Monday, February 28, 2011

"Generous" Not Even Close to State Health Plan Terms

The JS article describes the State health-plan's terms as "generous."

But by any measure, as Walker has noted and most state employees acknowledge, the state will continue to provide rich health-insurance benefits compared with the private sector, where nearly 40% of employers don't offer health benefits at all.

You have to read a few more grafs to get to this:

State employees still would have no annual deductible, and they would have a choice of plans carrying average price tags of $8,112 for single coverage and $20,220 for family coverage.

"Generous"? "Rich"?

Does Fort Knox have "a little gold"? Does Queen Elizabeth occupy a "cottage"? Is Obama's party-budget "comfortable"? Is Wisconsin's $43 Billion total debt "a bit of a drag"?

I remind you that the typical private-sector health insurance plan carries a $1,000.00 individual/$3,000.00 family deductible.

Those deductibles are paid with AFTER-TAX dollars. In other words, State employees do NOT pay ~25% in Social Security, Federal, and State income taxes on money they earn before handing it over to the docs, pharmacies, and hospitals, like you working schlubs in the private sector. Instead, the taxpayers fund those twice: once for State employees through premium payments, and once through the sweat of their own brows.

Generous, indeed.


Anonymous said...

Jealous much?

neomom said...

Greedy much Anony?

Dad29 said...

No, actually, I'm not 'jealous.' You MAY not be greedy...

The bennies are mind-boggling. It's beyond me how anyone could bitch about paying $200.00/month for a plan that good.

Anonymous said... sounds like they are willing to pony up on the bennies and other knick-knacks. Why does the spectacle continue? That's the question to pose to the "stinking" protesters and to the boy governor who appear to have some personal issues w/one another.

Your grasp of what public plebes actually pay-in leaves a lot to be desired. I doubt the hippy-dippy protesters are marching over having to pay their fair share.

They're probably pissed about spending hundreds of millions from the state treasury to "do right" with top earners and corporations. Squeezing working stiffs (psst, Wacker already inked this concession) out of their bargaining rights is like telling 2nd Amendment advocates that you can buy ammo but the State is taking away your firearms. Oh, and it's only because we have a "crisis" that mandates Uncle Sam takes away these rights.

And all to shave 3% from the deficit! Where will you go next?

Dad29 said...

I'll ignore your spin and propaganda. Next we go to cutting State employment by about 15%.

That will include cutting a bunch of State departments and functions.