Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Part-time workers, who historically have never been offered health insurance, are still not being offered health insurance. What has changed? Why, it's all Obama's fault now, of course   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 108
    More: Fail, obamacare, Poverty in the United States, Blackstone Group, common source, Obama administration, reform laws, Steve Schwarzman  
•       •       •

1982 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Feb 2013 at 11:24 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



108 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-04 11:26:07 AM  
Thanks Obama.
 
2013-02-04 11:27:49 AM  
What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.

Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   What a farking mess.
 
2013-02-04 11:28:35 AM  
Keep fighting for aetna and blue cross to keep getting their 30% cut america. Because freedom and jesus.

By the way stick your philosophical victory in your ass.
 
2013-02-04 11:28:53 AM  
This will in no way, shape or form convince rubes that single payer is the way to go and that the asshats of the GOP are the reason they can't have it.
 
2013-02-04 11:31:42 AM  

AcneVulgaris: What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.


gaia.adage.com

HAI GUYZ WHAS GOING ON HERE
 
2013-02-04 11:32:50 AM  
A lot of employers play the 'part time' game.  Hire you as a part-timer, then work you as much as they can without making you a full-timer.  Once worked part-time at a large-ish grocery chain where they wanted me to work 48 hours a week, every week.  I said to them, "If I do that, then what is your incentive to give me full-time status and health-care?"

I was fired a week later.
 
2013-02-04 11:33:27 AM  

coeyagi: This will in no way, shape or form convince rubes that single payer is the way to go and that the asshats of the GOP are the reason they can't have it.


Nevermind that congressional dems took single payer off the table themselves before negotiations even became and Obama™ torpedoed the public option.

Just hate the Republicans and mail that check.
 
2013-02-04 11:33:47 AM  

NateGrey: Thanks Obama.


Yup.  No skill workers such as retail are going to find out 28 hours is the best they're going to get.
 
2013-02-04 11:35:04 AM  

AcneVulgaris: What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.

Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   What a farking mess.


That also isn't new.

/have worked some 34 and a half hour weeks in my time.
 
2013-02-04 11:36:58 AM  

Ned Stark: coeyagi: This will in no way, shape or form convince rubes that single payer is the way to go and that the asshats of the GOP are the reason they can't have it.

Nevermind that congressional dems took single payer off the table themselves before negotiations even became and Obama™ torpedoed the public option.

Just hate the Republicans and mail that check.


You're right, it's poisonous having only two conservative political parties.
 
2013-02-04 11:37:27 AM  

Ned Stark: coeyagi: This will in no way, shape or form convince rubes that single payer is the way to go and that the asshats of the GOP are the reason they can't have it.

Nevermind that congressional dems took single payer off the table themselves before negotiations even became and Obama™ torpedoed the public option.

Just hate the Republicans and mail that check.


Lesser evil, man.  Lesser evil.
 
2013-02-04 11:38:00 AM  
The Act will require those left off their employer's plan to get coverage through a state exchange. They must pay a penalty if they don't. There are ways to get the cost of that coverage offset by the feds for those who qualify.
 
2013-02-04 11:39:53 AM  

AcneVulgaris: What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.

Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   What a farking mess.


This isn't new.....that's the point.
 
2013-02-04 11:40:34 AM  

This Face Left Blank: A lot of employers play the 'part time' game.  Hire you as a part-timer, then work you as much as they can without making you a full-timer.  Once worked part-time at a large-ish grocery chain where they wanted me to work 48 hours a week, every week.  I said to them, "If I do that, then what is your incentive to give me full-time status and health-care?"

I was fired a week later.


You were probably fired because you actually could identify vegetables.
 
2013-02-04 11:41:20 AM  
Have you guys ever thought of going tax-funded single payer?  It would solve so many of these weird problems.
 
2013-02-04 11:41:40 AM  
The obvious answer is to decouple employment and affordable health insurance, but why would we want to do that?  Only full-time employed people get sick.
 
2013-02-04 11:42:51 AM  
There should be universal catastrophic coverage and a guaranteed income for everyone else to cover other health costs.  We shouldn't let people be bankrupt for health care costs, but we also need to let market forces work to drive down the costs of healthcare.
 
2013-02-04 11:43:16 AM  
This is like how nobody's premiums ever went up prior to the reforms.

Thanks Obama.
 
2013-02-04 11:43:51 AM  
you can fark with the part timers all you want while the economy is bad but as it recovers that gets to be less of an option. like going out to dinner? wait until the staff are all surly and see how much you like that. oh you don't? so you'll eat elsewhere? the elsewhere staff won't be any better until their owners realize that they can grab all those unhappy dinners by treating their staff with respect and paying them accordingly. that includes enough hours to actually make a living.
 
