5 ms·

I suspect this might have something to do with the rising cost of health insurance. This is not a criticism of Obamacare. This problem has been building for yea

I suspect this might have something to do with the rising cost of health insurance. This is not a criticism of Obamacare. This problem has been building for years. Most people in the USA don't realize how much of their total compensation is health insurance since you don't typically see this cost as a line item on your paycheck. The last time I checked, an employer sponsored health plan for a family of 3 from Aetna was close to $2000/month

drumdance 11y ago
Several years ago some economists in the Bush administration researched the issue and concluded that pretty much all of the "wage growth" in his two terms came in the form of health coverage.
ThomPete 11y ago
This problem exist outside the US too even in Denmark were health care is free. The reason why it's not so obvious is that countries like Denmark redistributes wealth much more and have fairly high wages. Denmark doesn't have a minimum wage but instead it's based on negotiations between unions and employers (and sometimes the government if they cant agree). The model is know as Flexicurity[1]. The problem is that that model keeps a lot of people outside the working market because their skills simply aren't worth the salaries they would have to get because of this model. And so in Denmark the problem instead is that companies just move the production out or take in cheap east european labour. The problem isn't about any specific political prioritization but about something more underlying (my claim is technology). [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexicurity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexicurity
- goodJobWalrus 11y ago
  > The problem is that that model keeps a lot of people outside the working market because their skills simply aren't worth the salaries they would have to get because of this model. I'm not sure what you mean by "a lot of people", but Denmark has one of the highest employment rates among OECD countries, so it's actually doing great at keeping people in employment (comparably). http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/income-and-work/employment_and_unemployment/employment-rate-article.aspx http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/income-and-work/em...
  - ThomPete 11y ago
    Yeah please see how many people work in the public sector and you start to realize the problem. Also as with most other countries the way employment is measured it's usually based on who is deemed available for the job market. In Denmark a lot of people simply stop being part of the statistics after a while even if they are in theory available for the job market. Fever and fever people in the private sector providing for an increasing public sector and an increasing senior population. Denmark pays for it's gigantic wellfare system via income taxation and through a number of taxes on goods (180% on cars for instance) The current situation right now is that public sector while still growing the public sector year over year is now beginning to cut from areas it used to held almost holy. (Education for instance)
- gaius 11y ago
  This problem exist outside the US too even in Denmark were health care is free Well yes and no. Even in European countries someone is paying for it, no? In the UK there is NI and employer's NI - consider the percentages below: https://www.gov.uk/national-insurance-rates-letters/contribution-rates https://www.gov.uk/national-insurance-rates-letters/contribu...
  - ThomPete 11y ago
    In Denmark it's paid through taxes and therefore in the context of this discussion literally free for the individual. Or put another way. They don't have to insure themselves against sickness instead everyone pays in order to spread out the risk across generations. (which is the problem that Obamacare amongst others tries to solve)
    - gaius 11y ago
      Sure, but there is still the effect it has on what it costs an employer to create a job, that's the point I'm making.
      - ThomPete 11y ago
        Not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate?
        gaius 11y ago
        From the OP: Most people in the USA don't realize how much of their total compensation is health insurance since you don't typically see this cost as a line item on your paycheck. The last time I checked, an employer sponsored health plan for a family of 3 from Aetna was close to $2000/month You might not see it on your paycheque but it's there and it has to be paid from somewhere, and that money isn't therefore available to be given to you in the form of a raise. Which means your cost to the employer can go up without you seeing any of it. That will only get worse.
iamthepieman 11y ago
This is why I always negotiate health care. If you can reduce the percentage of the premium that you pay(or eliminate it entirely) then you get a raise every time your health insurance plan raises it rates. It's often an easy thing to negotiate because it is orthoganal to salary and people usually dont compare all the minor compensation variables when comparing to other similar employees and often a hiring manager is working with a salary range that doesn't include other compensation.
- blackguardx 11y ago
  Interesting. I've never worked at a place that didn't have standard packages for everyone. They even give everyone the same tables of what they will pay with different plans. What size were these companies?
  - iamthepieman 11y ago
    All under 100 employees. I suppose some things might not be up for negotiation at larger companies but I bet not as many as you think.
phkahler 11y ago
Employer provided "health insurance" is a terrible idea that needs to go. It creates friction in the job market. It shifts costs to the government - companies pay lower premiums because working people are on average healthier. As OP says, it hides the full cost from the employee. I really don't understand how this practice came to be or why people think it should continue.
- zrail 11y ago
  After WWII wages were frozen for years, but companies still had to compete for workers. Company-paid health insurance isn't considered wages, so companies were able to entice people with it. Same with "company cars" and various other fringe benefits. Over time health insurance became institutionalize and necessary, which led to the situation we're in today.

drumdance 11y ago

Several years ago some economists in the Bush administration researched the issue and concluded that pretty much all of the "wage growth" in his two terms came in the form of health coverage.

