Obamacare impacts small buinesses (1 Viewer)

IntenseSaint

Powhatan Power
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
7,615
Reaction score
7,154
Location
South
Offline

krushing

SR is my life!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
12,741
Reaction score
7,255
Location
Biloxi Ms
Offline
I wonder if there is one single sole on here who was for the AHCA that now wants it to go away based on what they have seen and heard??
 

krushing

SR is my life!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
12,741
Reaction score
7,255
Location
Biloxi Ms
Offline
I thought it was going to be a real mess. I think all folks like myself who were against it think its terrible. Just wondering if the other folks still think it was a good plan.
 

Beast

Former Camp Beast
VIP Contributor
Joined
Nov 6, 2001
Messages
13,191
Reaction score
2,742
Location
Parts Unknown
Offline
I still think the law will be an improvement over status quo in many areas of healthcare..

The main problem I see is that it does nothing to directly address the root cause of the problem - continually increasing costs.. Medicare, by law, controls what a hospital or doctor can charge for a specific service.. There's no reason that principle can't be applied across the board..

Also, see the link I provided the other day in the Comparison of Healthcare Costs thread.. Lots of provisions in Obamacare poll extremely well as individual policies, and yet as popular as they are, many people don't know that Obamacare brings them to fruition..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-popular-provisions-are-its-least-well-known/
 

sandiego_dre

Guest
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Messages
2,720
Reaction score
682
Location
Maryland
Offline
Let's see... maybe i'm over simplifying things, but:

If we consider the additional expense that they will incur - $108k, as a percentage of their gross revenue - $8M, then they need to increase the prices of their baked goods by roughly 1.35% to cover the additional cost of doing business.

I struggle to see why someone who is accustomed to charging $1 for a cookie could get their panties all up in a wad over providing health care coverage for people who currently do without it if it means having to sell the same cookie for $1.02.
 

lapaz

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Messages
6,955
Reaction score
4,010
Age
58
Offline
I thought it was going to be a real mess. I think all folks like myself who were against it think its terrible. Just wondering if the other folks still think it was a good plan.
Yes, it is still much better than the alternative, which left millions uninsured and seeking health care in emergency rooms. It is still the morally right thing to do. What's more, health care rate of cost increases are declining. Last year, post ACA, health care costs rose slower than the economy for the first time in over a decade. That is unfortunate for all of the folks that are hoping the ACA fails.

The $2.7 trillion question: Are health-care costs really slowing?
 

dtc

VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
29,294
Reaction score
28,316
Location
Redneck Riviera
Offline
Let's see... maybe i'm over simplifying things, but:

If we consider the additional expense that they will incur - $108k, as a percentage of their gross revenue - $8M, then they need to increase the prices of their baked goods by roughly 1.35% to cover the additional cost of doing business.

I struggle to see why someone who is accustomed to charging $1 for a cookie could get their panties all up in a wad over providing health care coverage for people who currently do without it if it means having to sell the same cookie for $1.02.
Yeah, and don't forget the 50% tax credit.
 

superchuck500

guarding the potatoes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
56,704
Reaction score
85,127
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
Let's see... maybe i'm over simplifying things, but:

If we consider the additional expense that they will incur - $108k, as a percentage of their gross revenue - $8M, then they need to increase the prices of their baked goods by roughly 1.35% to cover the additional cost of doing business.

I struggle to see why someone who is accustomed to charging $1 for a cookie could get their panties all up in a wad over providing health care coverage for people who currently do without it if it means having to sell the same cookie for $1.02.
Who needs figures when you have sympathetic anecdotes?!
 

Beast

Former Camp Beast
VIP Contributor
Joined
Nov 6, 2001
Messages
13,191
Reaction score
2,742
Location
Parts Unknown
Offline
Yeah, and don't forget the 50% tax credit.
Is this neg rep just a dtc hater?

Reason i ask is that there are tax credits available to those small businesses that end up offering insurance plans that meet minimum standards..
 

JonsDuu

Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
229
Reaction score
173
Offline
Let's see... maybe i'm over simplifying things, but:

If we consider the additional expense that they will incur - $108k, as a percentage of their gross revenue - $8M, then they need to increase the prices of their baked goods by roughly 1.35% to cover the additional cost of doing business.
Their profit is $200k. That's over 50% cut in income.

I struggle to see why someone who is accustomed to charging $1 for a cookie could get their panties all up in a wad over providing health care coverage for people who currently do without it if it means having to sell the same cookie for $1.02.
As the article stated, price is very competitive. The price increase needs to be 4% and the owners are worried that will negatively impact sales.

