As a single man with limited culinary skills, I eat out frequently and as a result waiters and waitresses know me as a regular customer. Those who serve me often talk about their work and I ask about their working conditions. They have tough jobs—on their feet for many hours at a time, wages are not generous, and customers can be demanding.

Now many of them are having their hours cut to less than 30 hours a week so their employers will not have to give them healthcare as the new law requires. For some it means they will have to look for a second job to make ends meet and will still not have health care. I have talked to a waiter and a waitress at different restaurants about this and have the impression it is becoming widespread.

Views: 400

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

On the other hand, if [Obamacare] is repealed, I believe the United States will never have a good system.

I think it safe to say:

1) Today's Republicans will win the Presidency and Senate, keep the House, and repeal Obamacare only if Democrats make serious mistakes, and

2) Democrats will surely amend Obamacare, but will repeal it only when xianity's Hell freezes.

However, the phrase "a good system" does not identify the interests for whom a health care system is good. The public? The medical industry? The insurance industry?

The early months of my forty years of political activism persuaded me that campaign financing guarantees that bribery and extortion determine what those in government do.

Until we amend the Constitution:

1) to reverse the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, and

2) to convince the Court that money is not speech,

any health care system we can get will improve the physical health of many Americans and will assure the economic health of the medical and insurance industries.

Unless the strong influence of money can be removed from the political process or at least substantially reduced and controlled, I don't see much hope for improvement. It appears that we are moving towards an eventual crisis over fiscal issues, but so far Congress has found ways to avoid it without doing any essential repair.

About 5 hours ago, Dr. Clark, you said this: "One out of six in the U.S. is not without health insurance."  Was this what you meant to say?  I see Obamacare as deeply flawed, but a step forward.  Switching to a single-payer plan will not, of course, solve all problems.  But it will/would eliminate the profit from insuring (not from medical care itself; that's a separate problem).  Since it would eliminate the entire health insurance industry, doing so would be difficult if not impossible.  We need a public who has access to information (we do, but also to lies), who cares enough to become involved, and who will demand members of congress vote in ways that serve the public or we will remove them and replace them with some who will.  I don't see this as likely.

Delete the not so that it reads "One out of six in the U.S. is without health insurance."

I have heard about many people being cut to part time so they don't have to pay healthcare. It looks like Obamacare isn't working or needs some restrictions or rules or something.

Businesses are reluctant to provide healthcare insurance in a market where price increases are constantly inflating costs. This is not particularly a fault of Obamacare itself. Ironically the result will be to drive people without insurance into using emergency rooms as clinics.

I wish single-payer healthcare would have passed.  I hate that healthcare is tied to ones job.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service