks their age are. But don’t let facts cloud your judgment.

Time Lord on July 24, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Sort of like saying, “We have to step on the mine before we know if it will explode.”

BMF on July 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

I can, actually, see Pelosi saying that, in full confidence of its accuracy.

OhEssYouCowboys on July 24, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Make sure CJ Roberts gets a copy of the “new and improved” – CBO’s re-estimated estimates.

Its gonna be very taxing, Johnny Boy.

FlaMurph on July 24, 2012 at 3:38 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on July 24, 2012 at 3:37 PM

No, Pelosi is of the type who would say, “Looks like poop. Hmmm, smells like poop. Better taste it to make sure.”

coldwarrior on July 24, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Our company, under 50 employees, is going through the renewal process for our group insurance. We rose 14% last year, and our renewal rates are 13.8% higher AGAIN this year. Other than believing it is our responsibility to offer health benefits to our employees, whom we regard as family, there is no incentive to offer insurance anymore. In fact, there is a HUGE disincentive to offer it. We could basically pocket an extra $250K in our pockets by no longer offering health insurance to our employees. And with rate increases continuing, it will become financially impossible for a lot of enterprises to participate…which of course is by design.

search4truth on July 24, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Can we ask the NCAA to impose penalties on the Obama administration for this clusterf*ck, but assess them against liberals?

Whose lies will cost Americans more? Penn State or the Obama administration.

Obamacare is an abomination.

BuckeyeSam on July 24, 2012 at 3:40 PM

As long as “news sources” keep referring to “The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office,” there will be no progress in straightening out Congressional spending.

The “Congressional Budget Office” is mandated to use provably-wrong “Static Analysis” and rely on provably-false assumptions for the purpose of “evaluating” proposed bills. Since the false assumptions and wrong analysis technique come from clearly partisan mandates, any allegation that the CBO is “nonpartisan” is an Orwellian LIE!!!

As long as this situation continues, there is no reason to pretend that any of the resulting numbers from CBO have any more credibility than any other wild and biased guess.

A truly ‘non-partisan CBO’ would seek TRUTH rather than POLITICAL VINDICATION. Such a CBO would consider more than one set of assumptions, would grade and conduct analysis of all assumptions, and would use more reasonable analysis methods: especially methods which have proved to be more accurate in the past.

landlines on July 24, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Forward has already got the folk scared. Seems like it’s working.
 
lester on May 8, 2012 at 6:17 PM

rogerb on July 24, 2012 at 3:40 PM

One in three respondents said they could stop offering coverage if the law requires them to provide more generous benefits than they do now, if a tax on high-cost plans takes effect in 2018 as scheduled or if they decide it would be cheaper for them to pay the penalty for not providing insurance.

So we can pretty much assume 1/3 of employers will drop coverage, because we know there are tons of additional mandates for minimum coverage on top of what most insurers offer now, and the penalty will almost certainly be less than paying for coverage.

I remain firmly convinced this is all by design. They wanted to make it cheaper for companies not to offer coverage than to offer coverage in order to accomplish two things, (a)direct a portion of those payments to the federal government as additional revenue that would have otherwise gone to insurance companies and (b)take so many individuals off of the insurance rolls that there would be an outcry for single-payer.

gravityman on July 24, 2012 at 3:41 PM

I think one out of ten is an underestimate.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

And I do believe this is an understatement.

John the Libertarian on July 24, 2012 at 3:41 PM

I think one out of ten is an underestimate.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Exactly, that’s why the end of the quote is the most important, IMHO:

One in three respondents said they could stop offering coverage if the law requires them to provide more generous benefits than they do now, if a tax on high-cost plans takes effect in 2018 as scheduled or if they decide it would be cheaper for them to pay the penalty for not providing insurance.

That’s 33% for the math challenged. And most likely an underestimate at this point, once the parameters of OCare go fully into effect I expect to to rise to close to 50%.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on July 24, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Time Lord on July 24, 2012 at 3:36 PM

barack obama and his raging barely hidden homosexuality and michelle my belle’s fug face cloud my judgement every day. chances are, you’re a troll.

GhoulAid on July 24, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Precisely what Obama wants, national health ‘care’.

