Corporations and Health Insurance vs. White Collar American.

Health insurance comes as second nature to many of us. We grab that blue and white card and put it in our wallet and forget about it until we are sick or injured. When this happens, there it is, cushioning our fall like the extra padding it provided to cushion our wallets. This is not the case with everyone, however. Many Americans have no cushion to fall back on, no blue and white card to show the emergency room when they have an unexpected health concern. No HMO with a convenient co-pay amount when their son or daughter develops an ear infection.

In 1954, Congress passed legislation allowing employers to provide health insurance benefits to employees on a tax-free basis (Sih and Singh 99). This legal provision marked the beginning of the rapidly expanding health care costs still apparent today due to the major incentives provided by the government to obtain employer-based health coverage. The overwhelming popularity of employer-based health insurance has led to a serious market inefficiency resulting from the system of third-party payment. As individuals rely on their insurance companies to pay for their medical expenses, this provides

Over five million individuals have lost their health insurance since Obamacare has been approved and put into action. The policy of Obamacare states that employers who are providing health insurance to their employees must tack on additional benefits that the companies cannot afford to do. This in turn causes the eventual cancellation of coverage for the employees, leaving them with no options besides signing up for Obamacare. It is the scheme of all schemes. Policy makers are constantly adding revisions to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) making it harder and harder for individual businesses and corporations to keep their health plan up to the standards Obamacare has set in place.

Many Americans have their jobs because of the health insurance their employer provides. Therefore, when these individuals lose their jobs, they do not only lose that but their health insurance as well. Following, the third question, which has to do with the Democrats’ and Republicans’ views on the proper role of the government in the health care sector, as well as the “power struggle” in both House and Senate during the passage of the ACA.

If an employer has 15 or more employees and the employer does not have health insurance for them, the government is going to subsided them, but the employer is going to pay a find, since the employees do not get pay enough to buy the

Third, the ACA regulates health care coverage in the United States. According to Lussier et al. (2016), the act mandates that all employers with more than 50 employees provide their full-time employees with health care coverage or face penalties for failing to do so” (p. 494). This act specifies that if organizations choose not to provide employees with benefits, they will be forced to pay a penalty for each eligible employee. However, organizations that do offer employee health and retirement plans must meet minimum requirements and comply with ERISA (Lussier et al, 2016). Employers and employees

In 2010, Obamacare was signed into law. Many Americans do not have health insurance. President Obama and Congress wanted to make sure that all Americans could get healthcare. This healthcare is intended for middle class low income families. Obamacare is a lower cost of health care. This was made to reduce the cost of Medicaid and Medicare. These insurances are a threat to the federal budget. Health care is the number one cause of bankruptcy. Most businesses will offer healthcare through the company, but there is people who don’t have this option. Some are poor enough to qualify for Medicaid which is covered by state and federal government and anyone over 65 receives Medicare. There are people who make too much money and they do not

Another issue that Ubel’s article discusses is how economic factors influence employer’s decisions in providing benefits to employees. If an employee is earning a higher salary, the individual may decide to forgo some of their pay to receive benefits, like health insurance (Ubel, 2013). Conversely, a low-wage earner does not have the financial latitude to sacrifice some of their wages to receive health insurance

The medical form was not totally in compliance with the “Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), even though the claimant had a written notice there was no effort put forth in order to secure an approved medical authorization and

Employees who have not worked for a covered employer for more than 12 months or 1,250 hours are deemed not eligible for FMLA. One modification to the policy would be to allow these employees the same benefit as if they have been employed for the 12 months. This would be a positive impact on the policy by giving employees who ordinarily cannot afford to take a leave without pay. Under the FMLA, with the suggested modification, employees could use paid leave. Another positive modification would be to extend the ‘during the 12-month period’ to ‘during the 24-month period’; which states that an employee can only take FMLA once within the 12-month period (for non-military reasons) if the 12 weeks have been exhausted. According to the US Dept. of Labor; “eligible employees may take up to 12 workweeks of leave in a 12-month period” (The Family Medical Leave Act - Wage and Hour Division (WHD), 2012). Some leave may require an employee to use repeated family medical leave such as, caring for a child with a terminal illness (cancer, multiple sclerosis). One modification that could have a negative impact on the modification of FMLA would be if the extended time is approved and the employee uses the paid leave and does not return to work. This would mean that the company, who has held the position for the employee, now has to seek others to fill the position, and the company has lost money. Benefits were paid on behalf of the employee and life insurance policies were kept active. Additional record keeping is required, and coordination of benefits per policies. Other negative impacts from policy modification could include excessive absenteeism, decreased productivity, moral problems, and inability of co-workers to balance their own work and family demands. “Although the FMLA was intended to provide job security, it may have just the opposite effect if excessive absenteeism jeopardizes an employer’s relationships and

What factors compel the patients to skip the medical care? Many people and the doctors blame the corporate sector for their greediness. But many business leaders reject and view insurers reject this. Some employers blame

Indeed, there are a plethora of acronyms to encode, store, and recall. The acronyms are so close in alphabetical sequence; a consumer could easily get healthcare plans confused. Dr. David Grazier author of “How Capitalism Can Save American Healthcare” interviewed a colleague named Bob, who agreed that healthcare is too complicated, he shares “the confusion--the prices are inscrutable, the ever-rising costs, the questionable quality, the chaotic lack of information. That is the micro-level of healthcare” (Grazier).

Indeed, there are a plethora of acronyms to encode, store, and recall. The acronyms are so close in alphabetical sequence; a consumer could easily get healthcare plans confused. Dr. David Grazier author of “How Capitalism Can Save American Healthcare” interviewed a colleague named Bob who agreed that healthcare is too complicated, he shares “the confusion--the prices are inscrutable, the ever-rising costs, the questionable quality, the chaotic lack of information. That is the micro-level of healthcare” (Grazier).

Similar to the discontinuity of care, the employment-based nature of the health insurance system of the United States poses a major problem for the effectiveness of the health care safety net. In this system, one can be a highly responsible working adult and find that one cannot obtain health care for one’s family. With the increasing cost of health care and inflation in medicine, employers are forcing

There is a spacious room for lemon in insurance field. The price for health insurance is not fixed, it varies based on the level of the need an applicant may require for the insurance. As in the case of elderly people over the age 65, it is well known that it is very difficult for them to get health insurance because of its high price as they certainly will need it more than other applicants. On the other hand, employees working in companies are offered health insurance as a part of the companies’ policies and regulations. This actually create more room for lemon in the insurance field and less chance for old people who need it more. This ended up with adverse selection by the insurance companies. (A.Akerlof, Aug