"Health Insurance Isn't All It's Cracked Up to Be"

[James]

I think he meant that non-underwritten plans be made available for those who couldn't qualify for a regular plan. Now I would go along with that but the cost would be quite a bit, so I would imagine for some public assistance would be needed.

Either way, someone is subsidizing it. Be it through higher premiums or through tax dollars. Heck, even in a group plan the risk is spread among all participants. But if the employer is paying some or all of the cost, it's a fair trade off to the employee. In addition, an employee has the option to not participate in the group plan and get individual coverage.

Obviously some people will need assistance. In limited cases such as the single mother of two children working on are near poverty level is one I would support on giving aid too. Its a matter of where you draw the line, some people will always need assistance either long or short term, but things are what they are. We live in a compassionate society and in the end I believe some assistance is okay and I would prefer to do it that way then to enact a total blown National H/C system.

To help finance it I suggest means testing SS and Medicare. That would be the trade off, we end SS and Medicare as we know them today.

 

[midwestbroker]

I have seen more and more small employers offer the individual to go get a policy on their own and they will compensate them for it, either partially or fully.

But would that work in a large group situation?

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

The biggest tragedy is in Maryland an employer is not allowed to pay for any portion of their employee's individual plan. I understand part of the theory behind that but it punishes small employers who want to help but can't.

 

[moonlightandmargaritas]

Why can't they give them a cash bonus?

 

[insuremojo]

Why can't they give them a cash bonus?

 

[somarco]

in Maryland an employer is not allowed to pay for any portion of their employee's individual plan

Does that include HSA contributions?

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

The way I understand it the employer simply cannot contribute to the employee's premiums. If the employee has a HSA I don't know whether or not the employer can help fund the HSA account. Very good question and I'll probably never get a rock solid answer from the MIA.

 

[James]

The biggest tragedy is in Maryland an employer is not allowed to pay for any portion of their employee's individual plan. I understand part of the theory behind that but it punishes small employers who want to help but can't.

Hummm, maybe they need to increase wages reflecting the savings of not providing h/c?

 

[arnguy]

Johnpet, you stated you have no idea how the concept for an employer to pay health insurance came about. Well, it started during World War II when there was a shortage of labor. Companies could not raise wages because of price controls imposed by the Feds, so what they did was add fully paid health insurance as a benefit to attract employees. After the WWII, labor came to expect this perk and unions fought hard to make sure it was included in collective bargaining agreements. This "trickled down" to small businesses. Soon all employees came to believe that employer paid health insurance was expected, even mandated (which, of course it was not and still is not).

Great thread.

 

[midwestbroker]

From what I understand, an employer can fund a HSA.

Now, if this is how I think it is, the employer would get a tax benefit from doing that since HSA dollars are pre tax.

I have a phone call into a HSA guru and I will post what he tells me.