Yup. The whole intent was to funnel everyone that direction.

Around 81 percent said they would continue providing benefits

…until as Nazi Pelosi said…they find out “what’s in it”!

Ah, what they said then does not correlate with what they actually do when the time to act comes.

hawkeye54 on July 24, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I think one out of ten is an underestimate.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

That’s because it is.

Some companies will drop it entirely but many more will stop offering it for people below a certain pay grade…

This will be a PR disaster so how will Democrats try to stop employers dropping coverage? Increase that fine to $100,000 per uninsured employee.

Punish our enemies.

CorporatePiggy on July 24, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I think one out of ten is an underestimate.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

And I do believe this is an understatement.

John the Libertarian on July 24, 2012 at 3:41 PM

An understatement the size of Godzilla!

pilamaye on July 24, 2012 at 3:45 PM

No, Pelosi is of the type who would say, “Looks like poop. Hmmm, smells like poop. Better taste it to make sure.”
coldwarrior on July 24, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Shut up and eat your poo peas.
- Dear Leader

Marcola on July 24, 2012 at 3:46 PM

CBO said the ruling added uncertainty to its estimates but it has put forward a number that comes down in the middle of possible outcomes.

They can only use the assumptions congress sets. So that’s “down the middle” of Zero and ABS(of adding 218 Billion)

MechanicalBill on July 24, 2012 at 3:47 PM

1 in 10 willing to admit it at this point. I think the number will be higher.

Lawrence on July 24, 2012 at 3:47 PM

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

you have no clue what you are talking about. A bp here and there is negligible to consumers.

I realize that Holder wants to ‘fight the good fight’…but you see…this is a distraction from the real bad stuff that has been happening

http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2012/07/16/the-fine-line-between-incompetence-and-criminality/

read the entire thing…if you want to get mad, then at least get mad at the right people…and not let the AG fool you

r keller on July 24, 2012 at 3:47 PM

The only thing unexpected in this is the number of employers who aren’t planning to drop their coverage!

redgypsy on July 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM

Another nightmare of an O re-election:

Small and midsized companies drop coverage. Libs/progs lead by Dear Leader further demonize said companies – “You didn’t build that and now you’re really not paying enough!” Mad taxes ensue.

Marcola on July 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM

The distorted incentives, regulations, many new taxes, and rampant uncertainty coming to fruition under the auspices of the PPACA are already rearing their ugly heads, and they’re not even finished writing all of the rules for the darn thing, let alone the mishaps that will come during actual implementation.

Since so many of the rules are left to the discretion of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, a lot will depend on whehter the rules are written by Kathleen Sebelius or someone nominated by President Romney.

Is he still on board for waivers for all 57 50 states?

Steve Z on July 24, 2012 at 3:50 PM

10 in 10 employees where robbed in the libor scandal by world banks that now finance romney campaign and HOT AIR puts ZERO articles about it!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Banks will be banks !!!!

Death to these Capaitlists ! – or maybe, howsabout indicting those who broke the law – now there’s a concept…..

…hmmmm who’s job is it to prosecute on this level ???

Hello, Eric ?

Incest is a biatch.

FlaMurph on July 24, 2012 at 3:50 PM

The real number of employers likely to drop coverage is higher…duh!

This is about implementing the liberal wetdream…A socialized euro-style America or soft fascism.

Control…Control…Control

workingclass artist on July 24, 2012 at 3:52 PM

really? that’s it? thats all you got? you’ve embarrassed all the kos kids.

chasdal on July 24, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Loose fan belt.

CurtZHP on July 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

I am disappointed with HOT AIR silence on this issue, its really Zero articles on the issue and I have no article to vent on…

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

“If you like your insurance you can keep it!” Heh. Good one Barry. You really had us going there.

Scrappy on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

10 in 10 employees where robbed in the libor scandal by world banks that now finance romney campaign and HOT AIR puts ZERO articles about it!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

SOROS!

workingclass artist on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

This is going to save me so much money!

tom daschle concerned on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

This will be a PR disaster so how will Democrats try to stop employers dropping coverage? Increase that fine to $100,000 per uninsured employee.

Punish our enemies.

