Okay. This is Orwellian evil:
WASHINGTON — The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Wednesday that employers could reduce or eliminate health benefits for retirees when they turn 65 and become eligible for Medicare.
The policy, set forth in a new regulation, allows employers to establish two classes of retirees, with more comprehensive benefits for those under 65 and more limited benefits — or none at all — for those older.
More than 10 million retirees rely on employer-sponsored health plans as a primary source of coverage or as a supplement to Medicare, and Naomi C. Earp, the commission’s chairwoman, said, “This rule will help employers continue to voluntarily provide and maintain these critically important health benefits.”
The RULE will not HELP employers ‘continue to provide…critically important health benefits.’ The RULE specifically allows (or HELPS) employers to drop more than 10 million elderly former employees off their benefit rolls.
Naomi C. Earp is an evil bad person doing the bidding of even more evil and bad people.
Single payer, single payer, single payer, single payer.
Hey Zeus. When can they get more evil? Just when you think they are the epitome of evil, they go and do something so evil that you couldn’t have even contemplated it a year before.
So tell me, what’s this bs about socialized medicine? Obviously we already have it, so let’s make it better.
It’s better to say “Medicare-For-All.” People don’t know what “single-payer” means. I asked someone and they said it sounds like it means if you get sick you have to pay for everything yourself without help. But everyone knows and loves Medicare.
Yes – Medicare for all.
It’s insurance that is evil.
Medicare is one of our most successful government-run enterprises. And that’s the whole point of it – the gov’t serving us all. That’s what it’s for, not for greedy people to make a profit off of us.
Kick the old folks to the curb. Great.
I really don’t understand why American business interests aren’t all over medicare for all. It seems like they would benefit the most if employee health care was not their responsibility.
So, we now have one more argument to use as amunition.
However, In your post I think that a much more frightening aspect is overlooked. After reading the nyt article, What jumped out at me was that the rulling has already been argued before the US Court of Appeals! and it has been sustained by the court. AND THAT IS THE REAL HORROR!
What that evil bastard has done that is the act of a monster is that he has methodically altered the legal structure in such a way so that it will take decades (if at all) to undo what is becomming more apparent daily! Its the effing courts! By destroying the ability for the idea of legal recourse, we are perfectly screwed!
Yet another gift to big business.
This ruling is vile, and will significantly hurt americans. Something needs to be done, and quickly. Is there any recourse at all?
Or maybe we should just wheel our elderly parents into the capitol building and let them die there.
This country is really beginning to fucking suck. I’m really beginning to hate my own country.
Congress could pass a law forbidding this, but then Republicans would call them anti-business. And our Congress folds whenever Republicans call them names.
Republican greed. Right now, Medicare is secondary insurance if you are working. i.e. Your health insurance pays first and Medicare covers what’s left. If you’re not actively employed, it’s the other way around. That’s to encourage insurance companies to sell policys to older people.
If they wanted to help small business, all they had to do was pass a law making Medicare always the primary insurer. This would reduce paperwork and give a break on insurance costs to employers. But the greedy bastards want to cut ALL the costs, leaving older workers with no effective way to get drugs, except the Medicare drug farce.
As one who took care of both parents in my home in their later years, fought for their medical care, was confused daily by billings, SS, AMA ignorance, I can also attest to the premise that elderly folk individually, have no voice to protest. They are vulnerable to this type of abuse and it makes this type of reversal all the more wrong.
Second, good to remember that insurance, unlike retail, bases its bottom line on refusing/denying service rather than providing it.
Aren’t they just saying that “when Medicare can kick in, employers can allow seniors to go on it” or “employers can force seniors on to it.”
Isn’t this somewhat of a good thing? Forcing more to use medicare, a good program?
“All I’m saying is that anything that helps tear down the employment based health care system is ultimately a good thing. Anything that makes morty and betty or whatever their names were recognize that they cannot depend on the employment based health care system is ultimately a good thing. This doesn’t mean that in the short term there might be negative consequences for you or me or any one of us.
[snip]
I completely agree with what this guy says. I believe the fact is that most business leaders (with the exception of the in the health care business) want socialized medicine but for political and social reasons they are unable to openly advocate it. Among other things they would be ostracised at their golf clubs. I believe their plan is to gradually offload more and more of the costs to the employees.
If it is done quickly enough the public will demand relief from the government and we will end up with single payer. If it is done slowly enbough we will have the boiled frog situation, and it isn’t obvious to me what will happen.”
That’s from my pop.