2013-02-04 11:45:30 AM  

AcneVulgaris: Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   W


Perhaps if those employers would pay a decent wage, none of this would be necessary.
 
2013-02-04 11:46:12 AM  
i291.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-04 11:46:29 AM  

This Face Left Blank: Ned Stark: coeyagi: This will in no way, shape or form convince rubes that single payer is the way to go and that the asshats of the GOP are the reason they can't have it.

Nevermind that congressional dems took single payer off the table themselves before negotiations even became and Obama™ torpedoed the public option.

Just hate the Republicans and mail that check.

Lesser evil, man.  Lesser evil.


OK, that is a coherent reason for lying down with the donkey. I disagree that its a good plan, but it is a thing that it is possible for rational people to do.

But if you think "the Republicans" are the reason we don't have single payer and that actual reform was just two Senate seats away you should probably stop huffing gasoline.
 
2013-02-04 11:47:11 AM  
I'm going to play the pedant here, but I have been offered health insurance as a part time employee before.

The problem was I could never afford it.
 
2013-02-04 11:51:18 AM  

Mercutio74: Have you guys ever thought of going tax-funded single payer?  It would solve so many of these weird problems.


Callate!
 
2013-02-04 11:51:40 AM  
I remember working for a large retail store, and they would schedule everyone for 29 hours a week because if you hit 30, you counted as "full time". This was 10 years ago. So... pretty much the same.
 
2013-02-04 11:52:43 AM  

MattStafford: There should be universal catastrophic coverage and a guaranteed income for everyone else to cover other health costs.  We shouldn't let people be bankrupt for health care costs, but we also need to let market forces work to drive down the costs of healthcare.


Why do market forces always drive down costs?  The same forces at work in the market can drive prices up as well.

People need healthcare.  The majority of us, they tend to like living.  The demand is always there, and always increasing as we get more and more people on this planet.

Want to really drive down healthcare costs?  Remove the artificial cap on med school enrollment we have in this country.  We may have more use of the joke "What do you call a med student that graduated last in his class?" though.
 
2013-02-04 11:55:03 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-04 11:55:10 AM  

GoodyearPimp: AcneVulgaris: Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   W

Perhaps if those employers would pay a decent wage, none of this would be necessary.


This. But here's how Wal-Mart sees it...

1.Hire workers at the minimum wage. If you paid them any less, it would literally be illegal.
2. Give workers just enough hours so you don't have to offer them any benefits
3. Hire a separate company whose sole job is to help your underpaid employees sign up for government assistance
4. Essentially whittle away local economy while subsidizing the cost of your employees using taxpayer-funded programs.
5. Profit to the tune of 3.46B in net income per quarter
6. Donate money to a political party that complains budgets are out of control because of entitlement programs.
 
2013-02-04 11:56:53 AM  

raanne: I remember working for a large retail store, and they would schedule everyone for 29 hours a week because if you hit 30, you counted as "full time". This was 10 years ago. So... pretty much the same.


I remember that was the case for me as well, like 20 years ago.  But the experience I related above took place 8 years ago, in the same state.  I don't know what happened in the intervening 12 years that suddenly they could work me 48 hours a week, every week, and still call me 'part-time', but they sure as hell thought they could do it.
 
2013-02-04 12:01:55 PM  

tnpir: AcneVulgaris: What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.

[gaia.adage.com image 255x186]

HAI GUYZ WHAS GOING ON HERE


Would order from them every other month or so.  Their thin crust w/ garlic butter wasn't bad, especially on days when I didn't feel like cooking or running out some where.  Gave up on them after he douched out.
 
2013-02-04 12:02:03 PM  

Cotton Rinkenbolts: GoodyearPimp: AcneVulgaris: Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   W

Perhaps if those employers would pay a decent wage, none of this would be necessary.

This. But here's how Wal-Mart sees it...

1.Hire workers at the minimum wage. If you paid them any less, it would literally be illegal.
2. Give workers just enough hours so you don't have to offer them any benefits
3. Hire a separate company whose sole job is to help your underpaid employees sign up for government assistance
4. Essentially whittle away local economy while subsidizing the cost of your employees using taxpayer-funded programs.
5. Profit to the tune of 3.46B in net income per quarter
6. Donate money to a political party that complains budgets are out of control because of entitlement programs.


Government's response: increase taxes on all companies to cover the benefits paid out to full-time-equivalent (FTE) employees that qualify for government assistance programs.