Also, see the negative reaction to the Denny's franchisee for proposing to pass the health care surcharge to the customers. People wanted to lynch him for being such an evil greedy heartless capitalist.
 

Cosmic201

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
4,553
Location
Baton Rouge
Offline
Their profit is $200k. That's over 50% cut in income.



As the article stated, price is very competitive. The price increase needs to be 4% and the owners are worried that will negatively impact sales.

Also, see the negative reaction to the Denny's franchisee for proposing to pass the health care surcharge to the customers. People wanted to lynch him for being such an evil greedy heartless capitalist.


But wouldn't the vast majority of their competitors be facing the same price increase?
Unless those competitors are already treating their employees with a basic level of human decency by providing them with health insurance of course.
 

QSTA

All-Pro
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
1,245
Reaction score
873
Age
46
Location
Lafayette
Offline
Let's see... maybe i'm over simplifying things, but:

If we consider the additional expense that they will incur - $108k, as a percentage of their gross revenue - $8M, then they need to increase the prices of their baked goods by roughly 1.35% to cover the additional cost of doing business.

I struggle to see why someone who is accustomed to charging $1 for a cookie could get their panties all up in a wad over providing health care coverage for people who currently do without it if it means having to sell the same cookie for $1.02.
Yet, I hear people gripe about an additional 1.8% increase in the state sales tax, which I'm personally against. Jindal's plan offers prebates, similar to the way Obamacare offers rebates.

I think Obamacare is a little more complicated than most tend to believe. Hidden taxes seem to be ok, though I don't think anyone believes that the cost of healthcare will be reduced. All we seem to be doing is shifting the costs to business/american taxpayer, and in-turn the consumer who buys a loaf of bread from the bakery.

Many of the businesses that fall between the 25 - 50 employee threshold will simply discontinue offering insurance, placing more of the healthcare burden on the American public. From what I've read, this employee bracket does not contain rebates, or any other inducement.

I understand that Obamacare is the law of the land, and truly hope that it somehow works, but I'm skeptical to say the least. Business owners find a way to stay a step ahead. I've explored a plan to spin off an existing business, and shift employees to maintain the 25-50 threshold, even with expansion. With this plan, I no longer offer insurance due to the threat of being fined, save money, while the taxpayer picks-up the bill.

The next 8 months should be extremely interesting.
 

krushing

SR is my life!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
12,741
Reaction score
7,255
Location
Biloxi Ms
Offline
I still think the law will be an improvement over status quo in many areas of healthcare..

The main problem I see is that it does nothing to directly address the root cause of the problem - continually increasing costs.. Medicare, by law, controls what a hospital or doctor can charge for a specific service.. There's no reason that principle can't be applied across the board..

Also, see the link I provided the other day in the Comparison of Healthcare Costs thread.. Lots of provisions in Obamacare poll extremely well as individual policies, and yet as popular as they are, many people don't know that Obamacare brings them to fruition..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-popular-provisions-are-its-least-well-known/
This is where both sides should have come together and done something to lower costs. There is no reason a mother and father shouldn't be able to write a check to put a cast on their kids broken arm. Insurgence shouldn't even be needed for small procedures. 400 bucks for the 25 minutes to place a cast and its over. Maybe two two hundred dollar payments and the insurance company doesn't get involved. As it is it'd be $12,000 bucks. Why?!! That's the problem
 

Beast

Former Camp Beast
VIP Contributor
Joined
Nov 6, 2001
Messages
13,191
Reaction score
2,742
Location
Parts Unknown
Offline
This is where both sides should have come together and done something to lower costs. There is no reason a mother and father shouldn't be able to write a check to put a cast on their kids broken arm. Insurgence shouldn't even be needed for small procedures. 400 bucks for the 25 minutes to place a cast and its over. Maybe two two hundred dollar payments and the insurance company doesn't get involved. As it is it'd be $12,000 bucks. Why?!! That's the problem
I can't recall if this article has been posted here before, but it's well worth the read.. (Warning: It's loooonng)

Anyways, this part is the most important:

Yet those who work in the health care industry and those who argue over health care policy seem inured to the shock. When we debate health care policy, we seem to jump right to the issue of who should pay the bills, blowing past what should be the first question: Why exactly are the bills so high?

