• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Will Obamacare create the new 29hr work week?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
WhipperSnapper said:
According to your theory, people should be dying left and right in all of those "people's states" that have socialized medicine.
Click to expand...

What does rationing care to grandma have to do with people "dying left and right?"

Why aren't the people in those nation's demanding free market medicine?
Click to expand...

Because they don't have our consumer mentality.

We already have health care rationing in the U.S. right now, btw. If you can't afford to pay your insurance premiums or your deductibles then you are welcome to "don't get sick, and if you do get sick, die quickly and quietly".
Click to expand...

That is a market system, not top-down management of care like what you get with single payer.
 
Incorruptible said:
I have always supported the free market. I was attacking socialized medicine.

Check my posts and I have always been supportive of the free market and attacked socialism.
Click to expand...

I know what you support. My point was the what you described as being evil socialized medicine is the exact same thing insurance companies do. They are no different in that regard.
 
soulcougher73 said:
I know what you support. My point was the what you described as being evil socialized medicine is the exact same thing insurance companies do. They are no different in that regard.
Click to expand...

They're is a big difference between socialized medicine and insurance companies. Comparing the two is just insane. We don't need socialism otherwise you should move to Europe. A free market system would be much better for the US.
 
We already have health care rationing in the U.S. right now, btw. If you can't afford to pay your insurance premiums or your deductibles then you are welcome to "don't get sick, and if you do get sick, die quickly and quietly".
Click to expand...

Not really, those without health insurance simply use the emergency room. Emergency rooms are prohibited by law from refusing them. It ain't cheap.
 
poofyhairguy said:
That is why single provider WOULD save us a ton of money- it would force rationing care down the throat of an American public that is used to a "the customer is always right, do everything possible to give Granda an extra day!" situation.

The only other answer is to bottom out care so much that people expect NOTHING, so a ration system that rose from the ashes would seem like an improvement.
Click to expand...

I wouldnt say single payer will save us a ton of money unless we are ready to ration care and actually reduce costs. Simply moving private insured citizens to a public system but not change anything will pick up a few % from the profit private insurance companies skim off the top.

I am not against a public option. But my plan would be true high deduct catastrophic insurance.
 
WhipperSnapper said:
Do you think that the huge amount of money spent on having insurance companies and everything related to it could possibly have anything to do with the high cost of health care? Where does the money come from to pay for all the employees at the insurance company and all the medical billing specialists at the hospital and the insurance consultants and benefits plan managers for businesses? Where does the money come from to pay for all hospitals' and insurance companies' advertisements?

The reason why health insurance is so expensive in this country is because about 30-40% of the people who make their living from the health care industry have nothing to do with actually providing health care.

If socialized medicine is the problem, then all of those other nations' health care systems should be in far worse shape than ours or they should be spending a higher percentage of their GDP on it than we are.
Click to expand...

You understand these people who work for private insurance companies would move to a public option side to process claims ect? It isnt like the current size of our public insurance systems could handle taking on half the healthcare market without having to increase in size to accomodate the increase in end users.

You also understand hospitals have specialists that deal with medicare\medicaid right? They also have a complicated claim processing system.
 
bshole said:
Gen.

I remember reading somewhere that 90% of a person's medical expenses occurred in the last year of their life. If that is true (and I don't know if it is), it represents an collosal waste of resources. So I guess I agree with you on that.

In Canada, they have rationed care and make triage type decisions on who to save or not. Here's a hint if you are over 75, they aren't going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to save your life, they will simply ease your suffering.

I'm ok with going to a Canada like system on the sole condition that I myself should be exempt from all such triage type decisions.
Click to expand...

It sounds cruel but if we want to address costs. We have to understand keeping granny alive at the cost of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars is not a wise use or resources. Nor are stage 4 cancer patients getting much more than pain management a wise use of resources.

I have heard it is a pretty high % that a persons life health care costs are in the last 24 months of life. This makes sense as most will have failing bodies that require resource intensive care to keep them alive.
 
Incorruptible said:
Sounds like death panels, what gives them the right to deny healthcare. You're a fucking hypocrite you want special conditions for yourself.
Click to expand...

If you want to truely have a free market system. Death panels of some type will have to be allowed to happen via denial of service due to lack of funds. If you want to address our issues within our socialized systems. Death panels(rationing) will have to be utilized.
 
soulcougher73 said:
But the end result is the same? If its the same then that proves that the free market is no better 😛
Click to expand...

The end result isn't the same.

In the free market system those who get paid more (and therefore have a higher productive value to society) get better care, while in a single payer system those who have the greatest need get the best care. If your focus is a productive economy in theory the free market system should be better- the lawyer/engineer/etc. gets back to work faster because they can afford to. Those who don't produce get worse care.

Currently we are looking at an increase in the "health care divide" with the increase of cash only concierge practices.
 
Genx87 said:
I wouldnt say single payer will save us a ton of money unless we are ready to ration care and actually reduce costs.
Click to expand...

That goes hand in hand with a public single payer system. Currently medicare and medicaid pay lower amounts for procedures than private insurances.
 
poofyhairguy said:
The end result isn't the same.