CorporatePiggy on July 24, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I don’t really see them increasing the fine. I think they truly want it to be less expensive to drop coverage than to provide it. They want as many people as possible in the state exchanges (those states that set them up that is), so they can eventually say “Well, everyone is on our state controlled plans anyways, so may as well be single-payer.”

Also, bear in mind to whom the payments go in each case. If a company was spending $5000 on coverage for each employee, that was going to the insurance company. If they decide to drop coverage and pay a $2000 penalty, that money goes directly to the government. If they raise the penalty to $100,000 then the companies start sending the $5000 back to the insurance companies and the government stops getting their $2000.

All in all, I think the government will want to keep the fine low… just low enough that it’s cheaper to pay the penalty than pay for coverage.

gravityman on July 24, 2012 at 3:54 PM

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Perhaps you should alert the UN?

workingclass artist on July 24, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Come to think of it, why should it be my employer’s job to pick and partially provide health insurance to me? Why my employer and not my church or my county or my neighborhood association?

Just a thought.

Time Lord on July 24, 2012 at 3:28 PM

a) Not every church is a “Social Justice” Church (Praise God.)
b) Your county doesn’t have the money, nor the manpower to untake that.
c) It’s a neighborhood,association, not a sovereign nation

You need to venture out of Mom’s basement every now and then.

kingsjester on July 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

I don’t really see them increasing the fine. I think they truly want it to be less expensive to drop coverage than to provide it. They want as many people as possible in the state exchanges (those states that set them up that is), so they can eventually say “Well, everyone is on our state controlled plans anyways, so may as well be single-payer.”
gravityman on July 24, 2012 at 3:54 PM

I agree. This is about single payer.

It will also bankrupt us faster..like Europe

workingclass artist on July 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

…I have no article to vent on…

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Thank you, Ed and AP.

kingsjester on July 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Banks will be banks !!!!

Death to these Capaitlists ! – or maybe, howsabout indicting those who broke the law – now there’s a concept…..

…hmmmm who’s job is it to prosecute on this level ???

Hello, Eric ?

Incest is a biatch.

FlaMurph on July 24, 2012 at 3:50 PM

dont worry, since libor is the index rate of +- 500 trillion, all institutions, private and public that took loans or trades in that index are gearing up to sue the big banks involved:

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=libor+sue

this stuff wont depend on eric to blow, its HUGE and hot air has ZERO articles on it!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Perhaps you should alert the UN?

workingclass artist on July 24, 2012 at 3:54 PM

lol!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Another nightmare of an O re-election:

Small and midsized companies drop coverage. Libs/progs lead by Dear Leader further demonize said companies – “You didn’t build that and now you’re really not paying enough!” Mad taxes ensue.

Marcola on July 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM

Nationalize companies?

workingclass artist on July 24, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Despite their insistence that ObamaCare is going to help bring down the deficit (I remain wildly and incorrigibly skeptical)

You should be skeptical. The CBO still excludes the “doc fix” which is estimated between 300 billion to 600 billion over 10 years.

BacaDog on July 24, 2012 at 3:59 PM

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Why don’t you focus on the utterly unreported scandal of Libor, by which Geithner knew and hid the rates, in collusion with the banks, to scroom all?

He s/b in prison, not where he sits, the weasely tiny man.

Schadenfreude on July 24, 2012 at 4:00 PM

This is not a bug, it’s a feature of Obamacare. Once employers get out of the business of providing medical insurance and the insurers themselves go broke from having to take any and all regardless of condition, the geniuses who brought you this will be able to stand up and sadly state that there is now no alternative to single payer. After all, they tried to let the market work and it simply didn’t.

Hucklebuck on July 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM

I have no article to vent on…

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

…if you get your head out of ‘there’ you won’t have to vent anything…you can breathe normally once it’s out of the rectal cavity!

KOOLAID2 on July 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM

This story sickens me even more than the “Has housing hit bottom? thread.

As others have stated above, the 1 in 10 number is probably way, way low.

