Health Care Benefits Costs reason for anemic job growth

[ACCtuary]

The following article at nytimes.com (free, but registration required)
Rising Cost of Health Benefits Cited as Factor in Slump of Jobs (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/19/business/19care.html)

I am becoming more convinced that our employer-pay system is a problematic aspect of our health care system. While I do not favor universal health coverage because it makes the gov't into our (only) HMO, what can we do to de-couple these things?

Certainly consumer directed health care can help, but it will take some time to educate people on how to use these.

I would like to see a stronger individual market. What are your thoughts?

This is intended to be an actuarial, not a political discussion (although complete separation of the two is of course impossible) How could we structure benefits design and tax incentives to improve this problem?

[Dr T Non-Fan]

We have been discussing this in "Political" (I think), although this is a far superior forum to discuss this topic.

There are ways to shift costs to consumers. Employers have this choice, and they (on average, the implication of the article (which I didn't read)) are choosing to keep the higher benefit level and not to hire more people. Employers are the problem in one sense. (Heavy-handed unions forcing employers to provide health care are another.)

Of course, when employers simply hand out health care for a small fee, employees and their dependents start getting uppity, as if health care were an entitlement.

I'd like to see health care benefits taxed as compensation. I'd like to see health INSURANCE benefits not taxed. And I'd like someone to draw the line between these two concepts.

[Dr T Non-Fan]

here (http://www.actuary.ca/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=36183).