Yet aehotnr day, yet aehotnr boldfaced lie from the Administration. I don’t think so. The admin is saying privately purchased premiums avg more than employer purchased ones. The WSJ quotes the CBO as asserting privately purchased premiums are 1/3 lower. How can this be?1. Is it apples to apples? Since privately purchased plans face both a tax disadvantage AND selection disadvantage (pre-existing conditions? you’re premiums are much higher!) the people who DO buy private plans may be buying less coverage. Additionally people for whom private premiums would be very high do opt not to buy private coverage so the actual plans purchased privately do end up being 1/3rd less. That doesn’t make it untrue to assert that if you took 100 random people getting employer coverage today and tried to make them buy coverage privately their premiums would end up higher.2. It doesn’t make any sense. If privately purchased coverage is 1/3 less than employer coverage it begs the question of:a. Why aren’t benefit experts employed by big employers doing their job of extracting value with their bargaining power?b. Why aren’t employees demanding higher pay in exchange for no coverage? At 33% savings the tax benefits are being eclipsed.
powered by SEO Super Comments