true or false (health care edition)

[WalterMitty]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

2.  government provided health care has to be better than the health care millions of poors now receive....which is little or none.

both statements are of course true.  now it is time for our politicos to get a dose of reality and fix the problem.

[Citizen James]

Just to check your numbers, a quick and dirty estimation of the careers which are likely to have the largest numerical growth (according to BLS statistics):

Retail sales ~ 800K  Rarely include health insurance.
Nurses ~700K Generally some sort of health care, though underpaid.
Post secondary teachers ~ 600K generally good health insurance.
Customer service ~ 500K Variable, but for most call centers no.
Janitors ~450K Sometimes, but not generally
Waitstaff ~400K not generally
Food prep ~400K No
Home health aids ~350K Unknown
Orderlies ~350K probably minimal if at all
Operations managers ~350K Insurance is probably included, though may be minimal for low level managers (AKA mcmanagers)

So for the top 10 jobs with the most numberical growth, we have about 4.9 million Jobs.  Of those, 2.9 Million are likely to be 'McJobs' with low pay and minimal to no health insurance (Retail, Customer service, Janitors, waitstaff, food prep, probably home health aides, and orderlies).

So you may be right.

I think the biggest problem is probably shortsightedness - 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure' may sound cliche, but when the poor are unable to afford basic medical care they often go to the ER - which is far more expensive than an office visit; doubly so as they often have to wait until the problem is severe and far more costly to treat.  In addition there is the matter of downtime as those who are out of action due to illness or injury decrease net productivity, and cause additional costs.

I'm not sure I should even get into policies on sicktime, or the fact that people (including those in food service) are often de facto encouraged to work while contagious (you don't come in, you don't get paid).   Why take a sick day and lose money when you can get paid to infect the entire office.

As a nation we are all too often penny wise and pound foolish.

I fixed a small HTML error that was making your entire post linked.  -Alcon

[opebo]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

False.  Wages will be very low in nearly all new jobs, but what does health care have to do with it?  There is no law that says full time workers have to get health care.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True.

[patrick1]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

2.  government provided health care has to be better than the health care millions of poors now receive....which is little or none.

both statements are of course true.  now it is time for our politicos to get a dose of reality and fix the problem.

1. Many large companies can afford to provide proper health care but choose not to to further their bottom line or stock price.  On the other hand, there are many smaller companies who cannot really afford to provide a decent level of health are and do so anyway.

2.  There are few instances in which the gov't provides anything better or more efficiently.  However, it is true that little and poorly managed care is better than no care at all.  There are many flaws in the US health care system and I do not know the correct solutions that are not too economically damaging.

[The Duke]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

2.  government provided health care has to be better than the health care millions of poors now receive....which is little or none.

both statements are of course true.  now it is time for our politicos to get a dose of reality and fix the problem.

First of all, poor people recieve Medicaid which is government health care.  So the health care the government would provide and the health care poor people typically recieve are one and the same, they are not two different things.

Second, it is not nearly as likely that employers will hire temps as it is that they will simply drop health coverage from compensation.  It makes far more sense for employers to simply not cover health benefits than to transform their whole workforce into an army of temps.

[WalterMitty]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

2.  government provided health care has to be better than the health care millions of poors now receive....which is little or none.

both statements are of course true.  now it is time for our politicos to get a dose of reality and fix the problem.

First of all, poor people recieve Medicaid which is government health care.  So the health care the government would provide and the health care poor people typically recieve are one and the same, they are not two different things.

Second, it is not nearly as likely that employers will hire temps as it is that they will simply drop health coverage from compensation.  It makes far more sense for employers to simply not cover health benefits than to transform their whole workforce into an army of temps.

medicaid obviously doesnt solve the problem.

it is my impression that it is mainly used by single mothers and their young children.

[WMS]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

2.  government provided health care has to be better than the health care millions of poors now receive....which is little or none.

both statements are of course true.  now it is time for our politicos to get a dose of reality and fix the problem.

First of all, poor people recieve Medicaid which is government health care.  So the health care the government would provide and the health care poor people typically recieve are one and the same, they are not two different things.

Second, it is not nearly as likely that employers will hire temps as it is that they will simply drop health coverage from compensation.  It makes far more sense for employers to simply not cover health benefits than to transform their whole workforce into an army of temps.

medicaid obviously doesnt solve the problem.

it is my impression that it is mainly used by single mothers and their young children.

perhaps, Walter, you should add on to "poors" the "working class", who are the ones who REALLY get screwed by the current health care system, because they aren't on Medicaid (they make too much money for that) but aren't in jobs that provide health insurance either...and I've been in that position before, and if your job doesn't provide health insurance, and neither does the government, it is really f***ing expensive to afford on a working class salary.

