9 ms·

What will the employees, in the US at least, do for health insurance? A pandemic is when you need it. These employees will be strained to pay for COBRA. I fear

• skellera 7y ago
  I don’t wish a bad outcome but if it happens, hopefully people realize we need a different system for healthcare.
  • ihm 7y ago
    Already most Americans support Medicare for all – it’s our bought elected officials who don’t.
    • faet 7y ago
      eh. Most Americans support a public option. M4A is down to about 26% support as of yesterday. https://i.imgur.com/H9bAwV9.png https://i.imgur.com/H9bAwV9.png
      • ianleeclark 7y ago
        https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/2003101_crosstabs_POLITICO_RVs_v1_AUTO.pdf https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/200310... All registered voters supported M4A with ~55% (see POL19) according to a recent poll. I'm not really sure what to do with a twitter image, but I'd be interested in seeing their numbers.
      • dwiel 7y ago
        What is the source of that imgur meme? Here is an article with a link to the pdf which claims 55% of voters are in support of M4A https://morningconsult.com/2020/04/01/medicare-for-all-coronavirus-pandemic/ https://morningconsult.com/2020/04/01/medicare-for-all-coron...
      • Chathamization 7y ago
        55% in the latest Morning Consult poll[1]. And this is after a heavy push from the healthcare industry against it, as well as strong opposition from all of the Republican leadership and most of the Democratic leadership. Before the recent blitz against it, polling was 70%[2]. [1] https://morningconsult.com/2020/04/01/medicare-for-all-coronavirus-pandemic/ https://morningconsult.com/2020/04/01/medicare-for-all-coron... [2] https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/403248-poll-seventy-percent-of-americans-support-medicare-for-all https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/403248-poll-seventy-pe...
        • trymas 7y ago
          Why republicans hate universal healthcare so much, even when facing unprecedented pandemic?
          • sp332 7y ago
            Have you seen the federal government lately? It's totally understandable not to want that to be in charge of your healthcare.
            • toomuchtodo 7y ago
              "Americans' satisfaction with the way the healthcare system works for them varies by the type of insurance they have. Satisfaction is highest among those with veterans or military health insurance, Medicare and Medicaid, and is lower among those with employer-paid and self-paid insurance. Americans with no health insurance are least satisfied of all." [1] [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/186527/americans-government-health-plans-satisfied.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/186527/americans-government-hea...
            • LarryDarrell 7y ago
              That's an argument for improving the federal government, not accepting the status quo as the natural order of the universe.
          • Chathamization 7y ago
      • sp332 7y ago
        ...in Wisconsin. https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2020/04/01/new-marquette-law-school-poll-finds-strong-support-for-coronavirus-closings-even-as-it-shows-substantial-economic-impact/ https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2020/04/01/new-marquette-law-...
      • thazework 7y ago
        Eh. That poll is just for Wisconsin. Nationally it's up to 55%
        • rch 7y ago
          You're right, and Wisconsin alone isn't representative, but in our current political system a state by state breakdown would be more predictive of election outcomes than a national figure. Edit: looking into it further, I think the WI number is more interesting than I thought given the 2016 election result: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/wisconsin/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/...
      • Ididntdothis 7y ago
        Maybe they should start doing polls about a medical system that’s very expensive, leaves a lot of people uninsured, sends random bills for procedures that never happened, can’t give estimates for procedures while still requiring the patient to pay for whatever they eventually decide to charge. Let’s see what the numbers will be then :)
    • AsyncAwait 7y ago
      Seeing how they voted for Joe Biden who openly mocks the idea, as a non-American, I am very skeptical of how the support is manifesting.
      • 1-more 7y ago
        The worst part is talking to people who think he supports it. The Dem primary about a year ago looked like the CPUSA primary; M4A was table stakes for every candidate. But nah, everyone had asterisks on what they actually meant by that.
      • andrekandre 7y ago
        a lot of biden primary voters actually do like bernie and his policies (including m4a) but they are voting out of fear that bernie couldn’t win (among other reasons) [0] [0] https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/11/sanders-voters-electable-2020-1489146 https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/11/sanders-voters-ele...
