Deseret News | Part 3: Little choice — Small companies struggle to provide health benefits

Reader comments
Part 3: Little choice — Small companies struggle to provide health benefits

AGAIN..... | 11:12 p.m. Oct. 19, 2009

Suppose we had insurance coverage for car repairs. My suspicion is, it wouldn't be long till we couldn't afford to replace a muffler without it. To my way of thinking, we continue to head in the wrong direction. Progress is when we can meet the demands of life on our own and not need the "village" to get by. I wonder what hospitals,doctors, medical schools, etc. would charge if no one had insurance coverage. My guess- what the market could bare.... just like plumbers, electricians and auto mechanics. I know two young couples who were expecting and hadn't any insurance. They got on assistance because they didn't dare go through child birth without it. I can't blame them.... BUT is this really progress? Folks have been having babies since the beginning and now in the 21st century we don't dare without insurance. Sorry, it doesn't sound like progress to me. Wouldn't it be nice if we all dropped our insurance and let health care charge like any other service provider. Who knows- we might see more innovations in treatments.It'll never happen but I can dream can't I?

Groups | 11:45 p.m. Oct. 19, 2009

The law should allow these independent contractors and owners to join together and form a group to bargain for insurance.

Small Business Owner | 12:48 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

This is a huge problem for small businesses. We have had to change our benefit program or absorb increases every year for the last 10 years. If the politicians would actually listen to small business owners, which actually employ more Americans than anybody else, they would find that if there was more competition in the insurance industry, we might all be able to find a policy that works for us. Utah isn't different from the rest of the country where 2 or 3 insurance companies control the market. Why can't companies cross state lines? That is just counterproductive. Utah has done more to help business find insurance solutions with the pool and others. I would love to see a group as "groups" stated above. Why this couldn't happen I don't understand. The more I have to put the cost on employees the fewer employees I have taking advantage of the program. Though it reduces the cost outlay, it reduces group size which will increase my rate over time.

Comments continue below

Organize/Unionize | 3:01 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

The best plan for all of the working americans is for all labor to organize and/or unionize. Since large corporations have been effective in killing organized labor the american people have become slave workers.

In the past labor unions were representing the workers and had a lot of influence in how the workers shared profits and benefits. Now large employers consider all workers expendable slobs with no brains.

There are two major benefits for unions and organized labor, profit sharing and representation of many in negotiating with insurance companies about insurance costs. Insurance companies would make changes and coverages to benefit the insured with the mass of workers available to an insurance company. And at one time when labor unions were speaking for organized workers, business were not permitted by law to abandon america and leave for cheap foreign labor. Congress changed the law so american companies could abandon america and kill organized labor.

These large corporations have done very well to discredit unions and brainwash the new generation workers to submissive wages and loss of profit sharing. Read the history on unions and what they did for america and stop listening to the lies.

Where was the leadership? | 6:24 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Health-insurance premiums for Utah working families increased 85 percent between 2000 and 2007.

While Bush sat in the White House with a Republican majority in congress, the big insurance companies made a killing and the little guy paid the price.

I am glad the Democrats are at lest trying to help the American people.

Sara | 6:34 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Love the comment by Again.... So true. Why is Des news jumping on the Obama bandwagon?

Anonymous | 7:11 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

The current system is unfriendly to families and small business. Even the big businesses are struggling with health insurance issues. This is why the reforms proposed in Washington are needed. It will only get worse without the U.S. joining the first world nations.

Barbara | 7:23 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

After working for large corporations all of our married life, my husband was laid off in the spring. He was fortunate enough to find a new job, but one working for a small business that offers no insurance. For the first time in our lives, we are faced with these difficult issues. We have five children and I do not work. It seem ridiculous that we have virtually no options!

What? | 7:24 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Unbelievable, "..Again) Of course there was a time when health care could be paid for out of pocket, or let's say with a chicken and pail of milk. Health care at that time consisted of leeches, blood letting, and some home made remedies. Of course a person would only live until 50 but who cares let's go back. I speak in hyperbole a little but not much. In what world do you think anyone other than the ultra rich could personally pay for scans, multiple surgeries, and years of chemo therapy? It's the shared risk priciple that's allowed the development of our current health care. It's not our health care that is being questioned now only our means of distribution and access.

