Obamacares Fate, Votes in Today

[Cossey]

@Upstate

Once this law takes full effect in 2015, it will be more cost effective for small businesses to not offer health insurance to their employees and pay the $2,000 fine instead, yes. I rep a number of pharmaceutical companies, so coverage is obviously a big deal to them, and I was at a PhRMA session in DC two years ago after passage of the ACA and they estimate that employer-sponsored insurance coverage will drop from 52% now to 39% by 2020, after everything is in effect.

@KrazyKid

Cossey is right NOW, but upstate and vlad will be right come 2015.

Business owners with employees are obligated to pay for social security tax, unemployment tax and others. NOT health, vision, dental, etc. So now the owner has that choice to spend $6K a year to offer benifits, or not to. Want better workers, to produce better products, chances are you need to offer benifits.

Come 2015 Vlad and Upstate are right. Now the owners have to pay ATLEAST $2000 per employee. So Company A with 10 employees at a part time coffee shop that has employees who dont need coverage if it was offered by the shop has to for over $20K a year to the gov now. But Company B with 1000 employees that spend $6K a person on benifits ($600K total) now can say go fuck yourself and get COBRA if you want insurance to all their employees and pocket $400K a year. (an probably loose alot of employees, and have crappy product produced by pissed off employees).

Once again, fucking over the little people trying to make a living in a community, and aiding the big bussiness tycoons. Go fuckyourself once again government.

This also brings up a good point. What if the employee has insurance under their spouse? Does the Employeer still face a penalty?

So again, I state that the companies give their employees benefits right now, pay what you estimate to be $6k/employee. If they take their benefits away right now will face a fine of $0… If they take their benefits away in the future, will face a $2,000 penalty per employee. So right now they can either pay $6k, or pay nothing, and they still CHOOSE to pay the $6k. But somehow you feel that they’ll be more apt to pay the $2k penalty under Obamacare, than paying $0 now?

In other words:
Right now, it’s more cost effective for them to pay $0 over the $6,000. But they choose the less cost effective route.
In 2015, it’s more cost effective for them to pay $2,000 over the $6,000, but at that point they’re more likely to pay the $2,000?

I can’t be the only one thinking that you’re point is completely invalid.