Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-26-2013, 11:17 AM   #141
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
bUU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,906
I think there is a very strong bias in our society against (truly) small businesses. Everything seems to be very deliberately arrayed to foster the development of businesses that start "small" meaning 250-500 employees (13 CFR 121), not two or three employees.
__________________

__________________
bUU is offline  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 02-26-2013, 12:25 PM   #142
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,417
Well I've worked for a small business and a big business and I know what I prefer.

Health care, regular raises, stock options and employee stock purchase plan and some other perks for the latter.

The small business guy I worked for was pleasant enough to work for but when I quit after about 9 months with no offers of a raise, he looked hurt and asked if I was leaving for more money.

There was a huge gap in pay, before the benefits.
__________________

__________________
explanade is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 01:43 PM   #143
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
Well I've worked for a small business and a big business and I know what I prefer.

Health care, regular raises, stock options and employee stock purchase plan and some other perks for the latter.
When was this? Most people I know who work for big businesses have barely sniffed any raises at all, if any, in the last 5-6 years. Very few stock options, either.

I'd add one benefit to working for a small business, while also acknowledging some of the advantages of a Megacorp: the small business probably isn't going to be publicly traded and given its marching orders from Wall Street, which only cares about "hitting the numbers" this quarter, no matter how you do it, and doesn't care how it screws employees (or the company in the long run).
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 03:34 PM   #144
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
but I think that any company that currently offers health care will not drop it to save money... heck, they never had to offer it at all and could have saved even more money, but did not...
Maybe, we'll see. The company will do whatever gives them the best return on the compensation they pay. If health insurance now costs them $10K per worker (after the tax benefits) and they can dump it, pay a $3K fine, and give the worker a $6K raise in pay and the worker also gets a $6K subsidy from taxpayers to buy health insurance and he only pays $4k out of pocket more than he used to pay for care, then the worker is better off and the company is better off. Only the taxpayer got burned. These companies >should< drop health insurance--keeping it hurts their bottom line (and hurts their workers).

But if the exchanges turn into a disaster and if waits for medical care in the exchange-price plans are excessive, then employers might gain a competitive advantage by offering workers a way out of the gulag.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now  
Old 02-26-2013, 04:23 PM   #145
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem
Maybe, we'll see. The company will do whatever gives them the best return on the compensation they pay. If health insurance now costs them $10K per worker (after the tax benefits) and they can dump it, pay a $3K fine, and give the worker a $6K raise in pay and the worker also gets a $6K subsidy from taxpayers to buy health insurance and he only pays $4k out of pocket more than he used to pay for care, then the worker is better off and the company is better off. Only the taxpayer got burned. These companies >should< drop health insurance--keeping it hurts their bottom line (and hurts their workers).

But if the exchanges turn into a disaster and if waits for medical care in the exchange-price plans are excessive, then employers might gain a competitive advantage by offering workers a way out of the gulag.
Am I thinking correctly that a worker with a decent wage could get hammered pretty good under this scenario? Company does what you mentioned above. Except add these variables. 1. The workers pay was high enough for no subsidy. 2. Worker had been paying part of his healthcare premium out of pocket already and all his family. 3. If company dumped the insurance and the worker family gets pushed into the exchange program, won't they also lose a lot of money due to the fact they now cannot pay for their insurance with pretax dollars? Now I know many here including myself already have to do this, but for people who have not, this could also bring some budget shock to the family.
__________________
Mulligan is offline  
Old 02-26-2013, 04:32 PM   #146
Moderator
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Eee Bah Gum
Posts: 21,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
For the people who think that a large number of companies are going to drop health insurance because of Obamacare.... I just do not see it...

When I worked in the UK for a year, (back in 2000), companies were starting to offer health insurance to their workers.... and they have 'free' health care!!!

As long as it gives them a competative advantage (or to eliminate one from another company) to attract employees, they will offer these..

Remember that this in only health care... most large companies also offer dental, vision, STD, LTD, life, flex spending account, 401(k) with a match, sick leave and vacation time...