Re: Organize/Unionize | 7:47 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

I would agree with most of what you say if unions had a history of being what they claim..altruistic organizations that care primarily about the welfare of the average worker.

Unfortunately, just like every other group given significant power, they have a history of fraud, corruption, abuse of power, and outright stupidity.

Just look at some of the unions we have today that are literally killing the companies they work for.

I'm not saying that corporations do the best things either, but simply forming a union does not solve all our problems.

Wrex | 8:08 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

To AGAIN 11:12:

Ya, you go ahead and drop your health insurance. I'm sure "the market" will take care of you and everything will be hunky dory.

Let me know how that works out for you.

Bruce | 8:09 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Commenter used this article to throw in his pro-union propoganda. Ask any small business owner if he would like to see his employees unionize and I'm sure most will say that would be the quickest way for them to get out of owning a business altogether. Unions think that jobs grow on trees and it is their right to dictate the terms of employment. Without business owners taking risks and investing money there would be no jobs. Unions push companies to the brink while trying to not kill them outright. Good companies will treat their employees well and both will work together to each others benefit. History has clearly shown that countries that prosper and create jobs have free economies, where citizens have the freedom to create, invest, hire, and let go if need be. In Italy it is impossible to let go employees, therefore, hiring is curtailed, and investment is stiffled. Communism is the ultimate expression of bottom-up management, the proletariate (workers) in charge. Ask China or Russia if this system works.

Anonymous | 8:24 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

The comment by "Again" is great. Wish we could all see how digressive our situation is.

re: Groups 11:45pm | 8:30 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Law, schmaw!
Why are you so dependent on BigBrother having to give permission for everything?

No law stops these independent contractors and owners from joining together and forming groups to bargain for insurance.
Many risk-takers, aka insurance companies, encourage them to do that.
Get off your chair and make a business of organizing them. Everybody will win.

Amen Brother! | 8:32 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

I don't belong to a corrupt union! Most of them are just that!

BH | 8:49 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Health care has not kept pace with the technological advances in other industries in spite of what the health industry proponents claim. In many ways the care is declining while costs are sky rocketing. It is interesting that Republicans concede to a need for reform but offer vague and largely unworkable solutions. I am not a fan of having government take over large sectors of our economy, but private interprise is not providing what is needed in health care at this point and major changes are needed in the way we provide health care. The model that is in place right now does not provide for competition - the system is largely an oligarchy with few if any free market mechanisms in the way it operates. Even if 50% of the people were getting what they are paying for (and I seriously doubt that is the case in spite of the media polls) there needs to be some type of compassionate care for those who are "on the outside looking in" where health care is concerned. I believe that were an analysis conducted we would find that people receive less return for their medical dollar than for Social Security contributions.

Ultra Bob | 8:58 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

There’s a simple solution to the problem of employee insurance costs for businesses. Stop paying for employee insurance. As a matter of fact, make it a felony crime for a business to pay for any individuals personal insurance, even the owner.

It would be better for our economy and our society if the products we buy only contained the necessary and proper costs, instead of extraneous unnecessary expenditures like employee personal insurance.

All people could then participate in a more free market for their health care.

Something I don’t understand, the people at the tea parties and the march in Washington were mainly business people. Why are business people against health care reform and also against paying for employee health care?

Paul | 9:02 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Dessert News: This may come as a schock to you and the the AP editors, The bottom line is that the majority of the american people do not want Ombama Care!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AmericanCitizen | 9:21 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

While participating in this exchange helps the uninsured, the cost is still very high.Sadly, the "carriers" (Insurance Companies) have few incentives to reduce the cost of their premiums. This is why a Public Healt Insurance Option is needed to provide more competetion in the market place. Without more competetion,the insurance carriers just reap more enrollees in their expensive plans. Their CEOs and stock holders are the real winners, not the American people. We need to support a public option to bring some balance into the runaway system. Happily, it appears that the American people are starting to get it (even Utahns).

