# is the new health care law going to hurt or help your business



## missswissinc (Feb 21, 2012)

Since all of us are business men and woman and are either a small business owner or a major company who has mult employee's how do you feel this Health care law will affect your business. 

Does this health care ruling today change the way your going to hire people since now your going to have to cover part time employee's also unless you tell them they are on their own and your willing to pay the fine for not providing the health care.

Do you feel that now that your going to have to offer health care do you feel your prices for service are going to go up abit or do you feel that they will go up alot more that you might have to trim some lines and lay off people just so that you can stay competive in the screen printing market.

I thought I would see what what other people feel?. 

I for one feel that the health care law will affect my business in the fact that if I hire someone be it part or full time and my health care is better then lets say what they have now I will end up having to raise my prices just to cover either the health care or fine and with people looking at the almight dollar differently now I might be thinking I will make do with what I got and say thanks for coming but I will not be hiring right now. 

Lets keep it clean folks and all I'm asking is as a business owner like yourselves what do you as a owner feel and what changes if any are you thinking you might do.


----------



## beanie357 (Mar 27, 2011)

Hurt. We have been waiting on this at our parent company since inception.

We shelved a 10000sf expansion with 6 new positions today.

No property tax, no income tax, no payroll taxes.
Feds did real good today huh?

Hey wanna be made to buy a Chevy Volt next?


----------



## lben (Jun 3, 2008)

I'm a tiny one person company. I just changed over to LLC from DBA so that I could hire someone who knows what they're doing as far as sales is concerned. Looks like I'll be staying as a one person company for a while. Unless I "hire" them as independent contractors. That way they could work from home, too.

I don't have healthcare for myself. Not that I couldn't use it.. Lord knows I could. I just can't afford it. But if I have to get it for myself I guess my prices are going to have to go way up to cover it. November can't come fast enough.


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

It is simple for those of us who are one person shows. I have no incentive to grow and offer jobs. When that is the case fewer and fewer jobs will be available. 

Sent from my SCH-I500 using T-Shirt Forums


----------



## ajspin (Apr 10, 2008)

Well, I will not be the most popular for saying this, but for me, if this happens it will be really good. I am a 59 yr old female, I have had cancer in the past (30+ yrs ago) and I am diabetic, Everything under control, health is good at the moment, but I am Un-Insurable. Now they will HAVE to sell me insurance, and they will not be able to rate it sky high.

My husband and I are both in business for ourselves. 

At the moment, If something should happen, I would not be able to pay the hospital, and therefore, they will most likely say, oh well, you got cancer, your gonna die... since there is no insurance to pay for it. 

Now we will see if it happens, Romney says that if he gets in office he will file to repeal it immediately..


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

Your situation is indeed a flaw in our current health program. So much so thst I believe that flaw should have a solution found for it. I wish I knew what that answer was, if I did I probably would not have to worry about health care myself. As a business man at today's health insurance rates this should not be mandated by government....our even scarier created as a new tax. Either way what is the incentive at a time we need more jobs for an employer to create more jobs?

Sent from my SCH-I500 using T-Shirt Forums


----------



## pamelahaley (May 31, 2012)

The real flaw in our healthcare is the insurance and healthcare industry working together in a free market system for profit (commence the flames). 

I don't know about the rest of you but, I look at my bills and EOBs. The most recent example I have is from an MRI I had two weeks ago. 

I sat in the intake office and took note of a little plaque listing services and cost for cash payments for those without insurance.

If you have no insurance, and MRI at this hospital; paid in cash costs $700.

I have insurance.

I received a tentative bill from the hospital showing they sent the insurance company a bill for over $5k.

They expect the insurance company to pay $2.5k and write off, based on their contract, about $2k.

The insurance company sends me an EOB showing I will owe the hospital $700 after they pay $2.5k.

Do the math. The problem isn't people without insurance.


----------



## missswissinc (Feb 21, 2012)

thank you folks and I hope more people join this discussion and give their opinions also. I understand everybody is going to have a different opinion and hey that is why I asked what are you going to do be it either a single person like some of us are or maybe its you and 3 or 4 other people or heck even 20+ people how this law that has been ruled constitutional today will affect your business. 

Mike


----------



## SierraSupport (Aug 25, 2009)

pamelahaley said:


> The real flaw in our healthcare is the insurance and healthcare industry working together in a free market system for profit (commence the flames).
> 
> I don't know about the rest of you but, I look at my bills and EOBs. The most recent example I have is from an MRI I had two weeks ago.
> 
> ...


This law equals rights (free public health, which everyone has access to) with privileges (premium level of care). But even if you don't see it that way, or don't have a problem with that concept, there's still two other problems.

#1: this law won't change the valid argument you present. If anything, it will probably make it worse with the intrusion of Government.

#2: a precedent has been set that Government can now force any individual to purchase a commerce product. So, I'm also waiting for the bill for the Chevy Volt, which we've all been paying for all along but hey, now I'll be honored to have my actual name on the bill. That and I'm waiting for them to tell me to eat my broccoli, too. 

_Dual-cancer survivor, currently paying over 19K per year on a Blue Cross PPO for family of 4, and possibly starting to consider ways to work the system, since November doesn't really present much of a choice anyway. Strictly personal opinion, not that of the company I represent._


----------



## pamelahaley (May 31, 2012)

Well, I'm going to be a one man show... I don't know about making this my day job but, certainly it will reign in some extra income. 

I think the law will benefit businesses. It will benefit everyone in the short term. Most businesses who provide employment should also provide health insurance. I've never worked for a legitimate company that did not already do so; therefor I don't see how much this will change business as usual. I see for those who cannot afford their own insurance, there will be a credit (at taxpayer expense) in order to do so... This means to me that there really is no excuse for not having insurance except for being plain irresponsible... oh, and poor enough to get government entitlements. 

