Sam Rasoul | U.S. business, big and small, hurting because of our current health-insurance system
The practice of work-related health insurance began as a way for employers to get around the wage controls of the Second World War. The idea worked then, providing companies a way to attract the best workers in a time of labor shortage.
Today, though, corporations find providing health insurance for their employees too costly. Since 2000, health-insurance premiums have risen 87 percent. The average employer-based premium for a family is more than $11,000 (more than a minimum-wage worker can earn in a year). Faced with such exorbitant premiums, employers have felt the pressure to switch to plans with high deductibles for their employees or to eliminate health plans entirely. They also have had to cut jobs. Chrysler announced it would close two factories and do away with 13,000 jobs to reduce their health-insurance costs.
Some companies, General Motors, for example, have cut benefits but still find their costs so high they cannot compete in today’s global economy. Their very existence is in danger. Ford Motor Co. carries insurance on 570,000 people, including past employees and current employees and their dependents, spending $3.5 billion last year. Those costs add $1,200 to every vehicle they produce, creating a serious disadvantage in competing with companies in countries with a national health-insurance plan. Beyond any doubt, high insurance costs hurt American industry.
Small businesses that offer their employees health insurance suffer also. Some businesses face 50 percent premium increases yearly. In order to cover exorbitant health-insurance expenditures, they often cut staff in order to keep the business running. Cutting staff, though, means more responsibility and more stress for the remaining workers. Small businesses that do not offer insurance have a profit advantage over those that do, but because of the disadvantages around hiring and retaining reliable, good workers, they too want to fix our broken health-care system.
With both big and small business, the money spent on health insurance is money not spent on growth, innovation, or higher wages.
A single-payer system, such as HR 676, Improved Medicare for All, will benefit business in general. The plan will contain and stabilize costs and eliminate the waste generated by the for-profit system (which I will examine in another article) while providing health care for everyone. Costs for employers would drop dramatically and benefits would improve. Those lower costs would go into profits, profits that could be used for capital improvements or adding more employees or improving salaries. With everyone insured, business could expect healthier employees and higher productivity, less absenteeism, and lower employee turnover. United States business could once again be competitive.
- Column by Sam Rasoul
Related posts:
- U.S. business, big and small, hurting because of our current health-insurance system Column by Sam Rasoul The practice of work-related health insurance began as a way for employers to get around the wage controls of the Second...
- Jessica O’Brien: There are big holes in our health insurance system Op-ed by Jessica O’Brien As an independent health- and life-insurance broker in Williamsburg, I deal with people looking for health-insurance coverage on a daily basis....
- Sam Rasoul: Fiscal prudence is needed in our health-care solution Column by Sam Rasoul Principles of decency, fairness, and respect lead me to support reform of health-care insurance in the United States. Acknowledging that 18,000...
- Rasoul advocates single-payer Story by Chris Graham freepress2@ntelos.net It wasn’t cheap before, but health insurance is now something that Terry Holmes almost can’t afford to keep up for...
- ‘Sicko’ blasts U.S. health-care system Carly at the Movies column by Carl Larsen Michael Moore is kind of like George W. Bush. You’re either for him, or you’re against him....
Comments
23 Responses to “Sam Rasoul | U.S. business, big and small, hurting because of our current health-insurance system”Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying about this post...-
[...] The August Free Press and The Star City Harbinger (mostly SCH) have speculated on Sam Rasoul running for the Democratic Nomination in the 17th District. Rasoul’s residence in Blue Ridge, Virginia is not in the 17th but in the 19th District where Independent, Lacy Putney has been a popular member of the House of Delegates since 1962. [...]
Sorry Mr. Rasoul but your plan is not one payee it is millions of payee’s. It is socialized medicine with the government handling it and they can’t even balance their checkbooks. Socialized medicine does NOT WORK what part of that don’t you understand? I have many relatives that live in Canada and they hate their system so bad that they would rather pay out of pocket to get their medical care in our country.
If you listen to the people who have better ideas you might learn something. There is a doctor in New York who is charging his patients who have no insurance or can’t afford insurance $79 dollars a month and he takes care of them for everything they need. Great idea but the bureaucrats and the insurance lobbyists are trying to force him to stop or charge more money just because it eliminates the need for insurance companies. Typical GOVERNMENT CONTROL forced by LOBBYISTS. Sorry but the government is NOT the answer.
I’m beyond tired of hearing about “socialized medicine.” Let’s face facts. More than half of all personal bankruptcies filed in this country are due to medical issues. Three-quarters of those who file for bankruptcy due to medical issues have health insurance that does not pay what it is supposed to pay. Let’s all agree to get past what Republicans say and Democrats say and do what’s best for our country. How much more productive would we be if we didn’t have people facing the ruination that comes because they just happen to get sick? This is so stupid that it defies words.