To Again | 9:29 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Your comment just makes too much sense for Obama supporters to comprehend. Look at all the examples of things the government has fixed and how efficient they are. I'm sure they will do a great job with our health care.

Healthcare Professional | 9:33 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Small Business Owner - you comments are right on target! We need more Americans to start thinking in the same vein. Only then will the appropriate changes we need happen.

government responsible | 9:39 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

It is government that has enabled the frivolous lawsuit frenzy over the past 30 years...it is government that has regulated the free market choking competition across state lines...it is people that rely on government who do not prepare for emergencies, it is they who visit the doctor every time they get a sniffle or sneeze. These irresponsible people "who's bellies are not satisfied, and who lay their hands on other men's goods (money)..." are the greedy and they wish to tear down the whole so they can get a shingle. QUESTION WITH BOLDNESS!

no obama care? | 9:52 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

well just do what you all are doing , hire more illegals so there!

wallofvoodoo | 10:24 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Ultra Bob,

usually, business owners can't deduct insurance as a business expense. Even if they turn a profit, they pay SS & Medicare tax on it.

Unions will put small business out of business. & god luck paying for cancer treatment out of pocket. Even "easy" to treat cancer treatment 12 years ago was more than $100,000.

The public option is pandering to people saying we a capatalists & should act accordingly. Fine if we are, quit the pork spending & we can talk about being a capatilist.

A simpler way to deal with it would be to regulate the industy. Regulation is how we keep the dishonest people from taking advantage of the system. Banks are regulated (granted not always well). Insurance is regulated, the stock market is regulated etc. Why not health care?

Anonymous | 10:45 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

For all of you who love "AGAIN.....'s" comments:

Go ahead and drop your health insurance. If you are working for a company that offers it, as a matter of principle you should change jobs to one that doesn't. Then when you, your spouse, or your child gets sick or has an injury, don't seek any healthcare that you can't afford. Rather, let yourself, your spouse, or your child die a slow miserable death. That's progress!

Anonymous | 11:04 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Small Business Owner, the reason insurance companies shouldn't be allowed to cross state lines is it would be a race to the bottom in health care. Look at how people are held hostage by credit card companies "located" across state lines. Do you want the same thing to happen in health care? We need a robust public option and every state having the same quality of care and protections for their citizens.

Stupid is as stupid does | 11:27 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

If I don't like paying for new mufflers I can always buy a new car that I won't have to repair as often. Until I can do that with my body, I'd prefer to leave market forces to marketable items.

Serious Question | 11:58 a.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Can anyone tell me a country that has really good health care that utilizes socialized health care? I would like to research that country, I can't find one. Actually I have two questions. Can anyone name a program that the government has taken over that has not cost more than predicted and was actually improved because of government intervention? Once again I can not find an example. However I can find lots of examples of the government totally messing things up. Just look at our economy right now.

Sad | 12:01 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

That is such a sad story (sniff). We better enact Obamacare NOW! Oh wait. Wonder what would happen if the free market was able operate with government interference?

Anonymous | 12:28 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Agains' comments are pathetic. There is a simple solution to every complex problem, and its always wrong.

What are we going to get in the end. Nothing, thanks to the spineless democrats kowtowing to the no solution republicans.

A light went on for me | 12:40 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

A light just went on in me about healthcare: we know too much; we want too much; & we want someone else to pay for what we know is out there & want. We want unlimited healthcare. You know, the Fort Knox kind that keeps people like President Obama, Warren Buffet, Oprah, & Bill Gates in the pink. Unlimited, unrestrained, personalized medical care with top-drawer technology, service & expertise.

Nope, it ain't going to happen. In any healthcare system, inequality will always exist between them that has & them that don't; & of course between those that are lucky & those that aren't. There will always be a difference between these users of healthcare in how much access, availability,affordability,technology, science, & professional quality & skills that they will have.

No Socialist, no Communist, no Capitalist, no Republican, no Democrat, no Independent, no Liberal, No Conservative plan can create equality in healthcare. Not enough money, doctors, hospitals, medicine, technology, & science. Difference is inherent in any healthcare system.