I still stand my ground that the health care/ insurance industry is a total sham but, if the government don't believe it or gets kickbacks for promoting it; what can we do aside total rebellion? That is what we need if you don't want our government telling us what we can and cannot do. 

Pandora's box has been opened since we accepted giving up a little freedom for a little security... Since it's been mandated we have car insurance... Since Soda's over 16 oz were banned... Since we let the free market grow exponentially, crash and burn, and let the government pick up the pieces with OUR MONEY. The system is broken and, the only way to fix it is to start from scratch. Sadly, as long as the BIG government provides what the lechers want with the wealth of the working class; the majority will remain unwanting, unwitting and unmoved...

The more of us who become unemployed, give up and look to the government to help; the more of us who do the work will become the slaves to the lazy. The working class is too busy focusing on taking care of themselves and their families to stop and pick up their guns... Oh, is that next?


----------



## greyhorsewoman (Jul 19, 2007)

My son encountered health issues as a youngster when my husband was self-employed. The bills got high. Doctor says "get some insurance and come back." Except now any insurance we applied for EXCLUDED him since he had a preexisting condition. It was not an easy time for us, we had to search high and low to find ways to get him what he needed. It cost him the hearing in one of his ears. That is not acceptable.

There are a lot of people who would/could be more productive if they had access to health care to address their health problems. 

As to business, we will all adjust, just as we did when we were no longer able to use child labor or when minimum wages were enacted, etc.


----------



## pamelahaley (May 31, 2012)

SierraSupport said:


> _Dual-cancer survivor, currently paying over 19K per year on a Blue Cross PPO for family of 4, and possibly starting to consider ways to work the system, since November doesn't really present much of a choice anyway. Strictly personal opinion, not that of the company I represent._


This November... it's a laugh, really. Why does Romney present us with a statement for repealing the very thing he passed in his own state. There's never really been a choice. It's always been "pick the lesser of 2 evils" I had thought McCain was crazy when he said he'd hit the budget with a sledgehammer and build everything from scratch... Hindsight is 20/20 and I think it would have been a better plan but, he just had to go and pick Palin.


----------



## SierraSupport (Aug 25, 2009)

pamelahaley said:


> The more of us who become unemployed, give up and look to the government to help; the more of us who do the work will become the slaves to the lazy. The working class is too busy focusing on taking care of themselves and their families to stop and pick up their guns... Oh, is that next?


No doubt that a Government, any Government, will benefit from creating a culture of dependency.

One thing I'll add about car insurance is that it's a requirement only for those who drive, but I wouldn't be surprised if they make it mandatory for non drivers too. You can bet someone will make the case that it will benefit all breathing livings one way or the other, and how it will make it more affordable for everyone else, etc, etc. You know, those snob walkers and bicycle riders like my wife had it coming.


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

Your last comment is where the problem lies. It started in the sixties we stopped not only being involved in our government but started rebeling against it and at the same time looking to the government to pick up the pieces of our own laziness. The government saw that as long as the majority who felt entitled were appeased it would equal votes. We sold our control of our government by feeling entitled. The answer is simple get involved in the government choices and give up no vote with out proper research and lastly understand that being an American is not an entitlement but a duty.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using T-Shirt Forums


----------



## stphnwinslow (Sep 20, 2010)

I think if you have over 50 employees and you aren't able to provide any kind of health benefits you should start rethinking your strategies.


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

Good companies do good things for their employees. But that should be a choice not a government mandate.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using T-Shirt Forums


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

SierraSupport said:


> If anything, it will probably make it worse with the intrusion of Government.


So do you not think corporate CEOs do not already make a big intrusion on your health care?...I suspect that 99% of services will be delivered without any kind of intrusion, yet those with big financial interests as risk have you all "scared"....Do not be afraid, government healthcare works quite well in hundreds of countries around the world....


----------



## beanie357 (Mar 27, 2011)

Could you please share 50 of those 100's?

Love to know why we should be happy for this.


----------



## lben (Jun 3, 2008)

Rationed care.. euthanasia.. death panels.. denial of care.. delays in care.. Yep those 100s of other countries with socialized medicine are great. Until you get sick and actually need their services. Or when you reach a certain age and they decide you don't need to waste any more tax dollars.

I've heard that a lot of companies are going to drop healthcare altogether now and just let everyone get their own. There were ways the healthcare in America could have been fixed without this.


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

I agree 100%. Let's put it this way, name one program the Government has managed efficiently and effectively. The main reason they cannot manage a program is that the Government was not created to manage any programs because man is corrupt and the thought was that a Government run by the collective wills of the people would be able to maintain our freedoms, not impose on our wills. Think real hard about my first question....look at other programs the government controls and runs and ask yourself if that is the way you want your health care to look?


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

As with most any other program the government enacts, the solution is to throw more money at it. After the passage of the bill, whoops, it's going to cost 1.x trillion more than we had anticipated and they haven't even done anything. It's always a band-aid and not a solution.

The other argument I hear all the time is we are forced to buy car insurance. No we are not. If we want the privilege of driving, then yes, we are required to buy insurance, but if we don't drive we don't need to. Also, this is not federal law, this is state law. The only state that does not require auto insurance is New Hampshire, but again this is a state law. Whether it's a good law or not is irrelevant, it's entrusted in the hands of the state, where it should be.