    • dominotw 7y ago
      Biden is the candidate even of 'the righteous' . Highly doubt your statement.
      • toomuchtodo 7y ago
        Biden is primarily supported by voters over 65, who already qualify for Medicare and have no incentive to support a Medicare For All candidate. Good luck holding onto that voting cohort through an unmitigated pandemic. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-03-06/biden-older-voters-sanders-younger-voters-that-has-to-change https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-03-06/biden-older... https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/young-democrats-have-rejected-biden-and-it-could-cost-him-the-nomination/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/young-democrats-have-re... https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/1/20943879/iowa-poll-biden-warren-sanders-older-voter-2020 https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/1/20943879/i... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/us/politics/joe-biden-young-voters-bernie-sanders.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/us/politics/joe-biden-you...
        • dominotw 7y ago
          What about African american and latino vote https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/04/black-voters-biden-sanders-latinos-120952 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/04/black-voters-biden-... "already have medicare" theory isn't the explanation.
          • toomuchtodo 7y ago
            Latinx are overwhelming swinging to Sanders (per your link), people of color swing Biden due to his riding on Obama's coat tails [1] (IMHO; he has no policies that benefit them with his "status quo" stance). If Biden runs, Trump wins reelection. Not enough voter support for Biden besides older voters and people of color, younger voters will sit out before voting for Biden in a general election. That's not my opinion, that's what the polling data shows. [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/23/joe-biden-black-voters-support-south-carolina-102365 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/23/joe-biden-black-vot... (“In South Carolina we were taught to vote straight party. You see black people [on the ballot], you see Democrat, you vote straight party. You’re not used to seeing 10 damn candidates in the first place,” added Robinson. The menu of choices plays to Biden’s benefit because he’s a known commodity, Robinson said.)
    • lotsofpulp 7y ago
      It doesn't matter what most Americans support, nor what "bought elected officials" support. It matters what most voters in swing states support.
  • BurningFrog 7y ago
    Almost every American agree that the current system is bad. There is wild disagreement about what a better system would be.
• PragmaticPulp 7y ago
  > What will the employees, in the US at least, do for health insurance? A pandemic is when you need it. These employees will be strained to pay for COBRA. Strongly agree that health care coverage is a major concern. We have a long way to go toward an ideal situation. Sadly, many of the people who are first to be laid off are least likely to have employer-sponsored insurance benefits in the first place (hourly jobs). If they already had ACA-subsidized healthcare plans, nothing really changes for them. For everyone else, there are some mitigating factors: COBRA coverage has a grace period following termination. If you opt in to COBRA coverage during this grace period, the coverage is retroactive up to your date of termination. Please check with your insurance, but I believe the minimum grace period is 30 days, although I've personally seen higher numbers listed in my plans. Many insurers have indicated that they will waive costs for COVID19 testing, and some have even waived copays for COVID19 treatment. I expect we'll see more pressure on this as time goes on. This is a good time to remind everyone that a job less event triggers a special enrollment period for the ACA. Visit healthcare.gov to evaluate your insurance options. COBRA isn't the only option.
  • epc 7y ago
    Just experienced this with my spouse leaving Google in February. COBRA window was 60 days from last date of employment. We weren't going to go with COBRA until the pandemic expanded to the US, then we paid for two months.
    • lotsofpulp 7y ago
      The money saving move is to pay for the insurance via COBRA only after you need healthcare, since it’s retroactive.
      • jrs235 7y ago
        Its sounds like that's what they were holding out to do, but their 60 day window was closing so even though they didn't need healthcare they figured with what's happening they needed to execute the option and keep their insurance before losing it.
      • 7y ago
• throwaway55554 7y ago
  > What will the employees, in the US at least, do for health insurance? Struggle under the weight of the debt, become impoverished and many may become homeless. All the while being told to just find a more lucrative job, like say, coding.