ThomPete 11y ago

This problem exist outside the US too even in Denmark were health care is free. The reason why it's not so obvious is that countries like Denmark redistributes wealth much more and have fairly high wages. Denmark doesn't have a minimum wage but instead it's based on negotiations between unions and employers (and sometimes the government if they cant agree). The model is know as Flexicurity[1]. The problem is that that model keeps a lot of people outside the working market because their skills simply aren't worth the salaries they would have to get because of this model. And so in Denmark the problem instead is that companies just move the production out or take in cheap east european labour. The problem isn't about any specific political prioritization but about something more underlying (my claim is technology). [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexicurity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexicurity

goodJobWalrus 11y ago
> The problem is that that model keeps a lot of people outside the working market because their skills simply aren't worth the salaries they would have to get because of this model. I'm not sure what you mean by "a lot of people", but Denmark has one of the highest employment rates among OECD countries, so it's actually doing great at keeping people in employment (comparably). http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/income-and-work/employment_and_unemployment/employment-rate-article.aspx http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/income-and-work/em...
- ThomPete 11y ago
  Yeah please see how many people work in the public sector and you start to realize the problem. Also as with most other countries the way employment is measured it's usually based on who is deemed available for the job market. In Denmark a lot of people simply stop being part of the statistics after a while even if they are in theory available for the job market. Fever and fever people in the private sector providing for an increasing public sector and an increasing senior population. Denmark pays for it's gigantic wellfare system via income taxation and through a number of taxes on goods (180% on cars for instance) The current situation right now is that public sector while still growing the public sector year over year is now beginning to cut from areas it used to held almost holy. (Education for instance)
gaius 11y ago
This problem exist outside the US too even in Denmark were health care is free Well yes and no. Even in European countries someone is paying for it, no? In the UK there is NI and employer's NI - consider the percentages below: https://www.gov.uk/national-insurance-rates-letters/contribution-rates https://www.gov.uk/national-insurance-rates-letters/contribu...
- ThomPete 11y ago
  In Denmark it's paid through taxes and therefore in the context of this discussion literally free for the individual. Or put another way. They don't have to insure themselves against sickness instead everyone pays in order to spread out the risk across generations. (which is the problem that Obamacare amongst others tries to solve)
  - gaius 11y ago
    Sure, but there is still the effect it has on what it costs an employer to create a job, that's the point I'm making.
    - ThomPete 11y ago
      Not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate?
      - gaius 11y ago
        From the OP: Most people in the USA don't realize how much of their total compensation is health insurance since you don't typically see this cost as a line item on your paycheck. The last time I checked, an employer sponsored health plan for a family of 3 from Aetna was close to $2000/month You might not see it on your paycheque but it's there and it has to be paid from somewhere, and that money isn't therefore available to be given to you in the form of a raise. Which means your cost to the employer can go up without you seeing any of it. That will only get worse.

iamthepieman 11y ago

This is why I always negotiate health care. If you can reduce the percentage of the premium that you pay(or eliminate it entirely) then you get a raise every time your health insurance plan raises it rates. It's often an easy thing to negotiate because it is orthoganal to salary and people usually dont compare all the minor compensation variables when comparing to other similar employees and often a hiring manager is working with a salary range that doesn't include other compensation.

blackguardx 11y ago
Interesting. I've never worked at a place that didn't have standard packages for everyone. They even give everyone the same tables of what they will pay with different plans. What size were these companies?
- iamthepieman 11y ago
  All under 100 employees. I suppose some things might not be up for negotiation at larger companies but I bet not as many as you think.

phkahler 11y ago

Employer provided "health insurance" is a terrible idea that needs to go. It creates friction in the job market. It shifts costs to the government - companies pay lower premiums because working people are on average healthier. As OP says, it hides the full cost from the employee. I really don't understand how this practice came to be or why people think it should continue.

zrail 11y ago
After WWII wages were frozen for years, but companies still had to compete for workers. Company-paid health insurance isn't considered wages, so companies were able to entice people with it. Same with "company cars" and various other fringe benefits. Over time health insurance became institutionalize and necessary, which led to the situation we're in today.