All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports >

Who would do a better job of running the USA? Topic

10/8/2013 12:28 PM
Ours stayed the same for the first time ever. Zero increase in premiums.

The UPS droppage of spouses is only if the spouse is covered under another company health plan.
10/8/2013 12:46 PM
OK.

But if each spouse being covered separately by their own employer is more expensive than a "yourself and spouse" plan by one of the employers . . . they, as a couple, they are now paying more in healthcare benefits.
10/8/2013 12:53 PM
I've already said, (and surprisingly it was interpreted as a good thing by bad_luck), the grand scheme is to push everyone on the exchange. They have many incentives to that end.
10/8/2013 12:57 PM
It's also widely thought that UPS is using the ACA as an excuse to do this. They've been looking to do it forever.

How many companies are using the ACA as en excuse to once again maximize profits?
10/8/2013 1:07 PM
If the ACA is imposing fees on companies, should they just collectively shrug their shoulders and say "oh well"?  Does it make them "evil big business" if they attempt to recoup those additional expenses elsewhere, i.e. by cutting benefits?

Is the fact that things are starting to play out exactly the way the opponents of the ACA said they would just a random coincidence, or is there maybe some merit to what they've been warning about?
10/8/2013 1:09 PM
Posted by The Taint on 10/8/2013 12:57:00 PM (view original):
It's also widely thought that UPS is using the ACA as an excuse to do this. They've been looking to do it forever.

How many companies are using the ACA as en excuse to once again maximize profits?
Yep.

Companies were free to cut benefits in the past with the only downside being that everyone would think they were ****** companies.

Now they can do it and blame it on the ACA. No downside!!!!

Blame the companies, not the ACA. The ACA expands healthcare access.
10/8/2013 1:11 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 10/8/2013 1:09:00 PM (view original):
If the ACA is imposing fees on companies, should they just collectively shrug their shoulders and say "oh well"?  Does it make them "evil big business" if they attempt to recoup those additional expenses elsewhere, i.e. by cutting benefits?

Is the fact that things are starting to play out exactly the way the opponents of the ACA said they would just a random coincidence, or is there maybe some merit to what they've been warning about?
The ACA isn't imposing the fee. You said yourself that the spousal surcharge has been available for years.
10/8/2013 1:26 PM
Fees that the ACA are imposing on the employers, i.e. the sponsors of the group health plans.  Dumbass.

http://www.ifebp.org/Resources/Research/acacostsurvey.htm
10/8/2013 1:43 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/7/2013 8:36:00 AM (view original):
Wasn't easy to find but here's a lefty site that agrees with me(I assume a right wing site would be met with "Phhhttt. Righty site nonsense."


http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/10/01/shutdown-government-real-reason/

Link a lefty side that disagrees with him, STFU badluck up.

Neat trick. 

10/8/2013 1:44 PM
Posted by The Taint on 10/8/2013 12:57:00 PM (view original):
It's also widely thought that UPS is using the ACA as an excuse to do this. They've been looking to do it forever.

How many companies are using the ACA as en excuse to once again maximize profits?
Shouldn't a company look to maximize profits?

Should the gov't give them a means to do so?
10/8/2013 2:01 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/8/2013 1:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/7/2013 8:36:00 AM (view original):
Wasn't easy to find but here's a lefty site that agrees with me(I assume a right wing site would be met with "Phhhttt. Righty site nonsense."


http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/10/01/shutdown-government-real-reason/

Link a lefty side that disagrees with him, STFU badluck up.

Neat trick. 

Do you want to keep that argument going, because it seemed pointless. You always accuse me of not letting things go...what exactly do you want here?
10/8/2013 2:21 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 10/8/2013 1:26:00 PM (view original):
Fees that the ACA are imposing on the employers, i.e. the sponsors of the group health plans.  Dumbass.

http://www.ifebp.org/Resources/Research/acacostsurvey.htm
Well let's take those one by one.

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: The fee is $1 per covered life in 2014. The health insurance company pays it unless the plan sponsor is self funded (meaning the employer acts as the insurance company).

General administrative costs??? Yep, without the ACA, no one would have administrative costs.

Reinsurance Fee: Reinsurance costs are always paid by insurance companies. Reinsurance is risk spreading. Insurance companies do it all the time, with or without the ACA. The insurance company can (and will) roll the fee into the premium. This fee is estimated to add 1% in 2014, falling to 0.35% in 2016 and it goes away in 2017.

providing health insurance to individuals who previously were not offered coverage in order to comply with coverage requirements (13%): You mean it's going to cost money to provide health insurance to people who don't already have health insurance? Un-*******-believable.

Again, the ACA is just a convenient excuse to shift cost.

10/8/2013 2:40 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 10/8/2013 1:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 10/8/2013 12:57:00 PM (view original):
It's also widely thought that UPS is using the ACA as an excuse to do this. They've been looking to do it forever.

How many companies are using the ACA as en excuse to once again maximize profits?
Yep.

Companies were free to cut benefits in the past with the only downside being that everyone would think they were ****** companies.

Now they can do it and blame it on the ACA. No downside!!!!

Blame the companies, not the ACA. The ACA expands healthcare access.
Yes, Let's blame ANYTHING but the ACA.

Here in Washington, Children's Hospital isn't being included as a covered provider for the exchange-based coverage programs because of cost.  Of course, I'm sure that's the fault of the insurance companies, not the ACA.

I'll rest easy when my employer chooses to pay the penalty and my family ends up on the exchange, without my 3 kids having access to Children's Hospital, knowing that the ACA is not at fault for any of it.
10/8/2013 2:45 PM
In BL's "Land of Make Believe", everything is just as he said.  Along with cute puppies riding unicorns as they jump over rainbows.
10/8/2013 2:47 PM
of 57
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Who would do a better job of running the USA? Topic

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999- WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.