I've typed out four or five different comments on this one, but none of them were articulate enough to voice my opinion. Instead, I've decided to thank you for writing this.
This is absolutely a hard one to encapsulate in a few sentences. It's highly personal and unique to any individual need/history. (My own comment is truncated given I could write a thesis on Abdullah's post.)
"Be the Change You Want in This World"... This is about how you differentiate the potential future leaders. By this I mean being able to gain leadership buy-in requires effective communication and the ability to present a strong business case for internal processes to change. By assigning a moral value to the workplace, you potentially miss the opportunity to be meaningful change.
Good leaders understand that managing up is as important as down.
Post ACA, adoption the rate of self-employed, un-insured dropped from 27% to about 16%. The rates for small businesses was the same using CPBB numbers. But we also have seen that number increase as a result of Covid-Era subsidies expiring. (Congress is statutorily required to obtain ACA coverage through the D.C. Health Link.)
*UK NHS came about in 1942 as a result of William Beveridge... the same guy behind the curve representing the relationship between unemployment and job vacancies. The difference being he promoted flat tax contributions for basic universal access rather than means testing (which is really how the US handles health insurance.)
But there is another major piece. Employers pay about 70% of health insurance cost for employees with families, and about 84% for single employees -- the employee pays the rest. But just as with taxes, we need to speak about the BURDEN of the health insurance cost -- that is, from whose income is the health insurance subtracted? That varies according to circumstances, but there is a general rule of thumb: THE MORE IMPORTANT YOU ARE TO THE COMPANY, AND THE HIGHER YOUR WAGE, THE LESS BURDEN YOU BEAR. That's right -- there is an "income elasticity of wage burden"! If your income is higher, indicating that you are more valuable to the company, and consequently the cost of replacing you increases, the company will be likely to bear the lion's share of the burden of health care; if you have a lower income -- a salaryman slaving away in a forgotten office -- you will be the one bearing the great majority of the burden of health insurance cost.
What I am saying is that the company allocates a "cost of employment" -- for every employee. They also allocate a "pay package" -- what they actually pay. Part of that cost of employment is benefits -- health and life insurance, pension, vacation -- part is wages. Wages the company agrees to give you. But who bears the burden of benefits depends on how much the company figures they need you. If you are an executive, the company itself covers the burden; if you are a worker-bee, you end up covering -- bearing the burden of -- the subtractions from wages represented by each of those costs.
So when we in the US, who receive higher pay on average, look down our noses at the French, who get longer vacations, and think "but we are more productive!" -- this is true ON AVERAGE. But low-income modestly skilled workers in the US get lower pay, because they are bearing the cost of benefits. The Russell Sage Group cites a 2016 study by Saez, Zucman & Piketty which concludes: "Although overall, average income per adult in France is 35% lower than it is in the U.S., as the graph above shows, the bottom 50% in France makes more than the bottom half of the income distribution in the U.S." (https://www.russellsage.org/news/bottom-half-income-distribution-us-and-france)
Like others in this comment section, I find it very hard to outline how I feel about this. The effects of employer provided healthcare is something I don't understand well enough. This newsletter is a great start to improving my own understanding.
As someone who is employed butvkeft one job for a new comoany. I am in a 60 day gap of being uninsured and my cobra is more than 800 dollar just for health insurance. Our insurance model is a major limiting factor in economic mobility.
I've typed out four or five different comments on this one, but none of them were articulate enough to voice my opinion. Instead, I've decided to thank you for writing this.
And I thank you for always being a great colleague and supporter
This is absolutely a hard one to encapsulate in a few sentences. It's highly personal and unique to any individual need/history. (My own comment is truncated given I could write a thesis on Abdullah's post.)
Value Attribution Bias?
"Be the Change You Want in This World"... This is about how you differentiate the potential future leaders. By this I mean being able to gain leadership buy-in requires effective communication and the ability to present a strong business case for internal processes to change. By assigning a moral value to the workplace, you potentially miss the opportunity to be meaningful change.
Good leaders understand that managing up is as important as down.
Post ACA, adoption the rate of self-employed, un-insured dropped from 27% to about 16%. The rates for small businesses was the same using CPBB numbers. But we also have seen that number increase as a result of Covid-Era subsidies expiring. (Congress is statutorily required to obtain ACA coverage through the D.C. Health Link.)
*UK NHS came about in 1942 as a result of William Beveridge... the same guy behind the curve representing the relationship between unemployment and job vacancies. The difference being he promoted flat tax contributions for basic universal access rather than means testing (which is really how the US handles health insurance.)
I have actually been thinking of this exact idea lately. Great article!
Very interesting. Didn’t know the history behind it .
But there is another major piece. Employers pay about 70% of health insurance cost for employees with families, and about 84% for single employees -- the employee pays the rest. But just as with taxes, we need to speak about the BURDEN of the health insurance cost -- that is, from whose income is the health insurance subtracted? That varies according to circumstances, but there is a general rule of thumb: THE MORE IMPORTANT YOU ARE TO THE COMPANY, AND THE HIGHER YOUR WAGE, THE LESS BURDEN YOU BEAR. That's right -- there is an "income elasticity of wage burden"! If your income is higher, indicating that you are more valuable to the company, and consequently the cost of replacing you increases, the company will be likely to bear the lion's share of the burden of health care; if you have a lower income -- a salaryman slaving away in a forgotten office -- you will be the one bearing the great majority of the burden of health insurance cost.
What I am saying is that the company allocates a "cost of employment" -- for every employee. They also allocate a "pay package" -- what they actually pay. Part of that cost of employment is benefits -- health and life insurance, pension, vacation -- part is wages. Wages the company agrees to give you. But who bears the burden of benefits depends on how much the company figures they need you. If you are an executive, the company itself covers the burden; if you are a worker-bee, you end up covering -- bearing the burden of -- the subtractions from wages represented by each of those costs.
So when we in the US, who receive higher pay on average, look down our noses at the French, who get longer vacations, and think "but we are more productive!" -- this is true ON AVERAGE. But low-income modestly skilled workers in the US get lower pay, because they are bearing the cost of benefits. The Russell Sage Group cites a 2016 study by Saez, Zucman & Piketty which concludes: "Although overall, average income per adult in France is 35% lower than it is in the U.S., as the graph above shows, the bottom 50% in France makes more than the bottom half of the income distribution in the U.S." (https://www.russellsage.org/news/bottom-half-income-distribution-us-and-france)
Please choose the curse you like the best.
Like others in this comment section, I find it very hard to outline how I feel about this. The effects of employer provided healthcare is something I don't understand well enough. This newsletter is a great start to improving my own understanding.
As someone who is employed butvkeft one job for a new comoany. I am in a 60 day gap of being uninsured and my cobra is more than 800 dollar just for health insurance. Our insurance model is a major limiting factor in economic mobility.