• Frost1x 7y ago
  Also I'm not sure if I'm in agreement with the tactic of immediately pushing employees to unemployment. Unemployment is funded by taxes which are largely paid by the same people being laid off. If you're promoting businesses push people to unemployment instead of first trying to cover them during hardship and also taking a loss (as everyone else is), you're pushing for more tax subsidies to businesses indirectly. Unemployment is a safety net that needs to exist but it shouldn't, IMHO, be the first option to jump to. That's irresponsible unless of course you can't cover your employees at the rate unemployment can--then it's reasonable for everyone's sake. You should look at supporting employees part time if possible, especially those who have many years association with your business that are valued players. Your first order should be to take care of yourself and those around you, not immediately jump to social safety nets and pass the hardship. Let's re-establish long term employee and employer relationships and get rid if this "everyone's constantly disposable" economic mindset. If I'm laid off, I'll first look at my savings and hit the job market before I consider driving right into unemployment. I dont want to utilize that unless I need to and my other options fail. I expect businesses to do the same and be responsible contributors to society. If not, let's take a bit more of their stimulus money back and chuck it to other businesses and people that don't run away at the sight of a loss and try to persevere through difficult situations.
  • bilbo0s 7y ago
    >Also I'm not sure if I'm in agreement with the tactic of immediately pushing employees to unemployment. I think everyone definitely understands academically that the actuarial models underpinning unemployment collapse in that kind of environment. >I dont want to utilize that unless I need to and my other options fail. I expect businesses to do the same and be responsible contributors to society. Here's the issue game theoretically speaking. I'm pretty sure most businesses and people are likely not going to settle on your strategy as being optimal. (Even though, as you've pointed out, it is the communally optimal strategy given the system we have.) I'd imagine most people will opt for the immediate unemployment strategy.
    • _curious_ 7y ago
      "I'd imagine most people will opt for the immediate unemployment strategy. " Yes, even if quick and easy way out may not be in their best long term interests.
• take_a_breath 7y ago
  In an ideal scenario, we would re-open the ACA enrollment to provide reasonably priced health insurance. Unfortunately, our current administration doesn't want to do that. [1] ==The Trump administration has decided against reopening Obamacare enrollment to uninsured Americans during the coronavirus pandemic, defying calls from health insurers and Democrats to create a special sign-up window amid the health crisis.== [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/31/trump-obamacare-coronavirus-157788 https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/31/trump-obamacare-cor...
  • dewy 7y ago
    This exaggerates the problem. You can enroll in ACA outside of open-enrollment if you have a qualifying event, such as losing coverage through a job. You just have to submit paperwork that you lost a job. I'm not saying open-enrollment wouldn't be preferable, or that the administration might not be trying to encourage people to enroll, but the option is still open for many, in theory.
  • PragmaticPulp 7y ago
    > In an ideal scenario, we would re-open the ACA enrollment to provide reasonably priced health insurance. To clarify: ACA enrollment is open for anyone who has been laid off. They don't need to wait until the next enrollment period to get health coverage again. Making ACA open enrollment for an extended period of time would create a perverse incentive for people to avoid enrolling until they feel like they need it. Counterintuitively, this could decrease ACA enrollment rather than increase it.
    • take_a_breath 7y ago
      Centers for Medicare and Medicaid don't seem to be on the same page. "Insurers said they had expected Trump to announce a special enrollment period last Friday based on conversations they had with officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs HealthCare.gov enrollment. It wasn’t immediately clear why the Trump administration decided against the special enrollment period. CMS deferred comment to the White House." ==Making ACA open enrollment for an extended period of time would create a perverse incentive for people to avoid enrolling until they feel like they need it. Counterintuitively, this could decrease ACA enrollment rather than increase it. == Giving free money to people could create a perverse incentive for people to avoid working, but we just did that. Giving businesses grants for payroll might incentive them not to maintain cash reserves in the future, but we jut did that. I don't see why this would be any different. It's a national emergency, every potential solution should be on the table.
• tyingq 7y ago
  "These employees will be strained to pay for COBRA." That is a huge understatement. Especially for anyone that needs family coverage. The rates I paid when self-employed were more money per month than my entire paycheck until I was in my late 20's.