Now, smaller companies that have low paid employees probably do not offer these things at all and will have to make a decision on what to do.... but I think that any company that currently offers health care will not drop it to save money... heck, they never had to offer it at all and could have saved even more money, but did not...
+1

I had employer provided health insurance from 2 different companies in the UK that I worked for between 1979 and 1987. (then we moved to the USA)

Over time the nature of the HI offered may change, and it may be taxed just like other employee perks (company provided life insurance has been taxed for some years now).
__________________
Retired in Jan, 2010 at 55, moved to England in May 2016
Now it's adventure before dementia
Alan is online now  
Old 02-26-2013, 04:35 PM   #147
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
Am I thinking correctly that a worker with a decent wage could get hammered pretty good under this scenario? Company does what you mentioned above. Except add these variables. 1. The workers pay was high enough for no subsidy. 2. Worker had been paying part of his healthcare premium out of pocket already and all his family. 3. If company dumped the insurance and the worker family gets pushed into the exchange program, won't they also lose a lot of money due to the fact they now cannot pay for their insurance with pretax dollars? Now I know many here including myself already have to do this, but for people who have not, this could also bring some budget shock to the family.
I don't think there will be many folks paying with pre-tax dollars anyway. But, your worker would at least get the higher pay. I think (without the govt subsidy) he'd do worse than if the company had kept the company-purchased insurance, but he'll do better than he was doing when he paid full freight and didn't get that $6k extra pay.
But, I think overall the company will still do whatever gives them the most bang-for-the-buck in attracting/keeping employees. Maybe the improvements the ACA brings is that lower-paid workers generally won't have employer-provided insurance (but they'll get more pay than otherwise and easier job mobility than today), while higher paid workers will generally have company insurance.
Like today.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now  
Old 03-05-2013, 01:29 PM   #148
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
It appears that another claimed benefit of PPACA is not working out as we all had hoped. The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) is meant to allow those with health problems to buy medical insurance. The program had fewer enreolees than anticipated, but (like several other elements of PPACA) costs have exceeded projections and in mid February, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced that the no further policies would be processed and they barred states from making new enrollments due to lack of funding.

GOP legislators have suggested that the President use funds from other portions of the PPACA package to continue funding of PCIP. If this is done, it might slow implementation of the "exchanges" in the states, particularly since so many will now be administered by the federal government rather than by the states themselves.

Here's the 05 March letter from GOP legislators to the President.
Here's a link to the Daily Caller article on the issue.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now  
Old 03-05-2013, 03:57 PM   #149
Full time employment: Posting here.
Accidental Retiree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 975
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
That is my understanding too, but many retirees would have to increase their income by about $16K in order to get $12K after taxes to pay the premium up front.

For many, that would increase their MAGI and put them over the 400% limit.
Another good reason to have funds in after-tax accounts as well as in tax-deferred accounts, I guess.
__________________
Chief Retirement Strategist
The AR Group
Accidental Retiree is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 10:03 PM   #150
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Live And Learn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tampa Bay Area
Posts: 1,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
It appears that another claimed benefit of PPACA is not working out as we all had hoped. The Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) is meant to allow those with health problems to buy medical insurance. The program had fewer enreolees than anticipated, but (like several other elements of PPACA) costs have exceeded projections and in mid February, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced that the no further policies would be processed and they barred states from making new enrollments due to lack of funding.

GOP legislators have suggested that the President use funds from other portions of the PPACA package to continue funding of PCIP. If this is done, it might slow implementation of the "exchanges" in the states, particularly since so many will now be administered by the federal government rather than by the states themselves.

Here's the 05 March letter from GOP legislators to the President.
Here's a link to the Daily Caller article on the issue.
Just what I needed - another excuse to w*rk OMY
__________________
"For the time being no discipline brings joy, but seems grievous and painful; but afterwards it yields a peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it." ~
Hebrews 12:11

ER'd in June 2015 at age 52. Initial WR 3%. 50/40/10 (Equity/Bond/Short Term) AA.
Live And Learn is offline  
Old 03-06-2013, 08:44 AM   #151
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,874
Not being an early adopter, I'm just now reading the Time article on health care costs. I've gotta say that we are screwed until we can limit lobbying to congress. The ACA is juggling the firemen but no one is pursuring the arsonist.
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is offline  
Old 03-06-2013, 09:31 AM   #152
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelover View Post
I've gotta say that we are screwed until we can limit lobbying to congress.
Or maybe we could elect a Congress that isn't so easily bribed?

