Serious question: Why are corporations so quiet on this health care issue?

[notadmblnd]

So many have complained (The Big 3 is the first that comes to mind) that health care cost are the reason profits are down, then use the excuse to layoff and cheap shore job to ensure yearly record profits. Why aren't they lobbying for health insurance reform?

[Mike 03]

1. Are you talking about Health Insurance Companies? NT

[notadmblnd]

3. no, I'm talking about major corporations that claim health insurance

benefits are the reason for their loses. GM, Chrysler have used the excuse for years that their retirees cost them too much money and thus justified layoffs and off shoring.

[Mike 03]

14. Oh, I get your point entirely. Thank you for the clarification. NT

[Cronus Protagonist]

2. Because they'll still pay for it.

the key word in the OP is "insurance" reform. The only way the employers don't have to pay anything more than regular taxes is if the insurance ponzi scheme is dismantled, and the corps don't want to kill the goose that lays golden eggs.

[notadmblnd]

4. but their cost could go down too

if everyone contributed via a payroll tax like FISA, just the sheer numbers of people added to the pool could cut employers costs too.

[Donnachaidh]

8. do you REALLY trust the insurance companies to cut costs?

Hell -- they've probably got excuses lined up as to what, when, where and how they plan on increasing rates even after the mandate is in place.

[notadmblnd]

11. if congress regulates it , i think it could

[Donnachaidh]

18. that's just it -- IF regulation is passed it will be minimal

and only there to stop criticism of this bill. Hell, regulation wasn't even mentioned by Obama until he started to catch flack about his backroom deals. Do you really think he's going to regulate the crap out of this industry?

Because if you do - I have this piece of property you might like... :eyes: :sarcasm:

[Cronus Protagonist]

9. Yeah, in the short term, IF the insurers reduce rates initially

And they won't and the rates keep going up. The myth that lower costs equals lower sales price really ought to have died a couple of hundred years ago. Employers in all foreign first-world countries don't have to buy ANY health insurance for their employees, by the way, unlike this one, which really ought to be called a second-world country.

[90-percent]

5. Ditto

I've had the same question during the entire health care debate.

Taking myself for an example, I got laid off a year ago. COBRA payments to keep my insurance going was about $950 a month. (TARP and ARRA and stuff like that have reduced my monthly nut to $350 or so. For that I thank my Democratic President)

So, on top of my yearly salary, they have to fork over an extra $11,000 a year just to employ me?

Wouldn't a public option or single payer program SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE the cost of providing health insurance to employees? Therefore, wouldn't all enterprises that have employees be LOUDLY IN FAVOR OF "MEDICARE FOR ALL"?

-90% Jimmy

Medicare for all is my favorite frame!

[notadmblnd]

6. That's my thought!

[Donnachaidh]

7. because what is being pushed is NOT true healthCARE reform

And as they are going to be stuck paying for their employees healthcare anyway - they know they had better not open their mouths and voice an opinion. This bill being pushed does NOT have rigorous consumer protections, and the insurance companies have a rep for being vindictive assholes if someone badmouths htem.

[alfredo]

10. They really don't need us. We don't provide the high

rate of growth that Asia provides. Healthcare costs gives them a convenient reason to off shore.

[Happy Hippy]

12. .....

I think few business leaders are willing to voice opinions on the issue, for a multitude of different reasons. Like most Americans, senior level management and the C-suite are unsure of the direction Congress and the President will ultimately take. Which is understandable. How will it impact our current benefits package offered to our employees-if at all? Will there be any additional costs? Undoubtedly, this is a discussion topic in board rooms across the country. Due to the political uncertainty of this matter, the discussions usually boil down to "we don't know". Again, this is understandable, citing the obvious.

Secondly, I choose not to pretend that this issue isn't political controversial to a degree. Regardless of which "side" Corporate leaders take in the debate, there will likely be controversy to follow. Case in point, Whole Foods CEO. Had he come out as a staunch supporter of the public option he would surely have faced similar discontent from the right.

[branders seine]

19. for large corporations, health care costs are an excuse, not an actual reason,

for layoffs, downsizing, outsourcing and offshoring.

Like all capitalists, their goal is to eliminate the middle class. opposing health care reform works toward that agenda, as does killing middle class jobs.

Small business, where the real pain lies, is often so blinkered by their love of all things "libertarian" that they side against Democrats and especially progressives reflexively no matter what.