So what do we do? Play Russian roulette, get insurance, live healthy, be charitable, pray. and vote against government takeover of 1/6th the economy.

2 Insurances still hurts! | 12:57 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

I have both types on insurance, yep double covered. Union through my husbands work and Select Health through my work. We pay out a lot each month for each one for me, him and our 19 year old son! Each deductible for medical and prescription is unbelievable. FYI - Union doesn't pay for ANY kind of Women’s Yearly Health Care, doesn't matter that you NEED to have a mammogram yearly to avoid cancer, doesn't matter that I had cervical cancer when I was 19, I'm 42 and have to HAVE yearly tests to make sure I'm cancer free, they still won't pay for that. They won't pay for immunizations, won't pay for birth-control unless you need it then you have to have a note from the doctors stating such - each year, oh wait they won't pay for that visit! AND Union would drop our son if he wasn't a full time college student holding 15 credits! So either way it's not all great, but I'm glad I have both, some of my scripts for 9 pills would be $200 a month for generic.

SLC gal | 1:27 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Call me stupid, but I don't get it. A lot of people say that a public option for all is the answer, but if that option is being set up in same corrupt system as employer benefits, how is that going to be any different, cheaper, affordable, etc.....

Crazy Talk | 1:41 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

This is all a bunch of crazy talk. There is no reason that your employer should be involved in your health insurance. There should be no need for small companies to go begging insurance companies for group rates.

I think the federal government should make its already existing plans open to anyone that wants to sign up. No exclusions or prior conditions. Doesn't matter if their reason is for cost or convenience. If any government makes a requirement to have insurance, then they should have to provide it as an option, in the same way as the state WCF (which is a good example of government involvement in insurance).

The real need is for medical care, not medical insurance. If governments would start opening up clinics and hospitals and pay the staff decent wages, they could just let sick people walk in for health care. No billing departments, no dealing with insurance companies -- that would save a lot of money right there. No money or care if you don't show up and are sick, so there can't be anything like the medicare fraud that loses billions of dollars a year.

Market drop raises premiums | 1:53 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

I'm no expert on how this works. However, my understanding is that insurance companies are required by state law to keep a certain amount of resources (i.e. money from premiums) available to cover claims. Guess where most insurance companies put this money? Yep, investments. So, one reason why costs have gone way up over the past 1-2 years is because insurance companies have lost a ton of money in their investments in marketable securities. The increase in premiums is to help them recover enough money to cover claims, and to meet state required capital requirements. I'm not supporting the increases in premiums, just trying to explain, at least from what I understand, is one of the major factors for the increases this year. Yes, I hate the premium increases, too.

Gary | 2:00 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

A thought comes to mind. Why are we as a nation so dependent on insurance making the payments to our doctors and hospitals for our health needs? Whatever happened to saving the money into special accounts for health needs and working with the industry that way? Since the companies opted to use health insurance paying for it as a way to entice good workers, it's now crept in as being the only way to get insurance and this is nuts. The public option will bring back our choice of health care in a far better way and bring us OUT of the grasp of requiring a business or company to insure us. Shouldn't we be the ones insuring ourselves without depending on a company to do it? What we have in our health care system is ridiculous. I've learned there is a system that works. Health Savings Accounts (HSA). Google it and you will find information about it. Puts control back into our hands and not into the hands of insurance companies. Insurance companies are running us dry and getting rich off of it.

Increases From 2000-2007 | 2:29 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

The article mentions the increases during that time frame, guess which party was in office and had a majority? There are many complaints about the Obama decision making the past 10 months, but tell me where we would be now if the same party that lead us into this mess where still in control? Please you Utah majority smarties give us know nothings an example as to what your party would have done. These greedy insurance mongrels and the pharmacy industry are doing to this country what the financial people just got through doing to us. Do any of you know by now what that is or was? I guess your answers will be just let it operate the same way it is going. Lets hear your answers Repubs!

controling medical care cost | 2:42 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

We must control the cost of medical care. All this talk about insurance is insane! The insurance companies just pass on the cost of care. Control the cost of the actual medical care. Have medical tests and diagnosis shared and cut the cost of the care. Tort reform is a big part of the rising cost of care. Cost of care is the elephant in the room and we are woried about the mouse of insurance.