UltimateBob on July 24, 2012 at 4:05 PM

This number is way low, and based on some sterile analysis that likely assiduously ignores business realities and cannot possibly accommodate all the coming tsunami of unanticipated consequences. Plus it’s the CBO. Can anyone trust them? Assuming that business people are still allowed to make choices based on market conditions and what’s best for their stockholders and the needs of their companies, it may not be long before the question becomes How many employers are still hanging on to their health plans? and then Why would any employer still have a health plan? The main reason health was even associated with your place of employment was that it was a competitive offering. Now that competition has been legislated away there’s no reason to offer health care as a benefit. And once that happens then HR department benefits staffs will see wholesale “terminations” (HR’s, term.) That will snowball until all those “generalists” are caught up in the termination frenzy, and soon enough it will be regarded as highly uncompetitive to have more than a skeleton crew in the HR department. There’ll be no benefits to manage and no hiring to speak of going on. Even convincing higher-ups to keep a heartbeat of HR types around to carry on the oral traditions will become difficult. Ironic, isn’t it? I don’t think it’s going too far out on the limb to say that a majority of operatives in HR departments — one of the stealth institutions infiltrated by the Left over the decades — were Pro-Obamacare. Many of these newly footloose former psych majors, but not all, may find positions as clerks at the free clinics which will replace our family doctors. These clinics will be easy to find. They’ll be part of the Post Office. And they’ll be staffed by doctors maybe from, ohhh, Kenya.

curved space on July 24, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Why don’t you focus on the utterly unreported scandal of Libor, by which Geithner knew and hid the rates, in collusion with the banks, to scroom all?

He s/b in prison, not where he sits, the weasely tiny man.

Schadenfreude on July 24, 2012 at 4:00 PM

I think my rage should be directed first at the thieves, and after to the failed(perhaps corrupt) regulators.

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 4:05 PM

these numbers are completely false. this assumes the doc fix does not get extended/patched beyond 12/31/2012 (along with other rediculous assumptions). once you take that fallacy away, the deficit balloons.

t8stlikchkn on July 24, 2012 at 4:06 PM

…if you get your head out of ‘there’ you won’t have to vent anything…you can breathe normally once it’s out of the rectal cavity!

KOOLAID2 on July 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM

no need for this…
i know you guys only care about partisan warfare, but this scandal is important and should be mentioned… its not s|ht

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Obama: “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor too bad.”

Physics Geek on July 24, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Possibly, but the state ‘exchanges’ are not going to offer the kind of policies that a very large number of employees currently get through their employer.

When the coverage is noticeably poorer and the price is higher, I suspect a lot of people (including leftists) are going to feel they got the shaft and blame the Democrat party.

Of course it could go the other way and people could vote for Hugo Chavez to fix it.

CorporatePiggy on July 24, 2012 at 4:10 PM

Thank you, Ed and AP.

kingsjester on July 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

dont you care banks stole from us? for what I remember hot air had lots of madoff articles so why not about something that makes madoff look like a petty thief?

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 4:14 PM

dont worry, since libor is the index rate of +- 500 trillion, all institutions, private and public that took loans or trades in that index are gearing up to sue the big banks involved:

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:57 PM

.
Shirley then, considering the expansiveness of the entire lending world as you point out, you didn’t really mean to just single out Romney and the fine, earnest folks here at Hot Air –

did you ?

FlaMurph on July 24, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Well this is certainly unexpected.

coldwarrior on July 24, 2012 at 3:26 PM

I’ll alert the media

workingclass artist on July 24, 2012 at 4:15 PM

One step closer to “single payer”… ObamaCareTax needs repeal, root and branch…

Khun Joe on July 24, 2012 at 4:17 PM

Shirley then, considering the expansiveness of the entire lending world as you point out, you didn’t really mean to just single out Romney and the fine, earnest folks here at Hot Air –

did you ?

FlaMurph on July 24, 2012 at 4:15 PM

exactly, i don’t care about romney, its just to get attention on the news blackout of hot air on the issue.

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 4:19 PM

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 4:14 PM

I’ve seen you in action. I’ll pass.

kingsjester on July 24, 2012 at 4:21 PM

10 in 10 employees where robbed in the libor scandal by world banks that now finance romney campaign and HOT AIR puts ZERO articles about it!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Oh…you mean like JP Morgan Chase and Citicorp. And the Gilberts of Barclays, the same Barclays that was fined last week for rigging rates? Oh wait, my bad, they’re Obama donors and bundlers.

