Honestly, What Did They Expect Employers to Do?

Big surprise:

Forever 21 Caught in Obamacare Controversy

President Obama creates Obamacare. He makes 30 hours a week “full time” and forces employers to provide health insurance for “full time” employees. Employers respond by slashing hours below 30 hours per week.


What did the Obama Administration expect would happen?

People can gripe all they want but businesses and people operate on incentives. Politicians tend to forget this.


Perhaps the Obama administration expected exactly this would happen in order to pave the way for…

A single-payer system.

18 thoughts on “Honestly, What Did They Expect Employers to Do?”

  1. I don’t blame the employers at all. But while I’ve heard the theory before that Obamacare would “pave the way” for a single-payer system, I don’t really understand how it would do so. It is my understanding that there was such opposition to a single-payer system that Obamacare was the only means of health care reform that could be made law. A couple of things about it (of many) bother me that I will mention. First, I don’t like that it’s called “affordable”. *I* decide what is affordable when it comes to our household. I feel the same way about the name of the law as I do about businesses such as “Affordable Legal Services”. Secondly, I feel certain that Obamacare cannot work, based on my understanding of finance, medical costs, health insurance costs, etc.

    I believe that everyone – those who oppose and those who support Obamacare – should want it fully implemented as soon as possible. I don’t like it at all that the employer mandate has been delayed. Neither do I believe in repealing the law without implementing it. It IS the law, put it in full force now. With my certainty that it can’t work, I am puzzled about those who don’t want it implemented. It makes me think that they think it can work, as the president and supporters of the law do.

    Do you have the idea that the opposition to a single-payer system has somehow disappeared from the minds of those who opposed it in the past?

  2. I think what is confusing you is 0bamacare’s supporters’ goals. When they say they think 0bamacare will “work,” they mean it will achieve their goal of paving the way for the government monopoly of health care, which is their ultimate goal.

    Looked at in that light, 0bamacare is quite likely to work as intended.

  3. “But Forever 21 is denying its decision to cut hours is related to the overhaul, writing on Facebook that the cutbacks are “based on projected store sales, completely independent of the Affordable Care Act.” Obamacare will go into effect in 2014, although the government has delayed the mandate that employers provide coverage to full-time employees until 2015.”

    But don’t let facts get in the way of your conspiracy theories. 🙂

  4. When you look at Forever 21, taking up tens of thousands of expensive floor space in malls, yet selling $5 shirts, you know that they’re going to cut any and all expenses to the bone everywhere else they possibly can.

  5. And Jack believes that both Obama and Forever 21 are secretly hoping the major reform named after Obama will fail, all in the hopes of instituting a single payer health system at some point in time after Obama leaves office.

    Who else is in on the scheme in your conspiracy theory? I suspect you think doctors are in on it too because more and more are dropping medicare patients because (the doctors think) medicare doesn’t pay them enough. Also the insurance companies must be in on it too, as they are keep raising ins premiums despite massive profits.

    One summer when I was a teen over two decades ago, I worked two part-time jobs, 39 hours a week for both, because neither wanted to pay benefits or pay me “time and a half” for overtime. Was Obama in on that too?

  6. @Yana,

    Obamacare (A.K.A. the Un-affordable Healthcare act) paves the way for single payer because it is meant to fail. It’s a colossus of bureaucratic inefficiencies that imposes bankrupting regulation on insurers (ex.: no denial of coverage).

    When insurance companies either go out of business or hike premiums/deductibles enough, people will clamor for “someone” to do “something.”

    At that point, the statists in government will step up, blame greedy insurers for all the failings of Obamacare and offer true gov’t run healthcare as the only solution to keep costs low and ensure that everyone is insured.

    Then the shortage of healthcare providers will hit. But hey, it’s “free” healthcare which is a natural right after all…

  7. No less that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that 0bamacare is just a step toward single-payer.

    Government-run health care IS the goal. At least Sen. Reid was honest enough to admit it.

  8. Got a citation for that Jack? The best I can find is that Reid said he wants a medical system that doesn’t require insurance to access it. I want that too: but that sure as h3ll doesn’t mean I want a single payer system.

    I want a system devoid of fraud where a person (or his insurance provider) is charged the exact same amount for a ‘procedure’ whether they have medical insurance or not. Pricing information should be easily accessible so that I, the consumer, can shop around and make the providers compete in an open/free/fair market.

    The medical industry feels like a complete scam, and don’t you dare set foot in a hospital if you don’t have insurance (or they don’t ‘take’ the insurance you do have).

  9. So how, praytell, are you going to get a medical system that does not require insurance, but is a not “single-payer” (i.e., government-run) medical system?

    How would that work?

    When the cost to the provider depends on whether the patient has insurance, why should the cost to the patient not depend on whether he has insurance?

  10. How are the provider’s costs different if a patient has insurance or not? If anything, the provider should charge patients without insurance LESS because there is no insurance filling overhead.

    Instead, we have a system where the medical provider charges patients without insurance 5-10x more than they would to a patient without insurance.

    It always makes be laugh when I hear a doctor claiming that insurance companies are the problem with skyrocketing medical costs. The providers are the problem with their “take him for all he’s worth” billing practices when you don’t have an insurance company keeping the doctors in check.

    You asked how this system would work — it is simple: doctors need to charge the same rates whether you have insurance or not.

  11. “Instead, we have a system where the medical provider charges patients without insurance 5-10x more than they would to a patient without insurance.”

    Oops, typo above. It should read:

    “Instead, we have a system where the medical provider charges patients without insurance 5-10x more than they would to a patient WITH insurance.”

  12. I have been seeing the same doctor for most of my life. I have also had periods of time where I was uninsured.

    Whenever I went to see him for the same type of service (physicals, reoccurring bronchitis, etc.), my bill was always the same. The difference was how much I was initially billed to pay out of pocket. If I offered payment in full at the time of service and let the office know I was uninsured, the bill would dramatically drop. When I inquired as to why, it was due to having to inflate costs because insurance pays out pennies on the dollar for covered charges. Inflating the costs was the only way to cover the actual expense incurred by the office. The “cash discount” price would be what would be charged to everyone if the insurance companies didn’t play games trying to reduce their payments.

  13. Adam got lucky. There are plenty of horror stories on the net where people talk about the insane prices that people are charged when they don’t have insurance or are flagged “out of network”.

    A few years back when my daughter had braces, my company dropped orthodontic care from the dental plan 1 year into her multi-year treatment. I had already paid my part (in full) of the treatment the year prior.

    The orthodontic office billed me for the money they were no longer getting (monthly) from the insurance company (which is logical) PLUS AN ADDITIONAL $1,500 because they said I no longer had a “contacted” rate anymore.

    These people are blood suckers, and you better pay the protection money for insurance.

Comments are closed.