In the free market system those who get paid more (and therefore have a higher productive value to society) get better care, while in a single payer system those who have the greatest need get the best care. If your focus is a productive economy in theory the free market system should be better- the lawyer/engineer/etc. gets back to work faster because they can afford to. Those who don't produce get worse care.

Currently we are looking at an increase in the "health care divide" with the increase of cash only concierge practices.
Click to expand...

Except pay is only theoretically linked to social value, while in reality that's just not true, however much you want to believe in the just world fallacy. In reality, it has to do with a shitload of other factors, only some of which does an individual have any control over whatsoever. Men get paid more than women for the same work; people doing the same job can be paid very different amounts for any number of reasons; some people are just born rich and live off of interest on great-granddaddy's money without providing jack shit to society.
 
poofyhairguy said:
That is why single provider WOULD save us a ton of money- it would force rationing care down the throat of an American public that is used to a "the customer is always right, do everything possible to give Granda an extra day!" situation.

The only other answer is to bottom out care so much that people expect NOTHING, so a ration system that rose from the ashes would seem like an improvement.
Click to expand...
Rationed care is the single biggest reason NOT to support government-run healthcare -- single payer, or otherwise!
 
Last edited:
Rationed care is the single biggest reason NOT to support government-run healthcare
Click to expand...

Rationed care is the only economically feasible option. Health care is closing in on 20% of per capita gdp. Out of pocket health care costs have more than doubled in the last decade from 9K to 20K for a family of four (a frigging new car every year). Another decade at this rate and out of pocket expenses will be 40k! It is unsustainable.

The vast majority of that money is WASTED in the last year or two of a persons life. Weirdly it DECREASE their quality of life in those last years. Instead of easing suffering, our health care system involves itself in hideously expensive/painful operations on people who literally are doomed to die in a short time (and even the practitioners know this).

Unlike any other advanced country we do NO triage and everybody gets the most expensive care. It is clearly unsustainable. Rationed health care is coming to the United States and there is nothing anybody can do to stop it. Economics will drive it. We simply do not have the money to pay for it anymore. Insurance companies will eventually do it or the government, it is completely and utterly inevitable.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2012/12/30/2012-the-year-in-healthcare-charts/
 
Last edited:
Genx87 said:
You understand these people who work for private insurance companies would move to a public option side to process claims ect? It isnt like the current size of our public insurance systems could handle taking on half the healthcare market without having to increase in size to accomodate the increase in end users.

You also understand hospitals have specialists that deal with medicare\medicaid right? They also have a complicated claim processing system.
Click to expand...

I understand exactly what you're saying. But under true socialized medicine there wouldn't be any insurance or "claims" or bills to file, at least nothing comparable to what we have in the present system.
 
JEDI said:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/08/smallbusiness/obamacare-fatburger/index.html

Under the Affordable Care Act, companies with 50-plus full-time employees must start offering them health insurance or face stiff penalties.

Because a 30-hour work week counts as full-time under Obamacare, Fatburger fast-food restaurants had started cutting worker hours below that threshold, CEO Andy Wiederhorn said.


would the bottom line be increased for Fortune 500 companies to reduce all but the 49 most crucial employees (ie: CEO + top mgrs) to 29hrs week?

and since they're working 29hrs, their pay will also be reduced.

but since they are salaried, hope they still work 40+ hrs/week?
Click to expand...


To be honest this part of the bill is not bad. If a place of business has a company with 50 or more full-time employees they should be able to offer health benefits. On a personal note if I worked at a company with that many full-timers and they didn't offer health benefits company wide, I would find another job.
 
classy said:
To be honest this part of the bill is not bad. If a place of business has a company with 50 or more full-time employees they should be able to offer health benefits. On a personal note if I worked at a company with that many full-timers and they didn't offer health benefits company wide, I would find another job.
Click to expand...
The problem is that it encourages small companies to hire contractors or part-time employees once they get close to 50 full timers -- and many people are desperate enough for work that they just deal with it, rather than shop for a new employer.

It will also be common to see small growing companies (those with over 50 full timers) to elect to pay the fines, rather than provide more expensive coverage for their employees.

Imagine companies that do landscaping, construction, plumbing, and other similar services. Those are the ones that will game the system and screw their employees because those are the ones who know most of their employees are more desperate for work these days...
 
the problem is a company may be getting along fine with under 50 and offer some benefits.
However, to expand they need for additional employees, putting them over the 50 limits.
Now along with the cost of the extra employee (#50, #51); they are being pushed into a completely new realm of expenses. It is not incremental based on the additional 2 but based on the 51 people themselves.

If benefits are $10 per person; they are paying $490.

If the law states that benefits should be $12 per person over 50; then the total is 50*10 + 12 for a total of 512.

A company should be able to absorb that for a quality employee

But the law is stating that it is 12 across the board - now you have 12*51 for a total of $612.
Driving costs up 20%. If the company can not absorb that 20%, by increase prices; they then can not afford to expand. A single employee is not worth 20% of the benefit costs to all.

While Obamacare is talking about medical benefits; there is a cost when the defined level is breached and my example demonstrates such.

Increase costs to the consumer, and/or reduced business expansion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top