Deanna on July 24, 2012 at 4:23 PM

When your employer does drop your corporate health insurance, don’t expect to be able to find “affordable” individual health insurance.

The monthly premium for my individual high deductible plan for a single person in California was $366.00 in 2009 before Obamacare passed.

Then in a series of rapid increases my premium jumped to $636.00 per month by March 2012 and that was without crossing an age threshhold.

Last week I was notified that my premium would be increasing to $830.00 per month when I do cross an age threshhold at age 50.

Obamacare is making everybody’s health insurance MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE!

Vote as if your life depended on it in November!

wren on July 24, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Oh…you mean like JP Morgan Chase and Citicorp. And the Gilberts of Barclays, the same Barclays that was fined last week for rigging rates? Oh wait, my bad, they’re Obama donors and bundlers.

Deanna on July 24, 2012 at 4:23 PM

ah then, corrupt banks financed obama election and there is ZERO hot air articles on it!?!?! can you explain?

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 4:25 PM

My opinion alone. First, those who say the number is low are right. Much like election polling, many asked are outright lying either from fear of disdain or trying to hold onto an unreasonable fantasy. We are lobbying for business approaches to government and campaigning to have a responsible, business savvy president who understands economics, management and bookkeeping. The raw reality is that businesses must survive with the highest possible profit. With that in mind the number should be around 70-90%. Something I learned early is that you can be professional and respectful to your employees, but never be a friend and never think of them as family. It’s safe to say that soggy sentiment will only be returned with envy, disrespect, procrastination, entitlement, theft and loss of that all important profit that gives them and you an income. The philosophical reaction is to continue to provide ever more expensive health care. The pragmatic employment of business sense says to take the least expensive route – ie the fine and cut them loose. Some of them probably voted Liberal. Tough love.

ironked on July 24, 2012 at 4:31 PM

“The relentlessly rising cost of health insurance is prompting some small Massachusetts companies to drop coverage for their workers and encourage them to sign up for state-subsidized care instead, a trend that, some analysts say, could eventually weigh heavily on the state’s already-stressed budget….

Additionally, company owners say, it has become far cheaper to pay the state penalty for not covering their workers — roughly $295 annually per employee — than to pay thousands more in premiums.”

- “Firms cancel health coverage”
With cost rising, small companies turning to state- July 18, 2010

http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2010/07/18/firms_cancel_health_coverage/

hopping right along the romneycare bunny trail of FAIL… is our robertstax.

mittens on July 24, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Despite their insistence that ObamaCare is going to help bring down the deficit (I remain wildly and incorrigibly skeptical)
You should be skeptical. The CBO still excludes the “doc fix” which is estimated between 300 billion to 600 billion over 10 years.

BacaDog on July 24, 2012 at 3:59 PM

exactly. i wonder how they “hid the decline” in revenues that was the sham class act, which now repealed they must had had to jimmy up some more fake revenue. like the cadillac plan tax revenue (none of which will be received) and the increase in wages due to employers dropping plans, then giving employees wage raises, thereby becoming taxable income, thereby increasing revenues…it goes on and on. THIS is what needs explaining to people. this goes back to what newt was saying in the “right wing social engineering” comment. he wasnt saying we shouldnt do entitlement reform, or obamacare repeal, but before we do, we need the EXPLAIN it, and get folks on board. with full knowledge, facts. this is not rocket science, its commomn sense. all we need to do is just lay it out, repeatedly. they disdain “us” so much they just cant stomach it, those firggin elitist crapheads, they just cant trust us with these facts. we’re too stupid. we’re all watching kardashians. why else would they NOT hammer this home, every day.

t8stlikchkn on July 24, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Who believes for a hot minute that obamacare will do ANY deficit reduction? Once the employers drop coverage and the states opt out of the exchanges, they designed this for all of those People to have to turn to the gubmint for coverage because the private insurance companies will be in their death spiral from mandated coverage without enough policy holders to spread the risk.

karenhasfreedom on July 24, 2012 at 4:36 PM

t8stlikchkn on July 24, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Of course, this is the same government that has issued edicts and assessed penalties against companies for not using bio-fuels that do not even exist.