Just the fact that you want to live in America, you are now forced to pay a "tax" for health insurance if you don't have it already. But the argument was it wasn't a tax, but the only way they could win in court was to argue it was a tax. It's all smoke and mirrors to get what government wants. I don't care what party affiliation you are with, it's the same thing oftentimes with either side. We need to get our head out of party affiliations and begin to look at the intent of what is being done. We have personally been without health insurance for years, intentionally. I've seen the cost of it years ago and weighed the difference we spend and realized we would save thousands of dollars annually. Yes I know if something catastrophic happens, it's where it matters, but this is a choice I made. I no longer have this choice because the government believes they know much better how to run my life than I do myself. It's insulting to say the least. I feel for others who have had health issues and they are being rejected for coverage, etc, but to force everyone on a health plan at the federal level is entirely over the top and will not solve your problem. Temporarily, you will have a reprieve, but when this hits our economy (which it's already effecting), coverage is going to be much worse than we are experiencing now.

I'm not saying I agree with what Mitt Romney did in his own state, but again, it was state level. You don't like it, move out of the state. Now that this is on the federal level, I don't believe moving out the country is truly an option. The solution is health care reform on a state by state level, not allowing the government to take over 20% of the economy via health care. Wait to the day you have to stand in line at the DMV (yes DMV) to enroll in your health care plan of choice. Include in that list, local hospitals, schools, SS office and others to be designated by the states. If that's not a model of efficiency, I don't..... Oh wait, nevermind.....


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

I could not have said it better. Once again it is about us the people getting together and making decisions for ourselves. WE ALLOWED the Government to make decisions for us because we did not want to be bothered by them. When Government makes our decisions, we are no longer a free society. The Tea Party Was and I say was, just that a Grass Roots effort for Americans to stand together and take back the decision making from the Government. What happened? It started to become too much work to have to be involved with the Government so what did they do? They sold the Grass Roots effort to a political action committee to do the work for them. Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Conservative, we get too hung up on terms and parties, I want a Government run by Americans, not a fraction of them with a title like Democrat or Republican. Parties Divide, our true unity is that we are ALL Americans, part of STILL the greatest country with the most hard earned freedoms. Be an American, stand up, and make your own decisions, and stop waiting for the country to do it for you.


----------



## greyhorsewoman (Jul 19, 2007)

> Rationed care.. euthanasia.. death panels.. denial of care.. delays in care..


We have that NOW with regular paid for health insurance.


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

greyhorsewoman said:


> We have that NOW with regular paid for health insurance.


So true....


----------



## lben (Jun 3, 2008)

We don't have any of that now, at least not in America. There is no one standing there with a needle waiting to execute you because you are 75 years old and need open heart surgery. But that will be coming. There is a panel of 9 non-medical government bureaucrats who will decide whether that MRI you need is going to be done, or whether that surgery you need will be done. They will look at your medical history and decide whether or not you are worth the extra money to keep you alive. This has happened before (Nazi Germany in case you've forgotten or never knew). The first to be erased from society were those who were deemed to be imperfect and costly to keep alive and then it snowballed from there. There is a lot more to this bill than meets the eye. Somewhere around 80-90% of it has nothing to do with healthcare such as the creation of a civilian army, control over your food, water, natural resources, transportation, communication and the list goes on. The SCOTUS didn't bother to read the bill either. Had they taken the time, they would have tossed it out.


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

lben said:


> Rationed care.. euthanasia.. death panels.. denial of care.. delays in care.. Yep those 100s of other countries with socialized medicine are great. Until you get sick and actually need their services. Or when you reach a certain age and they decide you don't need to waste any more tax dollars.
> 
> I've heard that a lot of companies are going to drop healthcare altogether now and just let everyone get their own. There were ways the healthcare in America could have been fixed without this.


We have socialized medicine in Canada.....And we also live longer than Americans, have more live births than American and a lower unemployment rate than Americans.....

Corporations only interest is looking after themselves.....But with the billions of dollars they spend on lobbying they they have you convinced that the 3 Canadians you saw on TV during the last election is the status quo in Canada....

Our system in Canada is far from perfect but far less people are denied care, there are no corporate CEOs raking in millions in bonuses, no one goes bankrupt because they need treatment for a "pre-existing condition"....


----------



## pamelahaley (May 31, 2012)

Quote:	

Rationed care.. euthanasia.. death panels.. denial of care.. delays in care..	



greyhorsewoman said:


> We have that NOW with regular paid for health insurance.



Yeah, I agree. How many here have been on the waiting list for a kidney donation?

Honestly, this system has it's good points and bad points. It's not entirely horrible one way or the other. Some will benefit and others will ***** and moan. Only time will tell the long term effects.

I know what I see on my insured patient bills. 

I also have the privilege of being able to experience Costa Rica's socialized health care system. I was not a citizen, yet I was able make an appointment and see the doctor with as much time as it took to walk around the block. There was no wait after filling a short form and showing my passport. Between a thorough visit and prescriptions, I spent about $35.

Honestly, if you take the profit out of health care, it will be better. 

Everyone talks about death panels here like they are something horrible. Honestly, my boyfriend's grandmother is 95 and found out she has breast cancer again. After having it removed and treated 40 years ago; it finally came back. She was able to make the decision for herself NOT to go through chemo this time. It wouldn't make sense anyways. Of course the Doctors insist; but she insists further. Why go through all the pain and radiation sickness to remove a cancer that has not bothered her in exchange for a treatment what will destroy her quality of life in the time she has left? 

So the Doctors and insurance company can make money while expediting her passing or, she dies of old age anyways? The point is that some people want to live forever and others accept that their time is near. Sometimes someone else needs to make the decision for everyone involved as to whether the treatment is really necessary. 

You may not want your mom or grandmother to die but, maybe at 95, they are prepared and you should be as well.


----------



## SierraSupport (Aug 25, 2009)

royster13 said:


> We have socialized medicine in Canada.....


During one of my treatments in 2002, I coincided with a lady from Canada who was being treated for a different variation of the same condition I had. She came to the US because she was facing an 8-week wait on her treatment. Rationed care will do that kind of thing. She started being treated within 48 hrs of her arrival here, and was doing much better by the time I left my treatment and couldn't wait to get back home.