Basically, "if you're going to pay them so little that we, the government, has to help them make ends meet, we're billing you for the assistance we provide them.  If you don't want to get punished with taxes, pay a living wage, assholes".
 
2013-02-04 12:02:58 PM  

Jackson Herring: [i.imgur.com image 435x502]


What's wrong with you? Seriously. Posting a photo of the attacks on the Twin Towers is not the answer to anything. Just sad. Those images and  you.
 
2013-02-04 12:03:47 PM  

meat0918: Why do market forces always drive down costs? The same forces at work in the market can drive prices up as well.

People need healthcare. The majority of us, they tend to like living. The demand is always there, and always increasing as we get more and more people on this planet.

Want to really drive down healthcare costs? Remove the artificial cap on med school enrollment we have in this country. We may have more use of the joke "What do you call a med student that graduated last in his class?" though.


People need food to survive, and I would argue that the market is far better at providing food than the government would be.  We have examples of market forces on health care with both cosmetic surgery and lasik, and both have been rather successful.

I do agree with you about the med school enrollment.  Basically the opposite of what happened with lawyers - pretty disappointing that our policies have created a glut of lawyers and a shortage of doctors.
 
2013-02-04 12:05:25 PM  

Cotton Rinkenbolts: 6. Donate money to a political party that complains budgets are out of control because of entitlement programs.


You forgot 7. "Let's get rid of that pesky minimum wage."
 
2013-02-04 12:10:10 PM  

AcneVulgaris: What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.

Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   What a farking mess.


Because it's socialism! Or as my Dad said "It works in other countries like Canada, but not here because we have an underclass that will abuse it." To me that's just cognitive dissonance.

My Aunt is losing her insurance because of this, just farking put in a single payer system already!
 
2013-02-04 12:10:52 PM  
Part of American exceptionalism is our exceptionally barbaric health care system.  It just wouldn't be the same country if everyone had proper health care.
 
2013-02-04 12:13:11 PM  

Ned Stark: This Face Left Blank: Ned Stark: coeyagi: This will in no way, shape or form convince rubes that single payer is the way to go and that the asshats of the GOP are the reason they can't have it.

Nevermind that congressional dems took single payer off the table themselves before negotiations even became and Obama™ torpedoed the public option.

Just hate the Republicans and mail that check.

Lesser evil, man.  Lesser evil.

OK, that is a coherent reason for lying down with the donkey. I disagree that its a good plan, but it is a thing that it is possible for rational people to do.

But if you think "the Republicans" are the reason we don't have single payer and that actual reform was just two Senate seats away you should probably stop huffing gasoline.


Too much goddamn money and too many lobbyists.  I think just about every group involved in healthcare wants to maintain the status quo, and there's a lot of money behind them.
 
2013-02-04 12:14:06 PM  

Ned Stark: OK, that is a coherent reason for lying down with the donkey. I disagree that its a good plan, but it is a thing that it is possible for rational people to do.

But if you think "the Republicans" are the reason we don't have single payer and that actual reform was just two Senate seats away you should probably stop huffing gasoline.


A clear majority of the Democrats in Congress did want stronger reform, as evidenced by the fact that the House actually passed a bill containing a public option. A bill like this naturally couldn't make it through the Senate because, obviously, it takes more than merely a majority to get legislation like this past the Senate, and the fact that the GOP in its entirety opposed any attempt at reform meant that it was always going to be close to impossible to get certain things passed.

So yeah, singling out the GOP as "the reason" that reform wasn't as meaningful as it should have been seems a reasonably accurate assessment.
 
2013-02-04 12:14:08 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Part of American exceptionalism is our exceptionally barbaric health care system.  It just wouldn't be the same country if everyone had proper health care.


America: Where if you survive your inevitable gunshot wound, you won't be able to afford the hospital bill.
 
2013-02-04 12:14:16 PM  

MattStafford: We have examples of market forces on health care with both cosmetic surgery and lasik, and both have been rather successful.


Both are things that no one needs.
If you have kidney failure, you don't shop around.
Healthcare is primarily an inelastic demand. The market is never going to work.
 
2013-02-04 12:16:31 PM  
What's changed?

STATE RUN HEALTH INSURANCE THAT NEVER EXISTED BEFORE!

I feel the need to advertise that because it seems that they aren't doing a good enough job of that.  Sure, it sucks, but not as much as CORBA or trying to buy insurance yourself.  Hopefully, the State Insurance Exchanges will make it even better.
 
2013-02-04 12:20:08 PM  
 
2013-02-04 12:23:44 PM  
75% of the people who go bankrupt from medical bills... are insured. THEY'RE INSURED.