And the same government that is paying nearly $30 a gallon for other bio-fuels so the Navy can lessen its dependency on $4 a gallon diesel.

Not much of a peep out of the masses, eh?

We have indeed fallen down the rabbit hole…

coldwarrior on July 24, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Vote as if your life depended on it in November!

wren on July 24, 2012 at 4:23 PM

It does; I have a long-term (since age 6) pre-existing condition that will certainly lead me directly to the death panels. My demise will be long, slow, and ghastly.

Believe me, I will vote accordingly to rid us of this evil. I can only hope that what has been set into motion will be undone quickly, or that God will mercifully see me home fast.

chelie on July 24, 2012 at 4:50 PM

THIS is what needs explaining to people. this goes back to what newt was saying in the “right wing social engineering” comment. he wasnt saying we shouldnt do entitlement reform, or obamacare repeal, but before we do, we need the EXPLAIN it, and get folks on board. with full knowledge, facts. this is not rocket science, its commomn sense. all we need to do is just lay it out, repeatedly.

t8stlikchkn on July 24, 2012 at 4:35 PM

I agree t8stlikchkn! We all need to be explaining the perils of Obamacare every day, to as many people as possible!

I attended a panel discussion last week where people who are working on creating the state’s infrastructure for Obamacare spent an hour talking about all of the wonderful benefits that Obamacare would bring.

The audience was full of people who thought Obamacare would be fabulous.

The panelists said they were going to be giving a lot of these presentations during the next few months.

The liberals are actively promoting what they think are benefits of Obamacare.

If Conservatives don’t explain the very real disadvantages of Obamcare every day, it will be that much harder to Repeal Obamacare, even IF we have enough victories in the November election.

wren on July 24, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Oh hey look, yet another thing us crazy right-wing wackos warned about that the left scoffed at which is being proven true before our very eyes.

You’d think they would get tired of proving us right all the time.

tdpwells on July 24, 2012 at 4:55 PM

The book The Truth About Obamacare, by Sally Pipes is an excellent resource for those who want an efficient way to gather facts about Obamacare, so you can have fact-based conversations with your friends and family before the election.

It is a pretty quick read at 218 pages in very clear and easily understandable language.

wren on July 24, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Wethal on July 24, 2012 at 3:36 PM
Thanks for the link.

One in 10 is a gross understatement. The taxes on companies employing 50 workers or more which don’t offer coverage were kept low as to encourage them to drop it and force everyone into an exchange, and thus eventually into a single-payer health care system.

If states don’t offer exchanges, then that leaves the feds to step in (and I won’t even use the term “legally” because following established laws is not native to the Obama administration). Insurance companies eventually might be overwhelmed if enough companies drop coverage, and since most folks here get insurance from employers, they might not want to deal with shopping for it. It will be an expensive proposition to pay for coverage outright without a company match regardless of who sells the policy.

Smaller companies can split (on paper) into several entities to avoid the tax. They would just split the employees among the new companies.

It was all part of the plan to socialize medicine. Within a few years, there will be so few businesses buying employee coverage that health insurance companies (which will eventually be government entities) will not sell group coverage. Hey – you can all keep your doctor. Snort.

Philly on July 24, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Um, did the Hill update their story? The quoted texted doesn’t seem to match the story it links through to…

Tom_Shipley on July 24, 2012 at 5:05 PM

The book The Truth About Obamacare, by Sally Pipes is an excellent resource for those who want an efficient way to gather facts about Obamacare, so you can have fact-based conversations with your friends and family before the election.

It is a pretty quick read at 218 pages in very clear and easily understandable language.

wren on July 24, 2012 at 4:58 PM

thank you for this resource.

t8stlikchkn on July 24, 2012 at 5:06 PM

I think one out of ten is an underestimate.

Cindy Munford on July 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

.
Dittos.

Closer to 4 outta’ 10.

listens2glenn on July 24, 2012 at 3:29 PM

This makes absolutely no sense. It’s a poll. How is 1 in 10 an underestimate? Where is this 4 out of 10 coming from?