Still waiting to hear about one, just ONE program where Government stepped in and made it better and/or more efficient. Lack of competition and accountability, just what our health system really needed.


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

I will take rationed care any day versus 30 million uninsured, exclusions, pre-existing conditions, no insurance when job ends, lifetime limits, high co-pays, etc., etc.....If you have decent insurance now you might be good for a while but sooner or later your insurer will get you in exchange for higher profits or so they can pay a big bonus to a CEO for screwing you....

Despite all the concerns about our healthcare system we live longer in Canada and have higher live birth rate....And as an extra bonus, lower unemployment and higher math scores....


----------



## SierraSupport (Aug 25, 2009)

royster13 said:


> I will take rationed care any day versus 30 million uninsured, exclusions, pre-existing conditions, no insurance when job ends, lifetime limits, high co-pays, etc., etc.....If you have decent insurance now you might be good for a while but sooner or later your insurer will get you in exchange for higher profits or so they can pay a big bonus to a CEO for screwing you....
> 
> Despite all the concerns about our healthcare system we live longer in Canada and have higher live birth rate....And as an extra bonus, lower unemployment and higher math scores....


If freedom of choice is not very high on one's list, I suppose you may think rationed care would be better. It still doesn't make a good case for the lady that was facing 8-week wait vs immediate care, and I truly hope no one ever gets caught in that dilemma.

The comparison between countries is mute when one country has about 10% of the population of the other, and even less social and racial composition.


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

Freedom of choice is "over-rated" if you are left with nothing to choose from..And as soon as your insurer finds an opportunity, you will be punted, excluded, or whatever they need to do so they can put more money in their pockets versus providing coverage for you......

And what does population have to do with anything?..


----------



## SierraSupport (Aug 25, 2009)

royster13 said:


> Freedom of choice is "over-rated" if you are left with nothing to choose from..And as soon as your insurer finds an opportunity, you will be punted, excluded, or whatever they need to do so they can put more money in their pockets versus providing coverage for you......
> 
> And what does population have to do with anything?..


Not sure what you mean by "nothing to choose from". There is (free) public health in the US. On a recent trip to the airport, the guy driving the shuttle was telling me how he had a colon tumor operated at the hospital, and how he then got the bill which he didn't pay, and he followed with how the hospital gets to write it off as a loss.

Meanwhile, my premium went up 20% for the last two years in a row since they introduced Obamacare, when it used to go up 3-5% every year. I was torn between telling him "send me a thank you note" or "hey, a couple more 20% yearly increases and that's how I'll have to go about my next surgery".

Funny thing though about the rationed care you prefer, he still didn't have to wait over here.

Population is just one more component of the equation. Add ten times the population and 2-3 times the current racial and class diversity up there, and watch that 8-week wait turn into who knows how long.

Also, you may want to know that a large segment of the currently uninsured are by choice. We can debate the wisdom of that decision all day long, but for that large segment is a matter of choice, which of course is now taken away or face a tax. I mean, not a tax (repeat after me, n-o-t a t-a-x).


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

Most of those who are for the new Health Care Tax think there is no other or no better way. As I asked earlier name one Government run program that is efficient and effective. There are so many other ways to reduce health care and to help those who are uninsured. First off, why do we spend millions and even billions funding a butterfly zoo in South Florida, as long as one needy American needs health assistance? Why not look into ways that our medical professionals can lower their education costs, so it doesn't take exaggerated rates to pay it back, or create some safety in our law practices that makes the malpractice insurance so high. There are so many other ways that individuals educated in this could find, but I for one would rather see my tax dollars help the lady earlier then a butterfly that will just end up in somebodies grill.


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

We could go on all day long and we will still disagree.....So enough said by me for now....


----------



## Rusty44 (Apr 28, 2008)

When 40-80 million people get put into the government medical system there are no doctors to care for them, so how does this work? No wonder they have the euthanasia needles ready. 

Apparently the gov is hiring IRS workers by the droves to catch those in violation and fine them. 

What about all the exempt waivers that have been given to companies (mostly Unions) List of Obamacare Exempt Companies ... putting the screws people trying to make a living.

Any guess what coverage is going to cost? 

Insurance companies need to be able to sell across state lines to make things competitive ... but as long as they spend a Billion here and a Billion there for lobbying, who's going to listen to the little people. 

Thanks for letting me put my 2 cents in.


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

The big thing is who is going to end up paying for all this in the end. You are right we probably will disagree, and that is fine, will you pay my portion of this new Tax?


----------



## SierraSupport (Aug 25, 2009)

royster13 said:


> We could go on all day long and we will still disagree.....So enough said by me for now....


No problem in agreeing to disagree. By the way, very, very cool graphics on your site.


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

I thought since T-Shirts are what we do I would put my thoughts about this on a shirt.


----------



## crewchief97 (Jan 14, 2010)

You all are missing the main problem, government intrusion and loss of freedoms!!!!


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

I think the biggest issue here is, the people who do not have insurance today most likely will not have insurance in 2016. When that happens, they will now be required to pay a "penalty" (read tax), for not having insurance. How is this affordable? Taxes have been raised on not only the middle class like so many are stating, but the poor themselves. The ones that want health care but can't afford it and someone like myself that can afford health care but don't want it.

All this has done is give more control of the US economy to the government. Royce, I don't know what the medical industry is like in Canada, but I have heard stories. The vast majority of Canadians that I've heard stories from were what others have stated, mainly the long waits. Even one of Canada's politicians, Danny Williams, came to the USA for heart surgery. This is telling and shows the lack of trust even the Canadian politicians have in your health care system. If you are happy with the way things are done in Canada, then that is your reality and I wouldn't argue against your point. But I can say, the way our new law was written, it benefits the insurance companies, the pharmaceutical industry, (maybe) hospitals, politicians and a whole bunch of lobbyists. There are so many things in this law that don't even pertain to health care it's a joke.

