[mikemike]

Mini-med plans force people to drain their savings accounts for dozens of common medical problems. They also force hospitals to let some bills go unpaid, which drives up costs for everyone else.

So in addition to the obesity that they market, McDonald's health insurance also drives up this nations healthcare costs.

At the same time, it’s probably unrealistic to expect McDonald’s to give workers decent health insurance. Many of those workers make less than $20,000 a year. A typical family insurance plan would raise their total compensation by more than half, destroying the McDonald’s business model.

Am I the only one that doesn't see a problem with destroying the McDonald's business model if the goal of health insurance reform is improved public health and lowered healthcare costs?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/business/economy/06leonhardt.html?hp

[SteveM]

Does this mean the McDonald's business model is based on corporate welfare? The company can't be profitable unless large amounts of taxpayer funds are used?

[GeneV]

So in addition to the obesity that they market, McDonald's health insurance also drives up this nations healthcare costs.



Am I the only one that doesn't see a problem with destroying the McDonald's business model if the goal of health insurance reform is improved public health and lowered healthcare costs?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/business/economy/06leonhardt.html?hp

No you are not the only one. That business model is the problem on many levels. It also gets at the whole problem of "externalities" in any economic analysis.

I am appalled by the attitude of a number of people who don't get this. I remember an aquaintance explaining that the reason why they don't offer health insurance to employees is that the employees can get care at the county emergency room--"after all, isn't that why I pay taxes?"

[jeffkrol]

I'm tired of repeating this......

On the surface, these claims can sound credible. But when you dig a little deeper, you often discover the same lesson that the McDonald’s case provides: the real problem was the status quo.

American families spend almost twice as much on health care — through premiums, paycheck deductions and out-of-pocket expenses — as families in any other country. In exchange, we receive top-notch specialty care in many areas. Yet on the whole, we do not get much better care than countries that spend far less.

We don’t live as long as people in Canada, Japan, most of Western Europe or even relatively poor Jordan. Misdiagnosis is common. Medical errors occur more often than in some other countries. Unique to the developed world, millions of people have no health insurance, and millions more, like many fast-food workers, are underinsured.

to be honest I HOPE that the whole health care reform law is set up to drive public opinion to a 1 payer system... Unfortunately there are a bunch of errr... mis-informed in the way.

[GeneV]

Yes, and I've posted this before as well, but the problem I alluded to on the employer's side existst with the employees as well. My lowest paid employee makes twice what a typical McDonald's employee makes, and she would prefer to get her kids' healthcare through public agencies. My plan would cost her more than 10% of her income. (In reality, more than that when you talk about after tax net)

[mikemike]

No you are not the only one. That business model is the problem on many levels. It also gets at the whole problem of "externalities" in any economic analysis.

Yes, I think that cheap calories of fried foods creates a huge negative externality of obesity and the related health problems.

I would be happier if we dealt with this and other negative externalities, like those from burning fossil fuels, with a tax or price floor instead of a regulation. Maybe a $0.01/calorie minimum price for prepared and processed foods.

[Nesster]

Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland all use a system along these lines to cover everyone, largely through the private sector, for less money per person than this country spends.

So a private sector solution can work. In the USA there's two issues: the status quo has had years to get messed up and nearly any change will make things worse for some. And medical costs have gone out of control for decades, without any real moderating counterforce.

[GeneV]

Yes, I think that cheap calories of fried foods creates a huge negative externality of obesity and the related health problems.

I would be happier if we dealt with this and other negative externalities, like those from burning fossil fuels, with a tax or price floor instead of a regulation. Maybe a $0.01/calorie minimum price for prepared and processed foods.

On that, I am with you (again) 100%. I have lobbied or testified at the legislature for business interests concerning the effects of a number of well-intentioned green regulations. Many of them caused more harm to the environment than good, and the problem can be better addressed by making commodities which have harmful side effects pay their own way.

[troglodyte]

I say bring it on! I'd be all for a cholesterol tax. Since I'm nearly a vegan, mine is under 180. It'd be funny as hell to see people bitch about not eating animals. Maybe then McDonalds will serve a taster veggie burger and places like Burger King one

---------- Post added 10-06-10 at 11:42 AM ----------

suitable for vegetarians. Maybe if more ate vegetarian, even if for economic tax sasnctions, there will finally be more understanding and less bigotry against us.

[Nesster]

...ok so who said social engineering via taxation was a good thing? Next they'll be arguing for putting a price on carbon

I'm glad that perhaps our more conservative friends are seeing beyond the corporate propaganda on at least some things

[troglodyte]

Nesster,
What you talking about? There already is a carbon tax, at least here in california. I got a bill for coal based electricity and for spent nuclear disposal. I thought nuclear was so clean? What gives? The source of electricity is not my doing

---------- Post added 10-06-10 at 02:27 PM ----------

, so why am I taxed. Even though I'm not thrilled about any tax, food excess is at least preventable. I can't stop using electricity. Btw, that last post was me being a smart ass. In case I get more, 'you make less sense' comments again.

[Nesster]

Oh believe me, it was a 'you make MORE sense' comment

[mikemike]

I say bring it on! I'd be all for a cholesterol tax. Since I'm nearly a vegan, mine is under 180. It'd be funny as hell to see people bitch about not eating animals. Maybe then McDonalds will serve a taster veggie burger and places like Burger King one suitable for vegetarians. Maybe if more ate vegetarian, even if for economic tax sasnctions, there will finally be more understanding and less bigotry against us.

Here's how a 2 pieces of white meat chicken, a side item, and drink from KFC would be priced with a $0.01/calorie minimum price:

Chicken:
Original Recipe - $4.60
Extra Crispy - $7.00
Spicy Crispy - $5.90
Grilled - $3.90

Side:
Green Beans - $0.20
Mashed Potatoes - $1.20
Fried Potato wedges - $2.60

Biscuit - $1.80

Drink:
Pepsi - $4
Diet Pepsi - $0

So the lowest price they could charge for extra crispy chicken, fries, biscuit, and a pepsi would be $14.40 + sales tax.

The healthiest option of Grilled Chicken, green beans, no biscuit and a diet pepsi could still be sold for $4.10 + sales tax which is probably less than what they charge right now.

It would give healthy options a leg up since even with the same main ingredients can be prepared in healthier ways. It might be cheaper to use leaner grades of meat so that they can charge lower prices and have higher sales. And it would make it easier to compete on quality if you are willing to sacrifice a little profit.

[Parallax]

............. And it would make it easier to compete on quality if you are willing to sacrifice a little profit.

That one point right there would be the deal killer.

[jimH]

I'm tired of repeating this......


to be honest I HOPE that the whole health care reform law is set up to drive public opinion to a 1 payer system... Unfortunately there are a bunch of errr... mis-informed in the way.

The problem is this: Health care reform may be good, however the bill was used to shove through a lot of legislation totally unrelated to health care. Such as: Regulation on the trading of Gold, and the imposition of a 3.8% sales tax on a home sale, and who know how much more that is hidden in the "unread" bill. How can this be sold as a health care reform bill? Correct me if I'm wrong. I sure hope that I am, but I'm afraid that I'm not.