Dave | 3:26 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

One problem is doctors. Example I went to get my eye exam and to purchase new contacts. My sister worked for the doctors office and told me it would be cheaper to buy my contacts then to use my insurance to get them. I thought the whole reason for insurance was for the common worker to afford health care, but then I think doctors see insurance as a way of padding their paychecks. They charge the insurance company more for the service then other wise needed. That is what I think the problem is.

Anonymous | 5:11 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

The Problem with the First Analogy is if Auto Repairs are doctor Visit - If I go into the car repair shop and they tell me I need a new engine, I buy a new car. If they say a family member needs a new heart I not going to buy a new family member. Of course cost would go down if we paid for all our cost (competition/free market) but it does not protect me against the new engine.

In the last 10 years I have 3 emergency room visits stitches all three times and one surgery (16 visits to Physical therapist or Doctor.) And maybe 2 other visits to a doctor.

If there was not Insurance Companies the cost of all my doctor visits would be cheaper and the total cost would be a lot less money than what I am paying for insurance, but if during the last 10 years I got Cancer and I had to go to the Doctor 50 visits it would be much more

Grateful | 5:28 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Fortunately, the majority of Americans disagree with the sentiments expressed by most of the posters on this board. Poll after poll.

Employers should be out of the health care insurance business - period.

Health insurance should be available to all - it's called risk sharing.

US health care is the most expensive per person, and caries the highest per-person administrative overhead costs of any nation in the world. That fact alone tells you where the problem lies.

MD | 7:35 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Dave: 3:26; your sister may have been correct: cheaper to buy than to use insurance..that points to the insurance company, not the doctor, as the source.. just think about it...
It would be easy to shave 30% off the cost...If I didn't have to bill for every single little interaction, and the ins. didn't have to review every bill that would cut costs tremendously.. thus the argument for catastrophic coverage only (cancer, heart attack, etc) and pay the rest out of pocket... preferably using a pre-tax HSA. I wouldn't have the overhead of billing for everything, thus I drop my prices. Ins. co's don't have to review every claim,(just the big things) thus their overhead likewise declines.. Because catastrophic is (should be) a lot cheaper, (since it hardly ever pays out).. should be lots of money that now goes to the ins. co,, that can go to your HSA to cover the cost of your visits/ meds/ tests, etc, and your money goes a lot farther, plus you are in charge of where and how it is spent, not them, and not Washington, no new bureacracy, no new taxes

reality | 8:25 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Everyone who thinks the National Health in England and Canada is so great should talk to someone who has had to get on a waiting list to have a blood test, a surgery etc. These can be long lists. We don't have that in America now but we will with National health care. Forget about getting quick service. Everyone will be triaged and put on a list and no matter how miserable you are you could wait up to 6 years for a needed but not life threatening. No matter how bad you felt you would wait. I know this because of a friend of mine whose father lived in England. He could not come to visit her for 6 yrs for fear of missing the call that he was up for his surgery. The more the government gets involved in our lives the less freedom we really have. think about it.

Stacey | 1:13 p.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Glad someone intelligently rebuke pro-union talk, after all, unions have done so much for the American auto industry.

Often, I hear people complain about the rising insurance costs and then say they have health care costs far exceeding their premiums and I think, "Are you serious?!" If you are consuming more than you are paying in premiums, SHUT UP! I have a healthy family and we consume a 1/10 of our premium, yet I don't complain. I understand there are a lot of factors that can be addressed to lower costs, such as unnecessary treatments or double proceedures. How about dropping a coverage if you have double coverage if it really doesn't benefit you and spare ONE employer the premium cost? Be a conscious consumer and do your part instead of trying to 'Get you moneies worth'. I know a woman that complains about the cost of the Bonieva she takes for her Ostioporsis...I told her 'Don't take it'. My point is, don't complain about the cost of the meal with your mouth full when the rest of us that are also paying for it aren't eating.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.