The US needs to restructure the health care system, I don' think anyone is arguing against that point, but this law will only make a bad situation worse, it's not a solution, it's exploiting an already growing problem to gain more finances for "other" pet projects. The bigger issue this time is, now the health care system is in the hands of the US government to a greater degree than it already was. Medicare will be bankrupt in less than 5 years, and this law "borrows" money from Medicare to pay for it. We have allowed politicians on both sides of the aisle to strip away freedoms in America all because it's the "humane" thing to do. If I do anything of this nature in my personal life, I'd be thrown in jail for crime after crime, but we continue to allow it. Mostly because we've been accustomed to it and don't truly know our rights, only what we've allowed others to convince us of.

This ruling was a sad day in America, but whether you like Romney or not, he was able to raise $4.2 million in 4 hours (from 42,000 donors) after the ruling. To me, it sounds like a lot of people were not happy and are being energized. Overturning this monstrosity is the only way to have a hope of stopping an already diminishing economy to further go down the wrong path....

That's my .02....


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

crewchief97 said:


> You all are missing the main problem, government intrusion and loss of freedoms!!!!


So people dying is of no concern to you as long as the government does not intrude?....The US spends more on healthcare than most counties in the world yet your system is a complete mess....Healthcare corporations are "screwing" you but you are more concerned with government intrusion or loss of freedom....


----------



## greyhorsewoman (Jul 19, 2007)

> Romney or not, he was able to raise $4.2 million in 4 hours (from 42,000 donors)


There are over 312 million people in the US ... 42,000 donors amounts to 1.4% -- but obviously from the richer side of the road.


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

The stories you are hearing are focused on the extreme cases....But with the billions healthcare lobbies are spending they have you convinced the 3 folks that were on tv during the last election were the "status quo".....The reality is a good portion of our population gets very timely care....And everyone is insured (or can be if they want to).....My family premiums are only 109.00 per month.....

As far as Danny Williams, he had a quite rare condition.....And in order to get him timely care, he was sent to a US hospital.....And while not very well reported, a large number of Americans come to Canada for many medical procedures....Our hospital in Trail BC is well equipped and for folks just south of the US border it is much closer than Spokane WA.....So for some urgent cases, your patients come here.....

I have no idea if the solution is the right answer, but at least it is a change....Maybe the reason so many are opposed is it did not go far enough......I think single payer with private providers would give you far better bang for your buck than now....

As far as the bill having stuff in it that is not related to healthcare......Than seems pretty typical for pretty much any bill coming out of your government....So maybe instead of 1 side against the other (Democrats vs. Republicans) you should all gang up on the government...


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

greyhorsewoman said:


> There are over 312 million people in the US ... 42,000 donors amounts to 1.4% -- but obviously from the richer side of the road.


42,000 donors averages $100 per person, hardly the richer side of the road. Not only that, this was in 4 hours, and from a lot of what I've heard, from people who have never donated to any campaign ever.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

royster13 said:


> The stories you are hearing are focused on the extreme cases....But with the billions healthcare lobbies are spending they have you convinced the 3 folks that were on tv during the last election were the "status quo".....The reality is a good portion of our population gets very timely care....And everyone is insured (or can be if they want to).....My family premiums are only 109.00 per month.....


This is why I said I don't know your system. $109 per month is very good, but this law didn't change any of that, the premiums will go up, much much higher than what it is already and no where close to what you are paying. The idea of the law is great, but the law itself is terrible. It solves absolutely nothing.



> I have no idea if the solution is the right answer, but at least it is a change....Maybe the reason so many are opposed is it did not go far enough......I think single payer with private providers would give you far better bang for your buck than now....


Changing it just to change it doesn't make it good policy. One of the major driving force is the way the insurance companies handle claims. It needs changed, but this law gives the insurance even more power, it's the opposite of what needed to happen.



> As far as the bill having stuff in it that is not related to healthcare......Than seems pretty typical for pretty much any bill coming out of your government....So maybe instead of 1 side against the other (Demarcates vs. Republicans) you should all gang up on the government...


I agree and have been saying this all along. It's not a party debate, it's a debate on what is right and wrong for America. The problem with partisan politics is too many people are blinded by an ideology and don't seek out the truth behind whatever politics are being pushed. They just vote R or D....


----------



## crewchief97 (Jan 14, 2010)

Mr Royster the last time I looked hospitals cannot refuse service in the US, don't know how it works in Canada, but don't worry" I'm from the government and here to help"


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

royster13 said:


> So maybe instead of 1 side against the other (Demarcates vs. Republicans) you should all gang up on the government...


This was already in the works, it was called the Tea Party, but the media and politicians demonized them and made them look like racist hicks who wanted to keep their women barefoot and pregnant while going hunting with their rifles and automatic weapons. I was never part of the Tea Party movement, but I talked to many people who where very active in it. They were every day average citizens who were sick of politicians stripping away their rights. Contrast that with the glorification of "Occupy" movement who really didn't have a message except the 1% was unfair to the 99% and this is partisan politics at it's finest. The political machine in America is driving the message of hate and envy, and we are blindly following, 1984 all over.....


----------



## pamelahaley (May 31, 2012)

royster13 said:


> So people dying is of no concern to you as long as the government does not intrude?....The US spends more on healthcare than most counties in the world yet your system is a complete mess....Healthcare corporations are "screwing" you but you are more concerned with government intrusion or loss of freedom....


People are going to die whether the government intrudes or not. We can't save everyone.