Chris: Yes I agree lets get past all the stupid rhetoric. Examine the problems, bigger government taking care of your health insurance? I go to the Veterans Hospital in Salem, it is a 175 mile round trip, that is about $25-$30 dollars of gas at present prices. What do I get for it? How about a doctor that almost kills me by giving me an overdose of medication then when confronted with what he did he lied then sat back and said “what do you expect for nothing”. I have many relatives living in Canada that hate the socialized medical care they have. It dosn’t matter what you want to call it, if the government takes it over and we the people are forced to pay for it it is “socialized medicine”. It is just another way to fleece more money from our hands so that the government can keep us under control. Just like Social Security numbers, by law they are not supposed to be used for identification purposes, look at us now. For the 60+ years I have been on this earth I have watched as the government has slowly taken away from us the rights given by our forefathers because people are so willing for government to take the place of their parents. If we allow people to make choices such as this doctor in New York or the system that the CATO Institute came up with back in the 90′s, we wouldn’t be where we are today.
With this attitude that government can solve all our problems and take care of us from birth to the grave is what is insane. Accept that there is other alternatives but don’t take my money to pay for medical care for someone who makes bad lifestyle decisions and contracts AIDS.
This is an ideological issue for a lot of people. It isn’t that for me. To me, this is fiscal prudence. Fifty million Americans don’t have health insurance, and another 40 million are underinsured. That population of people (including me, incidentally, being a small business owner who has to choose between staying in business and paying an arm and a leg for what we can access being a small business) can’t afford preventative care, ends up in emergency rooms if they ever do need health care, ends up in bankruptcy if whatever sent them to the emergency room is serious, and guess who foots the bill for this?
We pay more per capita for health care than any other country in the world, and what do we get for that? One quarter of our country is in medical poverty. Not only is that an utter embarrassment for the wealthiest nation in the history of the world, but it’s a damper on our economic producitivity.
I’m not going to sell the Richard Armstrongs of the world on the idea that single-payer makes moral and economic sense, and that’s OK. My appeal is to those who truly want to see through the rhetoric from Republicans and Democrats and look toward a solution. All due respect to Mr. Armstrong and those who agree with his view, leaving things as is isn’t a solution.
I did not say that leaving things as they are is what should be done. What I did say is that government is not the answer. There are many ideas and possible solutions far better than the government buying in on more government. As is, so far it is incapable of running itself much less our health care. I too have been without health care and my wife will be loosing hers in a few months. With preexisting conditions she is going to have a hard time finding affordable care on her retirement income. One solution is to put $3000 in a medical account (separate checking w / interest) then pay her medical expenses out of that. If and when she uses the entire $3000 she will carry a major med. insurance (with a $3000 deductible) policy that will kick in and take over. Believe me Chris I am not against reform, I am only against the government taking it over and bankrupting the country. We have already almost sold the country to the lenders of the Trillions in all this “bailout” fallacy and the pork in the basic budget. If you don’t know it they are talking about removing Medicare because of the expense and then replacing it with something much larger. We cannot keep taking money out of our pockets to support the world or all the people in this country who don’t want to be productive. The ideals you and others are supporting will soon bring that to a reality.
I have spent many hours investigating this information and it works. Trigon has a policy with a $3000 dollar deductible and the monthly cost is less than $250 a month. If you have a good year then what you don’t spend add it to the $3000 the next year. Most families of four spend less than $3000 an year. Instead of arguing with me do the math then call them they will be glad to send you the information or come and look at what I have. The only problem we will have is putting the first $3000 in the bank because of the heavy tax burden already put on us but the city, state and federal governments. Our house is $1850 a year an extra $150+ per month. I didn’t pay that much in Detroit.
So-called market-based solutions have failed to address the myriad problems we face. We are where we are with private insurers taking the lead. It’s time for public-private cooperation to institute a hybrid single-payer system. Anything less means no movement toward the many problems with health care that I’ve identified.
Myriad of problems? Wait till the government gets its hands on it. The single payer system that you speak of is the forced taking of money from the taxpayer and spreading it over the entire population, that is wealth redistribution. What happens when the wealthy get tired of pay, pay, pay and either leaves the country or quits earning? I have yet to see a hospital or doctor turn away anyone from needed medical care. We have free clinics all over this country and now a doctor in New York will take care of your medical care for $79 a month but the government is trying to stop that. Why? You say the government is the answer, yet it interferes with free markets that will help solve the problems. That is the reality and absurdity of bureaucracy at its finest. The insurance companies are a major problem and the largest lobbyists in this country. You think they are just going to roll over and play dead when the government tries to take their bread and butter away from them? I am sorry but I fail to see your hybrid system as a viable alternative. The system that Obama proposes a health care system equal to what the government provides for its employees will bankrupt the country. Until you solve the problem of people being responsible for themselves it will never work.
