Affordable Care Act to Cause Huge Increases in Employer Costs

[StonesRiverSpid]

Here is an excerpt from the first page of this study:


The cost of the ACA to large U.S. employers (10,000 or more employees) is estimated to be between $4,800 to $5,900 per employee.
These large employers will see overall ACA- related cost hikes of between $163 million and $200 million per employer, or an increase of 4.3 percent in 2016 and 8.4 percent in 2023 over and above what they would otherwise be spending. (See Appendix One for cost estimates for specific ACA provisions)
?The total cost of the ACA to all large U.S. employers over the next ten years is estimated to be from $151 billion to $186 billion.This is just from large employers.

This post was edited on 4/2 12:04 PM by StonesRiverSpid

Study shows costs of Obamacare

 

[Anachnoid]

Thanks. Perused quickly and will take more time later. I've never been a proponent for socialized medicine but am getting there. Nice article I today's RTD by Schapiro about the haves not caring about the have nots.

 

[WebSpinner]

when in richmond, used to send shapiro emails weekly, just about, debating his ideas and thoughts. liberal ideas are based on emotion, conservatives on common sense. without reading his article, can say with confidence, liberal mantra but not true. haves give more than anyone to a ton of things, they just do not like being forced to, don't like THEIR money being confiscated for looney liberal programs. they also care just as much as liberals but they also see what the govt has done to people and that they just want to keep doing it to them and not getting them out of what they are currently into.

 

[BillyWayne]

For what it's worth, an example: I retire from the state as of August 1. I can go on Medicare, but my wife is 63 and has to have "regular insurance." She can continue on our state plan for $559/month. She shopped around and can get a group plan through an organization she is affi;iated with for $639. She can get a substandard plan for $187, but because it doesn't meet Obamacare guidelines, we'll get fined 1% of our adjusted gross as a penalty. The substandard policy is fine except it doesn't cover maternity care or contraceptives, which because of age, is unnecessary for us. The fine amounts to about $125/month, so we end up paying $250/month. While this, at first blush, seems like a deal, it is rediculous that we're penalized for getting what we need rather than what Uncle Sam says we should have. A free market economy would not result in this; socialism does.

 

[Anachnoid]

Bully politics by the party with the majority always leads to bad law. Unfortunately this is our current political landscape.

 

[WebSpinner]

it is, we could have had some small changes, thus not having to go through this cluster fu$$ plus the costs, which we cannot afford as a country. alas, the first steps to the government running the entire deal with docs, nurses, hospitals, being government employees and owned. again, glad i will not be here for that but hate it for my kids and their kids. remember when obama called the summit and both parties sent reps and they met somewhere in dc and mccain said we should consider making some changes and obama told him, you lost and basically told him, shut up. while watching that, just could not believe what was happening and had never heard a sitting prez say anything like that, at least in public. not a good way to make friends and cross the aisle and try for consensus. politics is a tough, dirty, business and there will never be everyone on board for many things, certainly don't expect that and the people will pay for that.

 

[WebSpinner]

cannot recall where but heard a suggestion recently about not having senators and reps come to washington but to remain in their districts/states. it just seems that there is so much power and the availability of corruption there, lobbyists would have more problems if they did not have all of those folks where they could get at them daily, etc., etc. just like with most states where the legislature meets only for small periods of time, feel that would work at the fed level as well. just hate them sitting up there thinking they are bullet proof and are always looking to solve everyone's probs and micromanaging our lives. would love some type of change in our government that gives them less power, makes their jobs less desirable.