----------



## pamelahaley (May 31, 2012)

JeridHill said:


> This was already in the works, it was called the Tea Party, but the media and politicians demonized them and made them look like racist hicks who wanted to keep their women barefoot and pregnant while going hunting with their rifles and automatic weapons. I was never part of the Tea Party movement, but I talked to many people who where very active in it. They were every day average citizens who were sick of politicians stripping away their rights. Contrast that with the glorification of "Occupy" movement who really didn't have a message except the 1% was unfair to the 99% and this is partisan politics at it's finest. The political machine in America is driving the message of hate and envy, and we are blindly following, 1984 all over.....



99% was a bunch of kids out of hope and without a plan. Some were well employed people who feel like any job should earn a living wage. Sure, you shouldn't have to work for minimum wage part-time at Wal-Mart when you are 30 but; people lost jobs, lost hope or never had any to begin with. You can't blame everyone and you can't just blame the few. For the last 90 years; America has grown crawling hand over fist over one another; leaving some in the dirt and others making it to the top. 

The only thing I'm sorry for is the poor people who forgot they could get somewhere in this country if they made an effort. You can build a multibillion dollar conglomerate. You can start a revolution. The problems come from the people who refuse to see that they can change their situation and the people who have the power which take advantage of them by taking away freedom for a little security; one social security card at a time.


----------



## knifemaker3 (Sep 8, 2006)

The OP's question is rather this will help or hurt your business.

My business will not be hurt at this time as I am well under the 50 employee limit to be required to insure employees. So, I am exempt for now....unless they decide to change to a lower number of say 1 employee, 2 employees, or whatever they deem necessary.

It will also not help my business as I personally may loose my current health plan my wife has me under on her company insurance plan. Should they decide like I feel many companies will to drop the insurance and pay the tax instead (which many will do to save money) then I will be forced to purchase insurance at which time my pricing structure will increase due to my having to purchase insurance instead of the policy I now have under my wife's employer.

What many people don't realize is that not only is this going to be a burden for people who cannot afford insurance to now have to purchase it, many companies will realize it's cheaper to pay the tax than to carry their current plans on employees.

What this amounts to is one of the largest tax hikes in American history. Nothing is ever free but many feel like they now are going to have free government health insurance without realizing they are now going to be forced to take what insurance the government has to offer at the price they decide it will be and if you don't take it you will be forced to pay the tax the supreme court has now placed into law.

My wife worked in a hospital billing department and was around several doctors, nurses, hospital officials, etc. until she changed jobs recently. ALL involved in the health care field that she asked stated that the quality of care WILL go down under the new healthcare law.

For those of us who have pre-existing conditions this seems to be a win....however, I feel it will actually in the long term but a very big loss. What good is it to pay for coverage but still not be able to get it as what happens in other countries all over the world who already have socialized healthcare?

Yes, the current system needs reformed. but this is not reform, just another tax to create more money for our bankrupt government. Like all other entitlement programs it will just lead to more waste and corruption in an already broken system.

Just my .02 cents worth which will be taxed by my government that keeps telling me I live in the land of the FREE while taking more and more of my rights away everyday.


----------



## cplanie (Mar 28, 2012)

I was working for a company which does studies on Medicare costs, and I saw that though folks paid 1k to 2k a year for additioinal insurance coverages, plus deductibles in the amounts of 2K to 4k per person, that the bulk of the coverage was paid by Medicare, because in many cases, it is considered the primary insurance, not the insurance companies. It appeared to me from my data collection that the insurance companies are raking in big bucks paying out amounts in the range of $18 to Medicares $168. I saw payments of as little as $.02 paid by insurance. I saw the ping pong of bills going back and forth between Insurance and medicare. I can only image what the administrative cost is to track a penny. $100?


----------



## plan b (Feb 21, 2007)

If the bunch up in Washington really cared they would have kept people in their homes and helped people get back to work and then work on health care..

There is just way to many things wrong with our government and the people we send there to do our bidding for us..

I mean come on lets take some of the money ( if not all ) that we give to foreign countries and help people here first,, get our home healed and then look at foreign money...


----------



## SweetExpression (Apr 22, 2009)

Like knifemaker mentioned about companies dropping company sponsored health care to save money, what if most companies in any given industry dropped health coverage? You couldn't just say that I'll go get another job. You current job could cut your health insurance, pay the fines(taxes), and pay you 20% more than you currently make and still save money. Their stock price would rise because their bottom line would look significantly better. The last I had heard was that the fine is $750 per employee. A recent meeting at my job stated that the company I work for was spending an average of $8000 per employee for health coverage. If that is true, then they could save millions by cutting out health care and still give everyone a significant raise. How are the unemployed supposed to pay a fine for something when they can't find work anyway? But the politicians in Washington know that throwing more of somebody else's money at it will make it all better.


----------



## pamelahaley (May 31, 2012)

I thought Big O mentioned a credit for people who can't afford an insurance plan. Of course government subsidized care would be better... or just reigning in the cost of health care altogether.


----------



## replicantgraphic (Jul 1, 2010)

I wish the president would just say "You know what? **** it. you're all right. we're too socialized. Today forward. no more taxes. You guys figure out roads, 'social' security,public services (police,firefighters), military, medicaid, libraries, schools. Anything else i can't think of off the top of my head. Thank you, god bless. "


----------



## replicantgraphic (Jul 1, 2010)

Oh yea, and 

Death Panels... Bull****

Waits compared to Canadian Heathcare or other "socialized" heathcare. Oh man god forbid we wait and make appointments for non-emergency procedures. "we're Americans, god damn it. Home of fast food. we don't wait for nuffin." 

Hospitals being overcrowded? Hey we may just have to expand our hospitals and employ more people in the medical field. You guys keep asking about jobs.


