Employer provided healthcare bad for competition?

[Benton]

So, I was talking to an employer (small business, maybe 40 total employees) about the healthcare issue. I asked him how bad mandates and the changes had impacted him, and he said the biggest issue had been paperwork and learning about what he had to do more so than the cost. So in the course of the conversation I asked if — since he cited aggravation as more of a problem than cost — he would prefer going to universal healthcare and just taking the same amount he was paying for healthcare and cutting that as a check to the fed.

His answer was, more or less, that his employees were low paid and insurance was the reason most of them were there. If they could get insurance and make more money working somewhere else — maybe even part time at a higher pay rate — that he wouldn't be able to attract employees.

I hadn't really thought about it that way. To me, it would be a positive as maybe some of those workers would go out and work for themselves and generate more competition. But to him, it would be a negative as he didn't want (or couldn't) increase wages to attract employees.

[Yojimbo]

(09-29-2017, 04:42 PM)Benton Wrote: So, I was talking to an employer (small business, maybe 40 total employees) about the healthcare issue. I asked him how bad mandates and the changes had impacted him, and he said the biggest issue had been paperwork and learning about what he had to do more so than the cost. So in the course of the conversation I asked if — since he cited aggravation as more of a problem than cost — he would prefer going to universal healthcare and just taking the same amount he was paying for healthcare and cutting that as a check to the fed.

His answer was, more or less, that his employees were low paid and insurance was the reason most of them were there. If they could get insurance and make more money working somewhere else — maybe even part time at a higher pay rate — that he wouldn't be able to attract employees.

I hadn't really thought about it that way. To me, it would be a positive as maybe some of those workers would go out and work for themselves and generate more competition. But to him, it would be a negative as he didn't want (or couldn't) increase wages to attract employees.

This is assuming the cost for private insurance for his employees will cost the same as the tax. If the tax is lower then he could turn the savings into higher wages.

[SunsetBengal]

Benton, that is interesting that your friend said that the cost of providing healthcare coverage to his employees wasn't a problem, yet also mentions that they are low paid. What I surmise from that is, he must be doing well, and likely could pay his employees more, but chooses not to, as they are "captive" due to needing health care coverage.

Whereas if healthcare went universal, he would likely not have people working for what he is willing to pay. Then, in order to stay in business, he would be forced to pay a higher wage to attract employees.

[Dill]

(09-29-2017, 07:12 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Benton, that is interesting that your friend said that the cost of providing healthcare coverage to his employees wasn't a problem, yet also mentions that they are low paid.  What I surmise from that is, he must be doing well, and likely could pay his employees more, but chooses not to, as they are "captive" due to needing health care coverage.

Whereas if healthcare went universal, he would likely not have people working for what he is willing to pay.  Then, in order to stay in business, he would be forced to pay a higher wage to attract employees.

Perhaps he could do that if the insurance cost less or he didn't have to provide it?

[SunsetBengal]

(09-29-2017, 07:44 PM)Dill Wrote: Perhaps he could do that if the insurance cost less or he didn't have to provide it?

Did you read the OP?  Benton states that his friend, the small business owner, said that the cost wasn't the issue as much as the paperwork.  He then went on to say that his employees are low paid, and that most are there specifically for the healthcare coverage.

[Dill]

(09-29-2017, 07:52 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Did you read the OP?  Benton states that his friend, the small business owner, said that the cost wasn't the issue as much as the paperwork.  He then went on to say that his employees are low paid, and that most are there specifically for the healthcare coverage.

Yes, and Benton raised the question of universal coverage. And the guy expressed fear he would lose employees because of the low salary.

I was just wondering if perhaps the Universal coverage might save him money he now pays offering insurance and doing all that paperwork. He could translate that gain into higher, more competitive wages.  The question would be whether he had to raise wages so high, in the new labor market, that it cost him more to run the business than previously.

[SunsetBengal]

(09-29-2017, 08:05 PM)Dill Wrote: Yes, and Benton raised the question of universal coverage. And the guy expressed fear he would lose employees because of the low salary.

I was just wondering if perhaps the Universal coverage might save him money he now pays offering insurance and doing all that paperwork. He could translate that gain into higher, more competitive wages.  The question would be whether he had to raise wages so high, in the new labor market, that it cost him more to run the business than previously.

You must have missed the part where his friend was saying that he'd rather just send the check to the Fed, and not have to bother with all the compliance paperwork.  

So, I'm thinking that dude is making pretty good profit.  His actual field of business was never stated, so I don't know if his business requires people that have a skill or something that anyone can learn easily.  But, if the cost of providing coverage isn't a problem, then he is likely doing well from the business.

[Benton]

(09-29-2017, 08:23 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You must have missed the part where his friend was saying that he'd rather just send the check to the Fed, and not have to bother with all the compliance paperwork.  

So, I'm thinking that dude is making pretty good profit.  His actual field of business was never stated, so I don't know if his business requires people that have a skill or something that anyone can learn easily.  But, if the cost of providing coverage isn't a problem, then he is likely doing well from the business.

At a football game (go wildcats) so haven't had a chance to read everything but did want to clear up the business owner didn't suggest sending a check to the fed, I asked him if that would be easier. It was my suggestion, which he didn't really seem super enthused about anything.

[StLucieBengal]

There shouldn't be employer based healthcare. Just buy it as individuals and allow us to buy in groups

I would love to pay for a membership to a group to buy healthcare.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-29-2017, 09:02 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: There shouldn't be employer based healthcare. Just buy it as individuals and allow us to buy in groups

I would love to pay for a membership to a group to buy healthcare.

What happened to let's try freedom? Now employers shouldn't have the freedom to provide incentives to attract qualified workers?

When you get health insurance through your employer, you buy it individually. The employer is the group. So it is exactly what you just suggested. Jesus.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-29-2017, 11:06 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: What happened to let's try freedom? Now employers shouldn't have the freedom to provide incentives to attract qualified workers?

When you get health insurance through your employer, you buy it individually. The employer is the group. So it is exactly what you just suggested. Jesus.

That's not even remotely close to what I posted.

[GMDino]

(09-29-2017, 11:06 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: What happened to let's try freedom?  Now employers shouldn't have the freedom to provide incentives to attract qualified workers?  

When you get health insurance through your employer, you buy it individually. The employer is the group. So it is exactly what you just suggested. Jesus.

What if employees negotiated for healthcare through their employer?  

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-30-2017, 12:44 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That's not even remotely close to what I posted.

The employees of a business are a group. They buy their insurance via the group individually. It's exactly what you posted even though you don't realize it.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-30-2017, 12:51 AM)GMDino Wrote: What if employees negotiated for healthcare through their employer?  

That would work as effectively as Lucie individually negotiating his contract as an alleged teacher. They will laugh at you and tell you to take it or leave it.