With Wal-Mart cutting health insurance on some part time workers (fewer than 30 hrs/wk), about 30,000 will consequently lose health benefits. These changes are coming as the company plans to incur an additional $500M in health-care costs this year.
Is this a negative result of the ACA? Why would some people say that "Obamacare is to blame here?" Who is to blame here?
http://online.wsj.com/articles/wal-mart-to-end-health-insurance-for-some-part-time-employees-1412694790?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories
I find it extremely hard to believe that Obamacare is not at fault here. If Wal-Mart provided health insurance for these employees previously and could afford to cover these workers, then why soon after Obamacare is passed can they simply not afford to provide it anymore. The fact that Wal-Mart's health insurance for its workers is going up an additional $500 million in the same year that Obamacare was started says a lot about its consequences on businesses in the US. If Obamacare can effectWal-Mart, one of the biggest businesses in the US, then imagine what it is doing to other business in the US.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with John. Obamacare seems to play a major role in this change of health insurance policy imposed by Wal-Mart. The ACA is having an immediate impact on big businesses by increasing healthcare costs. These companies refuse to pay for the insurance which is harming part time employees. It will be interesting to see how companies both large and small react to Obamacare in the next couple of years.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you both. And I think this is something we'll start to see more often as more companies feel the effects of Obamacare.
ReplyDeleteI also have the same opinion. We have seen the efficiency of Obamacare and now, we start to see the negative effects of Obamacare. And the poor people have to suffer from it as always. The more we try to fix the inequality, the worse it could get. Is our government getting so dysfunctional that nothing could be done for the people's rights?
ReplyDeleteI'm reminded that Trader Joe's made a similar move. I see this as a positive effect of the ACA. By subsidizing individual purchase of health care, the law puts individual coverage on a more equal footing with the distorted subsidized employer sponsored care. Now, these individuals can use the subsidy to purchase a plan that works best for them.
ReplyDelete