An office restroom in the 90’s had a sign on the wall that read, “Greed is Good.” This phrase was popular in culture when I was younger,
it was part of business school teaching and was commonly accepted. But now, fast forward 20 years and I’d have to say this notion is the cause of much of our American economic woes. I can see pretty clearly the affects played out in business, governement, courts, communities and in families.
Sadly, my generation, born in the 60’s will never be held accountable for events like Enron where greed fueled crazy financial modeling that could explain ways of fashioning the greatest greed. Or, where our government leaders were/are more concerned about a vote than an unborn American life. Continue reading “How Your Greed is Shrinking Your Pay Check”
“This caught my eye over the weekend. Does this change our decision matrix at all?”
This customer is in the middle of making decisions today for their employees. I wrote the email that follows to help them understand what this article is really about. The customer can move ahead as planned but should know more changes are coming for Obamacare. More importantly I explain how this article is an example of how the government and insurers do not care about your health.
If that’s important to you read on.
The article includes this CEO quote,
“We cannot sustain these losses,” Chief Executive Officer Stephen Hemsley told analysts on a conference call. “We can’t really subsidize a marketplace that doesn’t appear at the moment to be sustaining itself.”
My email to my business customer asking about how this UHC article may affect their present decisions for their employees.
Short answer to your question about UHC:
No, what they’re deciding makes no difference for your decision today. Your decision today will only be good until they make more changes and they do that everyday. What you decide today could change tomorrow, that’s not a joke, that’s real.
Long answer to your question about UHC:
Still, the answer is no, this won’t affect you in the short term and you can’t plan long term.
I’ve been using the words, “shifting sands” for 5 years now. The Obamacare law is 5 years old, March 23rd, 2010. Shifting sands means continuous course corrections by all system stake holders that affects more than $2-3 Trillion of the American economy. This means, today UHC is saying they’re out. But, what it actually means is they’re lobbying for more money. What we have going on here is “lobbying for position.” In the halls of congress, the industry exerts leverage in order to get more money from the government. Welcome to modern politics.
Sad, but true, I can confidently say, I’ve never seen a bigger mess. Before Obamacare, Healthcare needed a fix because the insurance industry wouldn’t police itself. But, this isn’t a fix and national healthcare won’t fix it any better either (watch my video on, “US healthcare system in crisis”).
My guess about UHC? UHC and the feds will make up; the feds will give UHC more money (this will drag on over the next few months) and in order to give them money they have to make the fix look like they didn’t. In the end, just more rules, overhead, confusion and frustration; and cost.
Summary: The government is making massive changes everyday while the plane is flying. Thoughtless unread regulations created this mess and their fix is a daily stream of thousands of new patches, regulations, paperwork and confusion. I’ve been living in the trenches for 5 years trying to help employers understand and navigate. The reality and size of this law is starting to impact small employers like you.
There has been NO improvement in health or cost because your health doesn’t matter to them (any of them). What are we going to get if we keep doing what we’ve been doing? Do you expect a different result?
“Insurers say Obamacare changes needed soon to protect companies from losses” USA Today, 11-24-2015.
“New research out this week from Commonwealth Fund shows far fewer people think their insurance premiums and deductibles — from employer-provided or exchange plans — are affordable than the government does when it defines affordability. About 40% of 2,700 people surveyed said they delay care and prescription refills when they were sick because of high deductibles, Commonwealth found.”
All human life matters and to my way of thinking it’s good the autos and government have a way to track responsibility. I live in Detroit so that makes me a car guy. I feel attached to the auto industry. It’s good the cars we drive are safe.
Outrage over car deaths, of course, makes sense. And, the autos have taken responsibility because the government has a good method to enforce the autos to be accountable to the public.
General Motors will pay $900 million to settle criminal charges related to its flawed ignition switch that has been tied to at least 124 deaths.
CNNMoney (New York) September 17, 2015: 2:46 PM ET; “GM CEO: ‘People died in our cars’ ” Poppy Harlow
When I talk about our medical system is broken, it’s clear that if the auto tracking method were applied to hospitals we’d have accountability.
Here’s a quote from the same article;
In the hearing’s closing questions, when Sanders inquired as to why this crisis was not constantly splashed across front page news, he was met with this: “When people go to the hospital, they are sick. It is very easy to confuse the fact that somebody might have died because of a fatal consequence of their disease, versus they died from a complication from a medical error,” Jha said. “It has taken a lot to prove to all of us that many of these deaths are not a natural consequence of the underlying disease. They are purely failures of the system.”
In our premiums and in our government run healthcare we pay for these services.
But, our system requires more fixes than just this. The white paper is breaking apart many pieces of the medical system apparatus in order to demonstrate the areas where the system is broken. Follow the white paper for what’s wrong, then we’ll be publishing the fixes in 1qtr 2016.
