• Xyre@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    46 minutes ago

    Or switching to worse providers, like UHC of all things.

    I really struggle to understand HR’s thought process there, seeing the news and still deciding to make that choice.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Push everyone onto the private market and jack the prices up with worse service. Just like everything else.

    Because even though the employer health care was shitty for a lot of reasons it did have one thing going for it: the ability of a powerful corporation to negotiate the best rates it could in order to keep its costs down.

    If it’s no longer tied to jobs, we lose that last advantage.

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      If the market worked, sure. Eventually it became a selling point that looks acceptable to job applicants, but is practically useless when needed. Tons of market failures because of all the monopolies.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I’m not arguing in favor of employer health care. I’m only pointing out the single benefit it offered vs health care being run like Netflix or any other subscription service that enshittifies further and charges you more every chance it gets.

        • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          But in reality we don’t get that collective bargaining benefit at all because the employer doesn’t represent our interests. They’re getting the entire surplus.

          Imagine a corrupt union, that bargains on your behalf but takes nearly all the surplus. Your employer is even worse than that.

    • Limonene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      There was another reason: Employer-provided health insurance is not taxed as income in the US. This is the main reason healthcare is tied to employment.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        I know of no place that cites the taxes as a “benefit” or a main reason.

        Health care was tied to employment as a means to attract workers. That’s it. The fact any of it is untaxed is at the whim of the government, not the employer. If anything the employer-based health care is a shackle, you lose your job or get fired you lose insurance.

        I’m sure if enough people get kicked off employer health care or enough corpos say they’re no longer offering it the government will allow some sort of pre-tax or no-tax income allowance to individuals based on reported health insurance costs.

        Maybe.

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Yeah, it’s bad for we poors. But we’re not the ones in power.

    We’re only allowed to have beneficial laws that don’t cost the billionaires something.

  • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Even Trump before said he favoured affordable healthcare because it means not tying healthcare to employers. Now, he did a u-turn probably because he’s going senile and having been bought by the insurance industry.

  • anon_8675309@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Yes! It was a horrible idea.

    But this is a good thing. People think employers actually pay for their benefits. That’s not how total compensation works.

    We need this. It won’t be easy but we need this.

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      12 hours ago

      And for the ones where it is, they’ll just choose United, and then you can’t get healthcare anyway because none of the clinics will bill United Health because of their denial rate.

      Literally not a single physical therapy office, occupational therapy office, immunotherapy, asthma clinic, or essentially any other outpatient facility within 100 miles of me takes United Health.

      And they’ve managed to swindle this in such a way that I can’t even appeal denied claims because they do this in such a manner: the claim is considered invalid from the provider’s side until the provider follows an appeals process for every single claim (which many of these providers cannot do). They don’t have the resources to go through an appeals process for every claim, which requires their doctors to actually be on the phone with United.

      • The Velour Fog @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Can confirm. Going through this bullshit with United Hellcare with trying to establish psych care. It’s like they are actively trying to prevent me from finding a doctor and it isn’t doing any favors for my already struggling mental health

        • tmyakal@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 hours ago

          It’s like they are actively trying to prevent me from finding a doctor

          They are. The less you use their services, the more money they make.

      • Jake Farm@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        12 hours ago

        If no one takes their insurance, they aren’t actually insurance, they are a ponzi scheme.

      • Zarobi@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Worst of all, these fuckers are the reason why when I try to type “unless” on my swipe keyboard, half the time it types United instead.

    • arrow74@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I’m curious if this “progressive” movement takes hold. This could be for the democrats what the tea party was for the Republicans. The RNC did everything it could to push out the tea party faction, but they won and took over the party.

      Maybe the new wave of Democratic socialists can do the same to the DNC.

      Then again I’m not sure we can survive the 2 or 3 election cycles necessary to get there

    • fodor@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Which Democrats? You did not clarify, and it matters, especially when you are using defeatist rhetoric…

      • Cataath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        DNC leadership, the rotating villains that help pass ghoulish legislation, and the rank-and-file Dems who are happy to go on the news to criticize the DSA (who are not socialists, just pro- regulation and social services, aka governing). Pro-corprate and pro-AIPAC Dems need to be defeated just as much as Republicans.