[Happy Hippy]

23. Well.....

I will kindly have to disagree with you. I have worked with large and small businesses alike - never once have I heard executive management say, " how can we eliminate the middle class." Never once within a corporate charter or mission statement have I found the objective "eliminate the middle class". Now, you can argue that outsourcing and downsizing has effected the middle class negatively. That I will agree with you on. Finding corporate equilibrium between customers, employees, shareholders, and stakeholders is a very difficult challenge - especially citing the turbulent economy. But to believe the CEOs of Apple, Chipotle, Google, McDonalds, Coke, Pepsi, Kroger, GAP, J.Crew, or other executives from this nation's thousands of businesses wake up every morning and ask themselves "how can we destroy the middle class today" is kind of silly. Yes, these companies really are curious over how HCR will impact the bottom line. That was my point.

Doesn't that sound a bit hyperbolic to you? Their goal is to make money, not to eliminate their customers and employees.

[branders seine]

24. we are in a class war.

their class wants to destroy the middle class. period.

[Happy Hippy]

25. That's a hard line you're taking.....

I'm just not a believer in the direct class warfare conspiracy. I do think some policies hurt the middle class, for sure. But it's clearly not the corporate objective.

[branders seine]

36. "Belief" is irrelevant.

[ChicagoSuz219]

13. Ironically, I think it will help them, as well...

...if rates are brought down, what's to stop them from switching from one insurance to another to get a better deal?

Also... they will be eligible for tax cuts if they insure their employees, I believe...

Be nice... Corporations are people, too... ;-)

[Mike 03]

15. I rec'd this post, but it didn't seem to make any difference.

This is worth considering, isn't it?

[notadmblnd]

16. I think so.

[Swamp Rat]

17. Birds of a feather flock together

[thotzRthingz]

20. because: the increasing threat of a PUBLIC OPTION, via reconciliation, has them spellbound...

after spending all those MANY MILLION$ on lobbying efforts and campaign contributions... OY!?

[Uncle Joe]

21. I imagine it's because the decision makers at the major corporations are in the top 1%

They see major health care reform, the best being Medicare for everyone as a threat against their personal income via tax increases to help subsidize the switch over.

I also believe their general view is that "for profit rocks" on any and everything, and thus are tied to for profit "health" insurance corporations on an ideological basis.

Finally I don't believe anyone is immune to brain washing and the corporate media are adept at the art, the very word socialism or socialist has been mindlessly demonized for over a half a century by the nation's "fourth estate." I have no doubt this relentless propaganda has even affected some business leaders; making them more timid toward pushing the envelope.

Thanks for the thread, notadmblnd.

[Canuckistanian]

22. I asked this question last year

And got no satisfactory answer.

It seems to me that corporations would be a direct beneficiary of a public health care scheme, so I can't imagine why the silence about it. After all, one of the stated benefits of making cars and trucks in Canada is the lower cost of employing people with their own paid health care.

The best I can guess is that corporations loathe the idea of government undercutting profits in ANY industry. It would be a bad precedent for them.

[Edweird]

26. Because fear of losing health benefits makes us their slaves.

[xynthee]

32. That's the only theory that makes sense to me!

Still, you'd think they could enslave us with other incentives like child care, tuition reimbursement, retirement plans, health club memberships, keychains with the company logo on them, etc. Of course, none of these are as important as health care so they wouldn't have the stranglehold they once enjoyed.

But corporations shouldn't sell themselves short; I'm sure they could think of SOME way to enslave us to the degree we're enslaved now. Screwing over their workers is about the only thing these POS CEOs are really, really good at, and one of the things they find most enjoyable.

[90-percent]

27. There will come a day

There will come a day when for-profit-health-insurance is in the same historical place as slavery.

Because for-profit-health-insurance companies ARE THE DEATH PANELS!

-90% Jimmy

[lonestarnot]

28. And perhaps the bloodletting will be remembered too.

:(

[notadmblnd]

30. that comment needs to be a bumper sticker.

[90-percent]

33. bumper sticker

I love the art of the bumper sticker.

Kind of like haiku - it must be six words or less.

BIG INSURANCE ARE THE DEATH PANELS

5 words, but uncomfortable. some grammar issues?

-jim

[notadmblnd]

37. INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE THE DEATH PANELS

how's that?

[ctaylors6]

29. Here's one opinion poll of business leaders from august 2009 ...

http://drivingbusinessforward.org/business_leader_poll

It was discussed on CNBC IIRC (think that's where I saw it then saved it).

I personally think businesses are reacting not all that differently than most people. I think Congress and Obama have failed pretty miserably at presenting clear solutions and then advocating for them. Businesses like clarity, and it's difficult for them to get behind something when they really don't know what they'd be getting. Some of the most brilliant people I "know" are here on DU, and I've seen more posts than I could count asking what HCR is going to end up looking like.

[ThomWV]

31. The much more serious question is how can they spend so much and you not know its them?

[upi402]

34. their ideology must be more important

...or more profitable. after this socialist putsch on their corporate rule is quelled they will just take it out of our scarce paychecks.

that's a key question. good post!

[Bluebear]

35. They have our elected officials to speak for them