What a farking shiathole America is.
 
2013-02-04 12:28:33 PM  
Using a conservative definition, 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92% of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5000, or 10% of pretax family income. The rest met criteria for medical bankruptcy because they had lost significant income due to illness or mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations. Three quarters had health insurance. Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 49.6%. In logistic regression analysis controlling for demographic factors, the odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause was 2.38-fold higher in 2007 than in 2001. - Source (Warning: PDF)

Even if you have health insurance, chances are good that you're screwed, my friends. And the rest of you? Well, I guess the rest of you can just die in a gutter like the conservatives wish.

Go fark yourselves, Republicans. Go fark yourselves, conservatives. Go fark yourselves, "libertarians" corporatist knob-gobblers. fark yourselves, each and every one of you. Kill yourselves, you evil shiat-eating bastards.
 
2013-02-04 12:28:42 PM  

shortymac: AcneVulgaris: What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.

Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   What a farking mess.

Because it's socialism! Or as my Dad said "It works in other countries like Canada, but not here because we have an underclass that will abuse it." To me that's just cognitive dissonance.

My Aunt is losing her insurance because of this, just farking put in a single payer system already!


As has been stated, your aunt will be required to buy coverage through a state exchange. Her employer may pay a penalty for that. She can get assistance to help pay for that coverage is she qualifies.
 
2013-02-04 12:28:57 PM  

AcneVulgaris: What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.

Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   What a farking mess.


Because we adopted an employer sponsored method of insurance during WWII.

I guess that means you can blame Hitler and the Capitalists.
 
2013-02-04 12:51:07 PM  

MattStafford: People need food to survive, and I would argue that the market is far better at providing food than the government would be.  We have examples of market forces on health care with both cosmetic surgery and lasik, and both have been rather successful.


Health care is an excellent example of a market that, by definition, is characterized by failure. There is no equity of access to information (do you really need that triple bypass? Only the doctor knows for sure), there is no equity of bargaining position (if I walk away from this transaction the doctor loses an incremental amount of income, but I will die), there is very little demand elasticity (gee, that mastectomy is awfully pricey so maybe you should just learn to live with breast cancer, dear), and there is no available substitute (that triple bypass costs too much, so I'll just get a flu shot instead). No one is going to bargain when he is dying or his children are dying, which is why elective procedures such as cosmetic surgery or lasik are inapposite.

I do agree with you about the med school enrollment.  Basically the opposite of what happened with lawyers - pretty disappointing that our policies have created a glut of lawyers and a shortage of doctors.

As a devotee of the free market, I ask you - if there are a glut of lawyers, why are they so expensive? It's because if you need a lawyer, you need a lawyer. You will not choose to go to jail or sustain a civil judgment simply because it costs too much to hire a lawyer. Again, a classic market failure.
 
2013-02-04 12:54:37 PM  

AcneVulgaris: What's changed is that employers are cutting their hours to make them part time so they don't have to pay the insurance.

Why the fark are employers responsible for compulsory insurance coverage to begin with?   What a farking mess.


That sounds like "supporting single payer like a good chunk of the electorate does when this is described by terms other than 'single payer'.
 
2013-02-04 01:00:34 PM  

BMulligan: MattStafford: People need food to survive, and I would argue that the market is far better at providing food than the government would be.  We have examples of market forces on health care with both cosmetic surgery and lasik, and both have been rather successful.

Health care is an excellent example of a market that, by definition, is characterized by failure. There is no equity of access to information (do you really need that triple bypass? Only the doctor knows for sure), there is no equity of bargaining position (if I walk away from this transaction the doctor loses an incremental amount of income, but I will die), there is very little demand elasticity (gee, that mastectomy is awfully pricey so maybe you should just learn to live with breast cancer, dear), and there is no available substitute (that triple bypass costs too much, so I'll just get a flu shot instead). No one is going to bargain when he is dying or his children are dying, which is why elective procedures such as cosmetic surgery or lasik are inapposite.

I do agree with you about the med school enrollment.  Basically the opposite of what happened with lawyers - pretty disappointing that our policies have created a glut of lawyers and a shortage of doctors.

As a devotee of the free market, I ask you - if there are a glut of lawyers, why are they so expensive? It's because if you need a lawyer, you need a lawyer. You will not choose to go to jail or sustain a civil judgment simply because it costs too much to hire a lawyer. Again, a classic market failure.


I'll take THIS with a side of OMG THIS, and could you put some extra THIS sauce on the side?
 
2013-02-04 01:06:13 PM  
In other world shattering news, companies hire a lot of part time employees because they don't have to provide them with health insurance.
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report