Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7374
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 15 Apr 2013, 4:50 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2309596/Americas-biggest-movie-theater-chain-blames-ObamaCare-cutting-employees-working-hours.html

Is this what is meant by the forum headline "Good for the economy"? Must be the unintended consequences rearing it's ugly head. OR... It could be people just "gaming the system". Yes indeedee. That must be it. The companies are just gaming the system, and using the program the way it is written. After all, you have to understand, the program is there, and the rules are there to use for people's benefit.

Nice. Reduction in hours always benefits the economy.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 12:19 am

Gaming the system is an unintended consequence.

Cutting hours per employee while maintaining total hours means potentially increasing the number of employees. Not sure whether that is the case with Regal. Also, not sure if cinema theatres are facing other threats such as competition from legal and illegal downloads. Just because they blame the ACA doesn't mean it's the primary driver.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 6:14 am

bbauska
The companies are just gaming the system, and using the program the way it is written.


The ACA continues the basic problem of tieing health insurance provision to the employer. It isn't an ideal solution for anyone.
A movie theatre requires a specific number of staff hours to be filled . They just hire more and have staff work fewer hours... You end up with people with two or even three part time jobs, receiving no benefits from any... This isn't ideal for the employer because managing the staff churn is diffcult, and is certanly not ideal for the employee, who has little control over their life, and will need to go to the ACA private pool for their health insurance.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 6:28 am

Speaking of "Obamacare" one of the supposed nice benefits is we are supposed to have "free" routine exams such as Breast exams and Colonoscopies, etc. Well, I bit the bullet and now that I am (past) 50, my wife nagged me into getting a colonoscopy, yes, the factory seal will be broken! My health plan SUCKS, it's on eof those that more and more and more are going to, a high deductible plan (nothing is covered until I reach I think $2500, then they pay 80% until I pay I believe something like $4000 or so until it pays 100% anyways, it's a free procedure ...may as well get it over with?

Well that free procedure will cost me several hundred dollars at least, probably close to a grand
The "free" procedure does not include the required consultation fee, facilities fee, anesthesia is not covered, any biopsies are not covered (I asked and it is rare they do not have a few biopsies). Some "free" test!?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 6:43 am

Do you know what it would have cost before the ACA?

If only your country would see single payer as politically acceptable, what you have is a fudge.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 7:08 am

I would actually prefer single payer vs what they came up with! I am no fan of single payer but my average benefits get worse and worse and worse yet the price keeps going up. I would like to see a basic crappy single payer plan with affordable upgrades we (or our employers) could add as we see fit. The problem is employers would stop paying any and all (why bother since their employees are covered and their taxes no doubt already went up to pay for this) while the "affordable" adders would not be all that affordable at all (what medical cost is affordable other than maybe aspirin?). What we would end up with is far better care for the poor, little difference for the rich since they can afford the adders but the middle class would end up with lesser care, you can almost guarantee this would be the case.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4961
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 7:09 am

I'm in small claims court right now suing for non-coverage of my colonoscopy 18 months ago. I'll let you know if I win.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 9:05 am

Ray Jay wrote:I'm in small claims court right now suing for non-coverage of my colonoscopy 18 months ago. I'll let you know if I win.


Awesome! I hope you win.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4961
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 9:39 am

so far it's felt like a second procedure.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 16 Apr 2013, 9:46 am

ray
I'm in small claims court right now suing for non-coverage of my colonoscopy 18 months ago. I'll let you know if I win
.

Whats exhibit A?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 18 Apr 2013, 8:18 am

A Democrat, who helped craft the ACA, explains why it is the drag on the economy that it is. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9airckw ... r_embedded
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7374
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 03 May 2013, 12:53 pm

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/05/03/sen_schumer_admits_health_insurance_premiums_have_increased_in_part_because_of_obamacare.html

Schumer says premiums have increased.

Raise your hand if you saw that coming...
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 03 May 2013, 1:11 pm

Baucus says it's a train wreck. Reid says action will have to be taken (meaning it needs more money).

#badplan
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 23 May 2013, 11:03 am

Yeah, Obamacare is sweet!

Some prominent health insurers, including industry giant UnitedHealth Group Inc., are not participating in California's new state-run health insurance market, possibly limiting the number of choices for millions of consumers.

UnitedHealth, the nation's largest private insurer, Aetna Inc. and Cigna Corp. are sitting out the first year of Covered California, the state's insurance exchange and a key testing ground nationally for a massive coverage expansion under the federal healthcare law.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 23 May 2013, 12:07 pm

reading back I see Ricky started this thread
"Obamacare will be good for the economy"
he then later states
The ACA continues the basic problem of tieing health insurance provision to the employer. It isn't an ideal solution for anyone.

But this is what Obamacare is all about, how can you say it will be good for the economy but then turn around and say it's not good for anyone? and bemoaned how it will end up forcing people to work part time jobs with no benefits?
...I'm terribly confused