*shaking head*

[henry quirk]

"The inherent problem is employer-provided insurance"

Only when it's mandatory.

If Joe wants to provide catastrophic insurance to all of his employees, that's on Joe.

If Joe wants to pay (some or all of) his employees enough so that each can attend to his or her medical needs as each sees fit, that's on Joe.

If Joe enters into idiosyncratic contracts with (some or all) individual employees to provide or make accessible 'this' or 'that', that's on Joe.

It's the mandatory nature of employer-based insurance that's the problem.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

"The inherent problem is employer-provided insurance"

Only when it's mandatory.

If Joe wants to provide catastrophic insurance to all of his employees, that's on Joe.

If Joe wants to pay (some or all of) his employees enough so that each can attend to his or her medical needs as each sees fit, that's on Joe.

If Joe enters into idiosyncratic contracts with (some or all) individual employees to provide or make accessible 'this' or 'that', that's on Joe.

It's the mandatory nature of employer-based insurance that's the problem.

Except when employer-provided coverage is the norm, then rates are artificially inflated, a one-size-fits-all policy is chosen by someone in HR rather than the individuals it's supposed to serve, and anyone who doesn't have employer coverage is effectively barred from getting a policy at all because they have no collective bargaining to offer.

All of which were addressed by Obamacare, and slowly we are seeing good things from it (a huge increase this year in the number of insurance companies offering new plans on the open exchanges, for example, with competition driving down prices as it should,) but we have a long way to go before people really give up this stupid idea that your job should be in charge of those decisions for you.