A Real Life Story of Accepting ACA Changes for a Small Business
The ACA landscape is “shifting sands,” a phrase we coined a couple years ago as we started designing the “BenStaff ACA Decoder“. I’d expect by now everyone understands ACA like we do. Sadly, this is a long way from true. We’re troubled that so few owners are taking advantage of options but then, there is so much “shifting sands” no one who does this part time should be expected to “get it” fast. There is a thread of continuous change, consider this example; the government just announced that open enrollment that ended 2/15 is open still through 4/15. You can still enroll so don’t miss out. See my post, or talk to one of the agents we like to make sure you don’t miss this NEW open enrollment.
Today begins a Story
Today, I wanted to begin telling a real life story about a family and small business. Of course, names have been changed to protect the innocent (a bit of a Dragnet reference). The reason for it to be a multi-part story, is to allow me to keep tackling the days work. If you follow the story you will learn what’s really happening in the employee benefit world and how it affects you, or could affect you.
It would take too long to write the entire story in one sitting and likely, you wouldn’t have time to read it. If I understand my audience, your interests are different than your neighbor (in viewing anyway). My interest in telling this story is the circumstances cover most every variation for you. Undoubtedly, in this story, there’s something in it for everyone. Owners will appreciate it and also will their HR and Finance staff plus any employee of any employer plus individuals looking for coverage. This story is about any typical business trying under the new law to provide coverage. It should help us collectively understand what ACA means in many different ways.
Part I – a Small Business Looking to Do Better
The story starts with a business who engaged us for our Decoder because they asked the simple question, “we know it’s different than it use to be, and we perceive we could do better but we don’t know how to make the right decision.” This is the question that we answer most of the time. So, here’s a brief background for the story. This is an employer with 18 employees many of whom are part time. We agreed to complete an ACA Decoder for them. We delivered the Decoder to the owners (2 of them) and started the conversation about which of the 3 options was best for them to pursue.
No two employers are the same and no two employers can solve the problems the same. No matter the employer size there are issues employers are facing. There are more than 20 options available to employers. And most employers are facing today’s rate increases with the same tools and intellect as they did last year, or the year before that and this is not serving them well. It’s why no matter your best efforts, you will find employers who use the Decoder do so with added confidence. As you will see with the story as it unfolds over the next few days.
This employer had an agent who was capable by any measure but not attentive to the employers needs. Of course, we established a connection with the current agent by encouraging them to participate with the completion of the Decoder. They objected to the idea and explained they would not be participating. This is so unfortunate, why would an agent not want to work with BenStaff or me to help a customer make a better decision and implement change? This kind of reception by the agent community really doesn’t make sense but we offered introductions to local agents who we knew who would work with us to develop the Decoder. The new agent worked with us to develop options, added a new customer and delivered the services I told the customer they should expect.
Too bad for the old agent but as you will see, the story ends happily every after in the end, you will see how we helped the employer navigate the ACA shifting sands by digging in and getting it done.
I’ll post Part II in the next day or so. Stay tuned.
Rationing is being downplayed just as the “Gruber” economics was previously.
Gruber Gaff, his economics doesn’t get to the real economics
Gruber disguised the true Obamacare objectives and misled the public; at least that’s what I read and hear.
If we keep focused on the Washington yelling match and taking sides the true problem and its’ solutions will continue to be disguised. The “Gruber Gaff” only serves to confuse the many problems in healthcare. No model from Gruber actually gets at the real problems of healthcare economics and that’s why the financial architect of Obamacare was never going to solve “rising Healthcare” prices.
Fighting over right or left politics may make politicians winners but the American public will pay more for their healthcare premium. Gruber is the architect;
“His real contribution, according to most former congressional staffers who actually drafted the legislation, was to provide the economic models to figure out what the impact of different choices would be—like what different levels of subsidies would cost, and especially what would happen to the mix of healthy and sick people if there was no individual mandate.”
Only One Alternative for the Future; “death panels”
“Medicare advisory board that the party has assailed as a death panel.”
The only solution that is possible given the lack of focus by legislators on both sides of the aisle is rationing. It’s a sad day when we consider that rationing healthcare as mentioned in, “The Hill,” article. The democrats have downplayed the death panel discussion since Obamacare’s beginning but the reality that any language is included points to the reality that Gruber, and other architects knew. Healthcare without policy reform had only one option. That was, and is, to limit costs by not allowing some services.
Americans don’t see it coming but it’s clear as a bright full moon, without our politicians joining forces against the forces pushing up healthcare costs, Americans will most certainly have healthcare rationed. American business owners, employees and individuals must begin a conversation that’s all-together different than all of what has gone before. Here’s the Politico article: BenStaff history: GOP pins hopes of dismantling ObamaCare on the courts _ TheHill