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  • drchopchop 7y ago
    Exactly, I worked at a Fortune 500 tech company and family coverage for COBRA was close to $2000/month. Many employers pay 80%+ of the share, and suddenly taking that all on yourself can be extremely onerous.
    • blaser-waffle 7y ago
      Same. Not just $2000, but 2000 for what was an extension of my otherwise mediocre work plan.
  • eternalny1 7y ago
    Same, self-employed and the rates were so extreme I went without health insurance. We need Medicare for all, desperately. Health insurance should not be tied to employment. I even had to skip COBRA during one period because that was out of reach.
• BurningFrog 7y ago
  It's rather fantastic that congress spends $2,000,000,000,000 to handle a virus, where $0 of that goes to paying for treatment of those infected by that virus...
  • pjc50 7y ago
    Got to maintain the principle that people who can't afford their own healthcare get to suffer. That is far more important to the US system than other outcomes.
    • sykick 7y ago
      You are correct. H.L. Mencken once defined puritanism as the haunting fear that someone somewhere is having fun. The essence of this definition does well to capture the psyche of America. We Americans tend to be very vindictive and have an almost pathological need for revenge and punishment. We simply do not like it when the “undeserving” get something they don’t deserve. You see this in our legal system, our foreign policy, and in our healthcare system.
  • kube-system 7y ago
    That isn't true. Large chunks of that money are going directly to public services and healthcare initiatives. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-anatomy-of-the-2-trillion-covid-19-stimulus-bill/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-anatomy-of-the-2-trilli...
    • BurningFrog 7y ago
      I see nothing that pays the hospital bills for those infected. I do see $100B paid to hospitals.
      • kube-system 7y ago
        If expanding Medicare benefits and giving cash directly to people doesn't count in your book, I'm not sure what does. Even the small business loans have a provision that they are forgiven only if they keep employees on payroll. That is the difference between keeping insurance and losing it for a lot of people.
• RIMR 7y ago
  You fear a revolution towards healthcare, housing, food, etc. as human rights? Personally that revolution can't come fast enough. This country has betrayed its constitutional duties to its people for decades (supporting the general welfare, anyone?). We NEED revolution at this point since it seems both of our two parties are on the same side when it comes to Working Class America.
  • newshorts 7y ago
    Agreed. Both most of our elected officials are neoliberal (dems/Republicans). Economically, neither party is working for the middle class
  • malandrew 7y ago
    At no points have the courts ever taken anywhere near as broad an interpretation of the welfare clause as you're suggesting it to be. And such a broad interpretation would be incongruous with the views of its primary authors (Jefferson and Hamilton). The framers would more likely to suggest that we NEED a revolution over the expansion of the federal government beyond their limited enumerated powers. They'd also certainly disagree with income taxes as well.
    • majormajor 7y ago
      I would love to see what they would think of the last 250 years of history. I think it's naive to suggest that they wouldn't have anything to learn. They were writing in one world, and people have found many new ways to abuse their countrymen since then.
• eternalban 7y ago
  There will no revolution by the utterly destroyed middle and lower classes lining up to get state handouts from the military to live. I'm sure Rand corporation or some such has detailed operational plans to roll out to deal with these perfectly predictable societal disturbances.
• ragona 7y ago
  Keep in mind that a lot of these workers were already uninsured or underinsured.
• vsareto 7y ago
  > What will the employees, in the US at least, do for health insurance? A pandemic is when you need it. These employees will be strained to pay for COBRA. Put it on a credit card and only make minimum payments, most likely
• satya71 7y ago
  If you can afford it, loss of employment should be a qualifying event for buying insurance on the health exchanges as well.
• dominotw 7y ago
  I enrolled in ACA via job loss exception when I got let go last year. COBRA is too expensive.
• tathougies 7y ago
  In my state, a health insurance plan can be bought of the market place for one person for a few hundred dollars / month. I'd hope that they get the stimulus checks out soon so people can pay, or that states are willing to accept IOUs of the stimulus check in exchange for a cash advance.