4 ms·

But the thing is, most people don't want to run their own business no matter how safe you make it. In the aggregate you may be right. Just from my own personal

But the thing is, most people don't want to run their own business no matter how safe you make it. In the aggregate you may be right. Just from my own personally experience, I can think of at least a dozen folks (extremely well-regarded in their field) who have all expressed to me a desire to strike out on their own, but it's the company-provided healthcare that keeps them from doing that. And (for the most part) these are folks in Massachusetts.

waterlesscloud 14y ago
Isn't it possible that's just a handy self-justification, though? If healthcare wasn't an issue, would it be something else?
- Anechoic 14y ago
  Isn't it possible that's just a handy self-justification, though? Looking specifically at the folks in my circle, I doubt for for two reasons: 1) they've seen me make a living at it for 9 years and they are all as smart, if not smarter than me and generally better connected than me, 2) a couple of folks in particular are supporting family members with medical needs.
  - ryanmolden 14y ago
    #2 is a big issue because insurance companies love to deny pre-existing conditions. I believe there is some time-limit to them doing so, like after being on the plan for 6 or 9 months they start covering, but don't quote me on that. The idea that having a pre-existing condition can screw you pretty severely if you have to switch insurance ilproviders is crazy to me, especially since insurance is so tied to employer in the US. I realize insurance prefers healthy people to subsidize the sick, but once someone is diagnosed, "punishing" them for being sick, everytime they change insurance is just crazy to me. I guess I am too much of a socialist to see how that is a good societal move.
    - yummyfajitas 14y ago
      #2 is irrelevant in MA. MA already has Obama/Romneycare. I.e., they already have the ability to force an insurance company (more precisely, other people who purchase insurance) to subsidize their care with or without an employer.
      - ryanmolden 14y ago
        Sure, I was speaking more generally than just to the people the parent knows in MA. If that becomes nationwide under Obamacare then good. By your phrasing ("force..other people who purchase insurance..to subsidize their care with or without an employer") it seems you are opposed to that idea (sorry if I presume incorrectly). If so is the idea seriously that if you get diagnosed with a serious medical condition then no one should subsidize care and you should basically be driven into bankruptcy or death due to lack of medical treatment? Perhaps this is an issue I am too close to since I am currently seeing an endocrinologist and just had a brain MRI, but prior to that (and likely still) I would say the insurance companies cleaned up on me / I subsidized a lot of other people since I have rarely had any medical conditions / costs for the entire time I have had medical insurance. But that doesn't bother me, so I guess the idea that insurance being a pool to subsidize / provide a safety net in an organized society regardless of employment somehow being portrayed as a bad thing is something I am having trouble wrapping my mind around.
      - Anechoic 14y ago
        #2 is irrelevant in MA. MA already has Obama/Romneycare. It's not quite that simple. One, the plans offered through the MA Connector may not be as inexpensive as plans negotiated by an employer, so you may wind up paying more for the same coverage. There's alao the issue of finding a plan with doctors in the same network, you may find yourself paying a little more if you have a favorite doctor treating you for a pre-existing condition. Also, you are only allowed to enroll in MA Connector plans during one (maybe two) "open enrollment" periods during the year, so you may be faced with a gap between losing insurance coverage after quiting a job before being able to enroll in a new plan. Of course there is always COBRA, but again the amount you pay out-of-pocket for the premiums go way up. But you are correct that insurance co's in MA generally can't reject you for pre-existing conditions.

waterlesscloud 14y ago

Isn't it possible that's just a handy self-justification, though? If healthcare wasn't an issue, would it be something else?

Anechoic 14y ago
Isn't it possible that's just a handy self-justification, though? Looking specifically at the folks in my circle, I doubt for for two reasons: 1) they've seen me make a living at it for 9 years and they are all as smart, if not smarter than me and generally better connected than me, 2) a couple of folks in particular are supporting family members with medical needs.
- ryanmolden 14y ago
  #2 is a big issue because insurance companies love to deny pre-existing conditions. I believe there is some time-limit to them doing so, like after being on the plan for 6 or 9 months they start covering, but don't quote me on that. The idea that having a pre-existing condition can screw you pretty severely if you have to switch insurance ilproviders is crazy to me, especially since insurance is so tied to employer in the US. I realize insurance prefers healthy people to subsidize the sick, but once someone is diagnosed, "punishing" them for being sick, everytime they change insurance is just crazy to me. I guess I am too much of a socialist to see how that is a good societal move.
  - yummyfajitas 14y ago
    #2 is irrelevant in MA. MA already has Obama/Romneycare. I.e., they already have the ability to force an insurance company (more precisely, other people who purchase insurance) to subsidize their care with or without an employer.
    - ryanmolden 14y ago
      Sure, I was speaking more generally than just to the people the parent knows in MA. If that becomes nationwide under Obamacare then good. By your phrasing ("force..other people who purchase insurance..to subsidize their care with or without an employer") it seems you are opposed to that idea (sorry if I presume incorrectly). If so is the idea seriously that if you get diagnosed with a serious medical condition then no one should subsidize care and you should basically be driven into bankruptcy or death due to lack of medical treatment? Perhaps this is an issue I am too close to since I am currently seeing an endocrinologist and just had a brain MRI, but prior to that (and likely still) I would say the insurance companies cleaned up on me / I subsidized a lot of other people since I have rarely had any medical conditions / costs for the entire time I have had medical insurance. But that doesn't bother me, so I guess the idea that insurance being a pool to subsidize / provide a safety net in an organized society regardless of employment somehow being portrayed as a bad thing is something I am having trouble wrapping my mind around.
    - Anechoic 14y ago
      #2 is irrelevant in MA. MA already has Obama/Romneycare. It's not quite that simple. One, the plans offered through the MA Connector may not be as inexpensive as plans negotiated by an employer, so you may wind up paying more for the same coverage. There's alao the issue of finding a plan with doctors in the same network, you may find yourself paying a little more if you have a favorite doctor treating you for a pre-existing condition. Also, you are only allowed to enroll in MA Connector plans during one (maybe two) "open enrollment" periods during the year, so you may be faced with a gap between losing insurance coverage after quiting a job before being able to enroll in a new plan. Of course there is always COBRA, but again the amount you pay out-of-pocket for the premiums go way up. But you are correct that insurance co's in MA generally can't reject you for pre-existing conditions.