----------



## beanie357 (Mar 27, 2011)

Much ado. My experience (through others in a radio club) of the Canadian system is that it is not all it' cracked up to be. I could be wrong.

There are massive subsidies down the road in Obomacare. We dropped our retirement plan to include vision and dental at no cost to our staff. Everybody suddenly need glasses and dental work. Ppremium went up.
Subsidize anything and use age goes up, but under Ocare, providers do not. Read the articles in the British publications if you want a picture of our system in 3 years with Ocare.

The USA borrows almost half our fed budget. All the income from the Top 10 top percent would not balance this. Socialism is bankrupt. Look at Europe.

If you can't get your a$$ in gear and cover your own health, why should I and all my staffers and families save your butt?


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

This is why, my guess, that topics like these aren't typically welcome on the forums. As long as we discuss this topic without letting our emotions get the best of this, I think this topic can stay on track. I'm not a moderator, just someone who knows what's going to happen to this thread if we don't have an open discussion but do have a war of words.....


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

Well beanie367 we live longer in Canada and we have more live births.....So despite what you may think about out system in Canada, we are doing okay....But with billions of dollars the healthcare lobby spent during the last election they could convince you to believe anything....Sure you can find a few example where it does not work well but that is the exception rather than the rule....Your system is broken.....You spend way more $$s but your outcomes are worse and many folks end up in bankruptcy.....


----------



## beanie357 (Mar 27, 2011)

Glad you're happy with yours.
The thread was impact in the USA of the new healthcare law.
As a 50 person company it will hurt, us, and staff.
There are many other issues that have impacted this position we find ourselves in.
Foreign input is always welcome, as it let's us see how others view their system
How many employees are you responsible for benefits?
Viewpoints may differ by company size.


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

Explain how it hurts? I must be missing something....


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

I respect all the opinions expressed on this thread. This is my third time writing a post on this thread. (I never submitted the first two because I try to stay out of political things, but this one is too close to hom.)

Although this does not affect "my business" per se, it affects my family. My wife has been in the health care industry for 15 years, has Master and Doctorate degrees and is finishing her Public Health Certificate at a university this term. Most public universities and professors are known to be very liberal in their political views. I find it unique that even the educators she has spoken to (most of which have no problems making it known their political standpoints) find it hard to accept this legislation. My biggest concern with this is not the extra money we are going to have to pay in the short term, but rather what incentive does the next generation of medical professionals have for going through a tremendous amount of schooling and training for a profession that will have substantial less compensation. Remove a substantial amount of the profits for any industry and the professionals in that industry or in the future will look elsewhere.

There is no politically correct way to say this (and I have friends / family members that are very good police officers and teachers)... but if we allow the govt to treat the professions of doctors like we do to police, teachers and other govt. workers, we are not going to improve the overall quality of health care of this country. Sure, more people will have access to health care... but that does not mean it will be improved. My wife works at a practice with 5 providers - 3 of which were educated in part in other countries (Columbia, Dom. Republic and Nicaragua I believe). Two of them are married to other doctors from other countries as well. They are in the USA because they believe they can make a better life for their families than in their home countries. My wife and the people they work with all talk about how exceptional they are at their jobs. 

My concern is if the profitable health care goes away, where will they go? Where will the next generation of talented doctors go? Sure, there are those people that go into professions that have no desire about money and there might be some on this forum that decorate garments without the ideal of making money. But when you require people to go 10+ years of school and training without any compensation during this time, that pool of people gets much smaller. There is already a large need for nurses and other health care professionals. This law is not going to help this situation.

I understand the view that for those that don't have health care, anything is better than nothing. There are a lot of programs that exist for people that can't afford health care. Yes, some of them are not the most convenient methods of treatment. But I don't see this bill improving them. Rather I see more middle class people having to rely on these programs more as their employers decide not to offer health care. Thus making them even more less desirable. 

I have no problem making the issue of lowering the number of uninsured people and openly discussing / working through the different concepts. But when a bill is so long and the Speaker of the House says you will have plenty of time to read it after the vote, that is not a valid legislative approach for any democracy. Many of us are not fans of CPSIA and the testing regulations, but at least they spent several years going through it and you have a choice whether or not to print on children's clothes. The choice in this case is to pay for health insurance or pay a tax. Just like many of you shop t-shirt vendors for the cheapest price or to find out what is on sale, most business owners will do the same to determine what has the least impact on their business. If this means pay a fine / tax, then they will do it. If it means not hiring employees, they will not and the next generation (whom are going to college now) are going to find it much harder to get a job in the USA. Thus resulting in an increase in the need for welfare.

So I guess my concerns are more long term and how it will affect me when it is more likely I will have to rely on the health care industry as I get older. I understand how others might be affected right now and respect their desires for a short term solution because that is their priority. 

This is good overall discussion.

Mark


----------



## OSSKOBRET (Sep 17, 2011)

Tallyplayer said:


> Good companies do good things for their employees. But that should be a choice not a government mandate.
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I500 using T-Shirt Forums


 Well thats not always the case 
thats why we have unions , of which i am a member of local 433 in los angeles ( ironworkers )
unions always push for equality in all classes of the working class from pay to healthcare


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

And that is why I said "Good Companies" do good things for, (and I should have added), PERFORMING employees. Bottom line in most companies the employees can make or break the company, no doubt. The company has to be making money to have it to spend on good things, and it lies in the hands of the employees to choose if they want to perform or not. My only problem with unions is they tend to protect slackers, and do very little to help the average man. Thanks to unions, the average man cannot afford to take a flight, go to a pro football game, and more items where the union pay and benefits have raised the price of the products to the point an average man cannot afford them.


----------



## beanie357 (Mar 27, 2011)

How does it hurt?
Well, if you consider we had to drop our retirement plan due to increased premiums with the already implemented law, we felt that was a negative impact.