That bit of random craziness aside, what happens if your employer does drop you? The whole idea behind Obamacare is that you’ll be able to afford comparable insurance, especially with the extra money the employer will be paying the employee due to them choosing to longer purchase coverage.

segasagez on July 24, 2012 at 5:08 PM

It does; I have a long-term (since age 6) pre-existing condition that will certainly lead me directly to the death panels. My demise will be long, slow, and ghastly.

Believe me, I will vote accordingly to rid us of this evil. I can only hope that what has been set into motion will be undone quickly, or that God will mercifully see me home fast.

chelie on July 24, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Chelie - Your situation lights an even bigger fire under me to do as much as I can to get Obama out of the White House and to fight for the repeal of Obamacare!

Please share your story with as many people as possible, to help them understand how high and very real the stakes are for you and so many other people.

I will be thinking of you as we approach the most important election of our lives.

wren on July 24, 2012 at 5:13 PM

people that get paid to research such stuff should have fun comparing the “estimated” cost of ANY public project to the final cost…can start with stadiums and public transportation projects.

I think you’ll start seeing a pattern of low-balling to get the “buy-in”.

teejk on July 24, 2012 at 5:20 PM

This makes absolutely no sense. It’s a poll. How is 1 in 10 an underestimate? Where is this 4 out of 10 coming from?

segasagez on July 24, 2012 at 5:08 PM

amen bro. why on earth would a business reduce an expense which it could do easily as much as 70%. what business that was worth it salt would DO such a thing. i guess MAYBE 10% would do that. but just think those business that would do that, reduce their empl bene exp, think what a DISadvantage they’d be against other businesses paying so much MORE! good grief, lets get real, ya know. and of course all those employers are going to hand out big raises to employees many of whom have no idea how much their employer actually PAYS for the medical coverage. its almost like saying: FOR profit businesess can do something more efficiently and cheaper than a NOT for profit business; insanity. i think you have thought this thru. occams razor, all that, yeah, 40%, crazy.

t8stlikchkn on July 24, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Zero articles on the issue and I have no article to vent on…

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

That’s the total of your excuse about hijacking and whining about a totally unrelated non-story on a thread discussing Obamacare?

Grow up and act like an adult!

Happy Nomad on July 24, 2012 at 5:27 PM

That’s the total of your excuse about hijacking and whining about a totally unrelated non-story on a thread discussing Obamacare?

Happy Nomad on July 24, 2012 at 5:27 PM

yes

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Thanks, wren, you’re a sweetie! *sniff*

I comment on as many blogs and on social media as much I can. Not only for me but also for folks like Trig Palin, and Ann Romney, and my elderly parents. Really, a LOT of people are living with situations that could be considered “death panel worthy” and we don’t even know about it. Scary stuff.

chelie on July 24, 2012 at 5:37 PM

10 in 10 employees where robbed in the libor scandal by world banks that now finance romney campaign and HOT AIR puts ZERO articles about it!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

You lose credibility with the bolded part. How is Romney at fault? These banks bundled around a HALF MILLION DOLLARS EACH in the 2008 election for Obama. Should he refuse their money for things they are still being investigated for? Should Obama give back all their campaign contributions from 2008, since the fixing was from 2007-2009?

Don’t try to paint this as “Romney is bad because he’s taking campaign contributions from Libor scandal banks.”

If proven true is the Libor scandal bad? Yes. If Romney’s AG voids fines/convictions after Holder’s DoJ finds them guilty, would that be bad? Yes, just as bad as Holder voiding the convictions of the New Black Panther party members.

Is Romney putting a gag order on anybody to hide information about the scandal? Nope, unlike Holder and Obama in Fast and Furious. Is Romney pushing policies to make Libor cheating easier? Nope, but Obama is allowing the Fed to make Goldmann Sachs richer through unnecessary funneling of the QE purchases.

Hot Air will probably cover the Libor scandal when more details are known, but they won’t cover it as “This makes Obama look bad” or “Romney should take no money from JP Morgan.” It’s a bank scandal, and politics aren’t involved in it. All politicians in power in every country involved are investigating it as they should.