Reality check – we already have an inefficient bureaucracy in charge of health care. It’s called the private insurance industry. They take 30 percent off the top before any of us gets treated. This big, bad government that you so loathe takes 5 percent through Medicare and Medicaid and VA.
If that’s government getting in the way of solving problems, then let’s get them in the way to solve this problem.
Go for it and see where you end up. You just can’t stand capitalism. One thing you have right is the insurance companies need to be out of it but that will never happen, too much greed and money involved. I am at the age where if I become gravely ill and as a diabetic that if I have major surgery under a government controlled plan I won’t get it because my QUALITY of life will not be improved for a long enough period of time. That’s what Canada is doing, so they have to get the money and come here to have the operation. Good luck when your time comes, where you going to go then?
“You just can’t stand capitalism.” Inappropriate. Wrong, bullheaded, and inappropriate.
One thing for sure we agree to disagree. It seems to me that I remember someone saying the government needs to stay out of our lives when the AFP first started up. HHHMMMM. How the political spectrum spins and turns. The statement was meant to be conjecture based on your desire for government too now handle everything. I shall leave it at that until our next disagreement.
You’re misquoting me. Again. I’m not a government-needs-to-stay-out-of-people’s-lives ideologue. I know plenty, and debate the issue with them consistently. Been doing that since high school, when the local papers printed my first letter to the editor on the failed policies of Ronald Reagan.
There is no central ground for you anymore. I will leave it at that.
Actually I won’t leave it at that. I have known you for a long time but now you have become a braggart and you know plenty. Well you have been proven wrong before by me with the facts. Now you stand there with this new attitude that you are smarter all the way back to high school. Well I have several years on you and I don’t claim to know everything, but at least I am willing to keep my eyes and ears open on the chance I might learn something I didn’t know. You have closed your mind to any ideas that might dispute you. So far the only thing you have brought to this argument is the same old democrat rhetoric and talking points. It’s a shame for such a great mind to go to waste without thinking.
Have a good day Chris
No need for central ground on an issue that is not partisan. This is common sense, which you appear to be lacking, Richard. Same old tired ultraconservative Republican rhetoric, same old tired talking points from 15 years ago that were no more true then than they are now.
You’d rather cut off your nose to spite your face. Fine. Your candidates’ policies have cut off our country’s nose to spite all of our faces long enough. Get out of the way, man. Seriously. We’ve had enough of your unpatriotic blather.
The only one with his head stuck in the sand is you. You out cast any ideas that make any sense and just want to follow the Pied Piper blindly in an ignorant stupor. You say I lack common sense, try thinking for once instead of trying to bully people with your arrogant smart-aleck remarks. As for unpatriotic, what branch of the military have you been in? If you think that tearing down the entire fabric of this country with your socialist ideals is patriotic you have another thought coming. You have no idea who my candidates are unless you were standing in the voting booth looking over my shoulder. You assume to know all but in reality don’t know anything as long as you keep wearing those blinders. Have a nice day.
I so enjoy engaging in issues-focused debates with Republicans like Richard Armstrong. Their firm grasp on the issues is what makes it enjoyable. That and their unwillingness to sink to mischaracterizing what the people on the other side of the issue have to say in defense of their position. And their steadfast resolve not to resort to using push-button words like “socialist” to misrepresent what their debate rivals stand for.
Kudos to you, Richard Armstrong. You are representing your Republican brothers and sisters well!
I’ve said this before, but apparently it bears repeating.
Misrepresentations of statements made by commenters on this site will not be tolerated.
Mischaracterizations of past statements or positions on issues by commenters will not be tolerated.
“Will not be tolerated” means engaging in one or more instances of this kind of behavior will get you banned from commenting on the site.
Back to the issue at hand – health care.
If in fact, the Government is the most benevolent of care giving entities; then why is there a need for federal labor unions? If the primus is, the government now under the Obama administration being the most caring, why do the people most affected by his policies still feel the need to unionized?
Did we elect Barack Obama emperor-for-life? Maybe I missed that. I thought we elected him for a four-year term. And then in four years, he can run for re-election, and then if he wins that, he’s done, and somebody else has to be president.
You stop now, and the pendulum swings, as it does, inevitably, and then a Repubilcan president and Congress puts the onus back on workers to fight for their interests again.
I know Barack Obama is not emperor-for-life, I just hope he knows, this idea of a “National Civilian Security Force” in a speech last year in which he urged creating an organization as big and well-funded as the U.S. military is a bit scary. Who would they answer too, who would be in charge, what juridical bounds would there be. This is not the a conspiracy theory, it came out of his mouth and the U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new “volunteer corps” and consider whether “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people” should be developed. It’s getting a lot of play on Law Enforcement web sites and blogs; I know that most of the national police community is not very pro Obama but to the men and women who put on badges it’s a very real concern. I don’t think this is a partisan issue, its just troubling to COPS.