I think foreign posters need to stick to explaining how their systems work for theIr particular size operation. Without them illuminating us on the ins and outs of their systems, it' counterproductive for them to argue a viewpoint we have no clue as to their positioning or background on the subject.

I doubt many have read much of the law and are either espousing a party line, or limited media talking points. We have an HR department headed by an ex Director at a local large hospital system.


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

How did I know you were going to blame increased premiums on Obama Care?.....Well because that is the "lie" that has been getting so much traction....But if you take a look at the rate of increases in health care premiums you will see they started spiraling out of control more than a decade before Obama Care...


----------



## beanie357 (Mar 27, 2011)

You can't discourse with people that can't deal with facts at your own place of business.
They are entitled to their opinions however wrong.
If they are not actively involved with administering this law, they have no credence.

We are outta this thread. We need to go make money to pay for the freeloaders.


----------



## BoydRiver (Aug 12, 2008)

What new health care Law. Nothing new in the UK.




missswissinc said:


> Since all of us are business men and woman and are either a small business owner or a major company who has mult employee's how do you feel this Health care law will affect your business.
> 
> Does this health care ruling today change the way your going to hire people since now your going to have to cover part time employee's also unless you tell them they are on their own and your willing to pay the fine for not providing the health care.





missswissinc said:


> Do you feel that now that your going to have to offer health care do you feel your prices for service are going to go up abit or do you feel that they will go up alot more that you might have to trim some lines and lay off people just so that you can stay competive in the screen printing market.
> 
> I thought I would see what what other people feel?.
> 
> ...


----------



## OSSKOBRET (Sep 17, 2011)

Tallyplayer said:


> And that is why I said "Good Companies" do good things for, (and I should have added), PERFORMING employees. Bottom line in most companies the employees can make or break the company, no doubt. The company has to be making money to have it to spend on good things, and it lies in the hands of the employees to choose if they want to perform or not. My only problem with unions is they tend to protect slackers, and do very little to help the average man. Thanks to unions, the average man cannot afford to take a flight, go to a pro football game, and more items where the union pay and benefits have raised the price of the products to the point an average man cannot afford them.


 so i guess that if we all got paid minimum wage we all would be at the same level and everyone could do and go to whatever ballgame they wanted,
oh wait a minute 
the minimum wage exists only because of unions , i guess poeple just working for nothing is not a good idea after all.
unions spread the wealth so the greedy few cant keep it all


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

Watch the pig farm think real hard about what a total unionized country looks like, and if you do not shiver a little, then you do not really know what freedom is.


----------



## Viper Graphics (Mar 28, 2009)

OSSKOBRET said:


> Well thats not always the case
> thats why we have unions , of which i am a member of local 433 in los angeles ( ironworkers )
> unions always push for equality in all classes of the working class from pay to healthcare


 
If unions are so great and looking out for you then explaine this.......I belonged to the IAM/AW in Houston and because of the greed within the union leadership 5000 workers lost their jobs...yeah, we working class equally lost our jobs and healthcare in harmony while the union stewards and bosses stayed on a salary and got placed in other union shops........yep...gotta love those unions!


----------



## OSSKOBRET (Sep 17, 2011)

lmcawards said:


> If unions are so great and looking out for you then explaine this.......I belonged to the IAM/AW in Houston and because of the greed within the union leadership 5000 workers lost their jobs...yeah, we working class equally lost our jobs and healthcare in harmony while the union stewards and bosses stayed on a salary and got placed in other union shops........yep...gotta love those unions!


 did you vote them out or just sit back and whine about it .
they arent untouchable but if members arent active then they will do what all people of power will do , just like our politicians


----------



## Tallyplayer (Aug 10, 2010)

There was most definitely a time when Unions were very necessary. and I would even concede there are still isolated incidents where they are needed. But mostly these days, mostly like any organization of power there is greed and, a protection of the non-performing. Equality in the workplace like mentioned previously gives no reward for performance, all workers do not give the same quality, or performance, so how can they receive equal pay? The government regulation now gives a lot of the same protection as the Union, so in some cases it is a form of double taxation for the same protection. I am sorry, and we are indeed all entitled to our views, but I do not see it any longer as any more than another way to get money from the working man.


----------



## Viper Graphics (Mar 28, 2009)

OSSKOBRET said:


> did you vote them out or just sit back and whine about it .
> they arent untouchable but if members arent active then they will do what all people of power will do , just like our politicians


OK smarty pants...The MAJORITY of the membership (over 4000) voted for a cross the board pay cut to allow the company to stay afloat...the union management in their mightier than thou wisdom dismissed the will of the membership and proceeded to cause the company to shut down...so no, I didn't sit back and whine about it and I take offence that you would acuse me of doing so...you display the perfect mind set of those that cause most of the problems...but you have a right to your opinion, just don't let it cause harm to others....jmho


----------



## OSSKOBRET (Sep 17, 2011)

lmcawards said:


> OK smarty pants...The MAJORITY of the membership (over 4000) voted for a cross the board pay cut to allow the company to stay afloat...the union management in their mightier than thou wisdom dismissed the will of the membership and proceeded to cause the company to shut down...so no, I didn't sit back and whine about it and I take offence that you would acuse me of doing so...you display the perfect mind set of those that cause most of the problems...but you have a right to your opinion, just don't let it cause harm to others....jmho


 Sorry to here you all got screwed over 
thats a shame
for myself i have worked both sides of the tracks and i am happier and a little better off as a union ironworker
the respect for a workers safety is great too.


----------



## Basikboy (Aug 28, 2007)

From what I have read you will only have to cover Health Insurance if you have 50 employees or more. Is this not correct? Currently I have 2 full time employees but I am honestly not sure where I stand because I seem to read different details on this ObamaCare from month to month.


----------