If someone offers me obviously stolen goods, I just say "No" (and maybe alert the cops, depending on circumstances). I don't take the 'deal' and then blame the guy for offering them to me.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 03-06-2013, 09:34 AM   #153
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,416
Getting off topic here folks...
__________________
MichaelB is online now  
Old 03-06-2013, 09:48 AM   #154
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
Getting off topic here folks...
Oooops! Sorry!

It's like dangling raw meat in front of a dog, I can't help myself ! I'll put that part of me back in my cage now, thanks for the gentle reminder


-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline  
Old 03-06-2013, 09:53 AM   #155
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 559
Hi guys,

i made a separate thread about signing up for healthcare using the massachusettes health connector which is the same as an Obamacare exchange.

some old and new insights based on me actually signing up for this coverage



gerry
__________________
gerrym51 is offline  
Old 03-12-2013, 02:35 PM   #156
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 559
I'm not good with links-but the 15 page Obamacare subsidy request form for subsidies for obamacare is on the web-link on Drudge
__________________
gerrym51 is offline  
Old 03-27-2013, 09:19 PM   #157
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 572
Study: Claims costs that drive premiums will rise 32 percent in under health law - The Washington Post
"A new study (by the Society of Actuaries) finds that insurance companies will have to pay out an average of 32 percent more for medical claims on individual health policies under President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. What does that mean for you?
It could increase premiums for at least some Americans.
If you are uninsured, or you buy your policy directly from an insurance company, you should pay attention.
But if you have an employer plan, like most workers and their families, odds are you don’t have much to worry about."

It is a long and complicated study from the advanced math nerds,
http://cdn-files.soa.org/web/researc...aca-report.pdf
the impact apparently will depend on the state you live in and where you get health insurance coverage. If you have an employer plan, the impact may not be so great, but for most of those in ER, unless they are getting MediCare, they no longer have an employer, and have to look for and pay for their own health insurance policies. And according to the study, that group will see the largest increase in health insurance policy premiums.
__________________
bondi688 is offline  
Old 03-27-2013, 09:41 PM   #158
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Chicago suburbs
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by bondi688 View Post
Study: Claims costs that drive premiums will rise 32 percent in under health law - The Washington Post
"A new study (by the Society of Actuaries) finds that insurance companies will have to pay out an average of 32 percent more for medical claims on individual health policies under President Barack Obamaís health care overhaul. What does that mean for you?
It could increase premiums for at least some Americans.
If you are uninsured, or you buy your policy directly from an insurance company, you should pay attention.
But if you have an employer plan, like most workers and their families, odds are you donít have much to worry about."

It is a long and complicated study from the advanced math nerds,
http://cdn-files.soa.org/web/researc...aca-report.pdf
the impact apparently will depend on the state you live in and where you get health insurance coverage. If you have an employer plan, the impact may not be so great, but for most of those in ER, unless they are getting MediCare, no longer have an employer, and have to look for and pay for their own health insurance policies. And according to the study, that group will see the largest increase in health insurance policy premiums.
To me it means ACA is working as intended. Insurance companies will be required to allocate more of their profits toward actual medical care for the insured and less for extravagant executive salaries, bonuses, administrative overhead, and bureaucracy. If they plan to make up this rebalance by passing those costs onto the consumer in the form of higher premiums, I believe ACA will prevent that as well. A victory for American consumers, in my opinion.
__________________
Richard8655 is offline  
Old 03-27-2013, 09:56 PM   #159
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,862
I'd be tickled pink to pay only 32% more than the currently unerwritten individual policies when I have to go shopping for HI in 2014. We may or may not have qualified for those low rates, but I'm 100% sure of getting insurance in 2014.
__________________
Animorph is offline  
Old 03-27-2013, 09:56 PM   #160
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 572
Richard8655
I hope you are right, but I find all the different takes from every side in the battle confusing. It is hard to know who one should believe. Trying to find politically neutral parties in this fight to gauge their opinion on the subject.
__________________

__________________
bondi688 is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:17 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.