What are the reasons, good or bad, that cancer means a half-million- or million-dollar tab? Why should a trip to the emergency room for chest pains that turn out to be indigestion bring a bill that can exceed the cost of a semester of college? What makes a single dose of even the most wonderful wonder drug cost thousands of dollars? Why does simple lab work done during a few days in a hospital cost more than a car? And what is so different about the medical ecosystem that causes technology advances to drive bills up instead of down?

Recchi's bill and six others examined line by line for this article offer a closeup window into what happens when powerless buyers - whether they are people like Recchi or big health-insurance companies - meet sellers in what is the ultimate seller's market.

The result is a uniquely American gold rush for those who provide everything from wonder drugs to canes to high-tech implants to CT scans to hospital bill-coding and collection services. In hundreds of small and midsize cities across the country - from Stamford, Conn., to Marlton, N.J., to Oklahoma City - the American health care market has transformed tax-exempt "nonprofit" hospitals into the towns' most profitable businesses and largest employers, often presided over by the regions' most richly compensated executives. And in our largest cities, the system offers lavish paychecks even to midlevel hospital managers, like the 14 administrators at New York City's Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center who are paid over $500,000 a year, including six who make over $1 million.

Taken as a whole, these powerful institutions and the bills they churn out dominate the nation's economy and put demands on taxpayers to a degree unequaled anywhere else on earth. In the U.S., people spend almost 20% of the gross domestic product on health care, compared with about half that in most developed countries. Yet in every measurable way, the results our health care system produces are no better and often worse than the outcomes in those countries.

According to one of a series of exhaustive studies done by the McKinsey & Co. consulting firm, we spend more on health care than the next 10 biggest spenders combined: Japan, Germany, France, China, the U.K., Italy, Canada, Brazil, Spain and Australia. We may be shocked at the $60 billion price tag for cleaning up after Hurricane Sandy. We spent almost that much last week on health care. We spend more every year on artificial knees and hips than what Hollywood collects at the box office. We spend two or three times that much on durable medical devices like canes and wheelchairs, in part because a heavily lobbied Congress forces Medicare to pay 25% to 75% more for this equipment than it would cost at Walmart.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that 10 of the 20 occupations that will grow the fastest in the U.S. by 2020 are related to health care. America's largest city may be commonly thought of as the world's financial-services capital, but of New York's 18 largest private employers, eight are hospitals and four are banks. Employing all those people in the cause of curing the sick is, of course, not anything to be ashamed of. But the drag on our overall economy that comes with taxpayers, employers and consumers spending so much more than is spent in any other country for the same product is unsustainable. Health care is eating away at our economy and our treasury.

The health care industry seems to have the will and the means to keep it that way. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the pharmaceutical and health-care-product industries, combined with organizations representing doctors, hospitals, nursing homes, health services and HMOs, have spent $5.36 billion since 1998 on lobbying in Washington. That dwarfs the $1.53 billion spent by the defense and aerospace industries and the $1.3 billion spent by oil and gas interests over the same period. That's right: the health-care-industrial complex spends more than three times what the military-industrial complex spends in Washington.

When you crunch data compiled by McKinsey and other researchers, the big picture looks like this: We're likely to spend $2.8 trillion this year on health care. That $2.8 trillion is likely to be $750 billion, or 27%, more than we would spend if we spent the same per capita as other developed countries, even after adjusting for the relatively high per capita income in the U.S. vs. those other countries. Of the total $2.8 trillion that will be spent on health care, about $800 billion will be paid by the federal government through the Medicare insurance program for the disabled and those 65 and older and the Medicaid program, which provides care for the poor. That $800 billion, which keeps rising far faster than inflation and the gross domestic product, is what's driving the federal deficit. The other $2 trillion will be paid mostly by private health-insurance companies and individuals who have no insurance or who will pay some portion of the bills covered by their insurance. This is what's increasingly burdening businesses that pay for their employees' health insurance and forcing individuals to pay so much in out-of-pocket expenses.
TIME: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us
 
Joined
Jul 19, 2001
Messages
25,332
Reaction score
65,379
Age
51
Location
GBTR
Offline
Yet, I hear people gripe about an additional 1.8% increase in the state sales tax, which I'm personally against. Jindal's plan offers prebates, similar to the way Obamacare offers rebates.
This is incorrect. Jindal's plan only raises 1.8% on things already taxed. A big chunk of the money, which he's not admitting to with his numbers will come from taxing over 200 services which were previously untaxed. That is a 5.8% tax bump on those. And his own point man admits it will put the bulk of the shift on the small La business owners and their customers.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Similar threads



Headlines

Top Bottom