Healthcare Cost Affecting Workers/And Feability of Nationwide Medicare Like Nat'l Health Care

the cost of employer-sponsored insurance has increased four times as much as the general inflation rate, for 40 years.

Employer-sponsored health insurance covers more than 165 million Americans. It can entice someone to work at one company over another, or be a set of golden handcuffs that keeps them locked into a job they may not enjoy.

But rising costs are straining that system like never before. As premiums balloon, employers have started to pass on more costs to their workers, and the percentage of small businesses offering employees health insurance has dropped significantly.

Health care cost/insurance was a major input on when/if intercst and others could FIRE. ACA was a big help to him & them.

Employee healthcare is a big load upon corporations. Methinks they now have a big interest in off loading that to the federal government. Is the feasibility of national health care-medicare like could now be passed?
And I believe that employee health care that the corporation has to bear puts a pay limitation upon workers.
Could national health care be a big Win-Win for corporations & workers and the nation at large?

6 Likes
2 Likes

I’ve long felt (and this is even more relevant now, I think) that the people in favor of a single-payer solution missed an opportunity to sell such as a business-friendly solution - as a means of freeing up capital and corporations to do what they do best and to remove that burden on their profits.

Yes, the alternative argument is “socialism” but to be able to state that you are going to save US businesses 700-800B (estimated) a year seems pretty pro-business.

6 Likes

Yes, but it must be done by simultaneously castrating the leeching nicking lying stealing medical insurance complex.

3 Likes

Yes, but who is shouting louder with their free speech political contributions?

Insurance companies?

2 Likes

Probably, but you can’t win the debate if you don’t take the field.

3 Likes

It wouldn’t save them anything. They’d be paying it to whatever version of medicare for all.

We really need a FERC for health care costs to set rates.

Well, “they” wouldn’t be paying it unless we increased corporate taxes by the same offset amount - and then the top 100 still likely would not be paying it.

Yes - except for the insurance corporations. And they are exceptionally powerful.
Also, there would be some sort of tax to pay for it - maybe like the SS tax.

Explain that Math to me. Corporate Annual Tax Revenues are roughly $500 Billion. The estimated annual cost for Medicare for all is another $1trillion to $3trillion annually. We’ll do what virtually what every other country does. Tax rates will rise substantially all the way down through the lower and middle class.

Add it to the debt. That’s what we do. We don’t increase taxes to pay for it.

I know that is not what you want to hear (and I agree with you), but that is absolutely factual.

1 Like

Walt Disney, Bloomberg, Starbucks, Deloitte, and the City of Dallas are among those taking actions next year to rein in health care spending, from restricting spousal coverage to eliminating plan options or cutting drug benefits to deal with soaring costs. Health plans are projecting the highest medical cost trend in nearly two decades, with commercial health care costs expected to rise 9% in 2027, according to consulting firm PwC. Insurer Aon predicted even higher costs, with U.S. employer health care costs increasing 9.5% next year, pushing average costs above $19,000 per employee.

It is factual that we continue spend beyond our means, using debt to provide these additional services. It is also a fact that we continue spend at great risk.

  1. The continued moral hazard that now any spending is acceptable and consequence is for future generations to figure out

  2. If we lose our economic standing, it puts our nation at risk to direct and influence activity around the world.

How much healthcare can we buy with our new war?

Destruction and death or blood pressure screening?

Decisions, decisions

2 Likes

I didn’t realize I was only offered a binary spending option with taxpayer dollars.

I count 3, war with:
Iraq
Afghanistan
Iran

1 Like

I don’t have a position on the US military involvement to share with you here. Other than, my preference is peace when possible. But, it serves no purpose to discuss here in terms of investable information for me. But then again, the METAR thread has really morphed into policy and political discussion of little relevance.

1 Like

Which post in this thread provided the best investable information for you?

And what action to take based on that post?

It’s an interesting thread but doesn’t inform my investing process, which is often the case with METAR.

None, other than my personal interest in weighing in. Can you explain to me which comment in the thread informs your investing and how so?

1 Like

Since your interest is clearly more than investing content, why post this?

and this?

and this?

and this?

1 Like