[WalterMitty]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

2.  government provided health care has to be better than the health care millions of poors now receive....which is little or none.

both statements are of course true.  now it is time for our politicos to get a dose of reality and fix the problem.

First of all, poor people recieve Medicaid which is government health care.  So the health care the government would provide and the health care poor people typically recieve are one and the same, they are not two different things.

Second, it is not nearly as likely that employers will hire temps as it is that they will simply drop health coverage from compensation.  It makes far more sense for employers to simply not cover health benefits than to transform their whole workforce into an army of temps.

medicaid obviously doesnt solve the problem.

it is my impression that it is mainly used by single mothers and their young children.

perhaps, Walter, you should add on to "poors" the "working class", who are the ones who REALLY get screwed by the current health care system, because they aren't on Medicaid (they make too much money for that) but aren't in jobs that provide health insurance either...and I've been in that position before, and if your job doesn't provide health insurance, and neither does the government, it is really f***ing expensive to afford on a working class salary.

right on, wms.

i have a pretty bad eye condition and no health insurance.  ive spent thousands out of my own pocket over the last three years in treating it.

[WMS]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

2.  government provided health care has to be better than the health care millions of poors now receive....which is little or none.

both statements are of course true.  now it is time for our politicos to get a dose of reality and fix the problem.

First of all, poor people recieve Medicaid which is government health care.  So the health care the government would provide and the health care poor people typically recieve are one and the same, they are not two different things.

Second, it is not nearly as likely that employers will hire temps as it is that they will simply drop health coverage from compensation.  It makes far more sense for employers to simply not cover health benefits than to transform their whole workforce into an army of temps.

medicaid obviously doesnt solve the problem.

it is my impression that it is mainly used by single mothers and their young children.

perhaps, Walter, you should add on to "poors" the "working class", who are the ones who REALLY get screwed by the current health care system, because they aren't on Medicaid (they make too much money for that) but aren't in jobs that provide health insurance either...and I've been in that position before, and if your job doesn't provide health insurance, and neither does the government, it is really f***ing expensive to afford on a working class salary.

right on, wms.

i have a pretty bad eye condition and no health insurance.  ive spent thousands out of my own pocket over the last three years in treating it.

yup

good luck in finding some, though you could always join me as a leech on the taxpayers government employee.

[The Duke]

1.  the majority of all new jobs created in the future will be part time and or temp 'mcjobs' because employers cant afford health coverage.

2.  government provided health care has to be better than the health care millions of poors now receive....which is little or none.

both statements are of course true.  now it is time for our politicos to get a dose of reality and fix the problem.

First of all, poor people recieve Medicaid which is government health care.  So the health care the government would provide and the health care poor people typically recieve are one and the same, they are not two different things.

Second, it is not nearly as likely that employers will hire temps as it is that they will simply drop health coverage from compensation.  It makes far more sense for employers to simply not cover health benefits than to transform their whole workforce into an army of temps.

medicaid obviously doesnt solve the problem.

it is my impression that it is mainly used by single mothers and their young children.

Most of the really poor ARE single moms with young children.

I agree that Medicaid is not the full answer, I was just saying that the poorest of the poor are not without insurance and government isnurance is not an improvement for them, its just the status quo because they already have it.

perhaps, Walter, you should add on to "poors" the "working class", who are the ones who REALLY get screwed by the current health care system, because they aren't on Medicaid (they make too much money for that) but aren't in jobs that provide health insurance either...and I've been in that position before, and if your job doesn't provide health insurance, and neither does the government, it is really f***ing expensive to afford on a working class salary.

Mario Cuomo had a great line for this group of people.  "Not rich enough to be worry free,  but not poor enough to be on welfare."

[Nation]

Amusing anecdote:



Craigslist, as many of you may know, is a popular web-haven for apartment searches (God knows what I'd do without it), personal ads, odd requests, etc etc.

As for the personals section of Craigslist, what a lot of people are doing now, in addition to listing hot abs, $75,000 a year incomes, and a great personality as turn-ons, is someone who has health care.

A lot of the personal ads actually contain things along the lines of "I'm looking for a soulmate --- who has health care."

I agree with most of the sentiments in here, right now. The Craigslist idea actually sounds pretty good. I should get on that.

[WMS]

Mario Cuomo had a great line for this group of people.  "Not rich enough to be worry free,  but not poor enough to be on welfare."

Bingo and usually ignored by left and right alike