PastorJon on July 24, 2012 at 5:44 PM

That bit of random craziness aside, what happens if your employer does drop you? The whole idea behind Obamacare is that you’ll be able to afford comparable insurance, especially with the extra money the employer will be paying the employee due to them choosing to longer purchase coverage.

segasagez on July 24, 2012 at 5:08 PM

But the reality is that you will most likely not be able to afford comparable coverage under Obamacare. See my previous comment about the cost of my individual insurance increasing from $366 to $830 per month since 2009.

Obamacare prohibits insurance companies from setting lifetime limits on your coverage. I kept my individual health insurance premiums down to a reasonable level by agreeing to a lifetime maximum of $7 million and I was comfortable with that limit. Now that my insurance company is going to be required to cover our health expenses to infinity and beyond, the cost of our health insurance naturally must increase.

Obamacare mandates insurance coverage for things like birth control and other services which I would prefer not to have to pay for via my health insurance. But again this increases the cost of our health insurance.

Obamacare mandates coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. So again the cost of our health insurance will increase to cover the cost of providing care to people who may wait until they have a pre-existing condition to get insurance.

Obamacare is going to cover millions of people who do not currently have health insurance and most likely can’t afford to pay the full cost of their care. Well since doctors and hospitals don’t provide health care for free, somebody is going to have to pay for all of those people. So again the cost of our health insurance will go up.

Obamacare places a tax on medical devices. The cost of those taxes will show up as increases in the cost of our health insurance.

These are just a few of the things that will increase the cost of our health insurance.

I agree that there are problems associated with having your health insurance tied to your employment. But giving control of your health insurance to the government is not a good solution to this problem.

A better solution would be to focus on reforms that would actually help to lower the cost of health care for everybody, such as:

- More visibility on the cost of health care services to help us all compare prices more effectively
- More availability of local health clinics to give us the option of using less expensive services when appropriate
- Malpractice Insurance reforms to lower the cost of this insurance for doctors
- Use technology to reduce the cost of Medical School
- Allow insurance companies to compete across state lines
- Reduce the number of mandates that insurance companies are required to cover in their policies
- Encourage the use of Health Savings Accounts so people can have insurance policies with higher (an therefore less expensive) deductibles.
- Enforce our laws against ILLEGAL immigration to reduce the number of uninsured people in our country

wren on July 24, 2012 at 6:03 PM

You lose credibility with the bolded part. How is Romney at fault? These banks bundled around a HALF MILLION DOLLARS EACH in the 2008 election for Obama. Should he refuse their money for things they are still being investigated for? Should Obama give back all their campaign contributions from 2008, since the fixing was from 2007-2009?

i know that mentioning romney and this scandal will help me achieving my goal of raising awareness to this HUGE scandal that hot air is clearly censuring…

Don’t try to paint this as “Romney is bad because he’s taking campaign contributions from Libor scandal banks.”

he is and so is\was obama, they are all on the pay of corrupt bankers and its very revolting.

If proven true is the Libor scandal bad? Yes. If Romney’s AG voids fines/convictions after Holder’s DoJ finds them guilty, would that be bad? Yes, just as bad as Holder voiding the convictions of the New Black Panther party members.

dont mix this with the holder case…

Is Romney putting a gag order on anybody to hide information about the scandal?Nope,

i think there was a memo from the RNC\Romney to hot air, the silence is deafening…

unlike Holder and Obama in Fast and Furious. Is Romney pushing policies to make Libor cheating easier? Nope, but Obama is allowing the Fed to make Goldmann Sachs richer through unnecessary funneling of the QE purchases.

QE benefiting only GS is a spurious accusation, while big banks tempering the libor rate thus stealing billions from the world economy(you and me included) Is at this point a proven fact, we just don’t know the full extent of it.

Hot Air will probably cover the Libor scandal when more details are known, but they won’t cover it as “This makes Obama look bad” or “Romney should take no money from JP Morgan.” It’s a bank scandal, and politics aren’t involved in it. All politicians in power in every country involved are investigating it as they should.

PastorJon on July 24, 2012 at 5:44 PM

there is not even a headlines reference to this scandal. something is up!

nathor on July 24, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2