Employer Provided Insurance: THIRTY THREE MILLION Americans Won't Be Worrying About Losing It Anymore

Another 3 million today.

For those puzzled over the enormous jump in unemployment and the lack of a corresponding embrace of M4A, this story in the WaPo is interesting:

The vast majority of laid-off or furloughed workers — 77 percent — expect to be rehired by their previous employer once the stay-at-home orders in their area are lifted, according to a nationwide Washington Post-Ipsos poll.

If most people who are losing their jobs believe they'll be getting them back, I think that goes a long way toward explaining the lack of urgency at replacing employer-sponsored insurance. We'll see how, and if, this changes as this crisis goes on.

PVW said:

For those puzzled over the enormous jump in unemployment and the lack of a corresponding embrace of M4A, this story in the WaPo is interesting:

The vast majority of laid-off or furloughed workers — 77 percent — expect to be rehired by their previous employer once the stay-at-home orders in their area are lifted, according to a nationwide Washington Post-Ipsos poll.

If most people who are losing their jobs believe they'll be getting them back, I think that goes a long way toward explaining the lack of urgency at replacing employer-sponsored insurance. We'll see how, and if, this changes as this crisis goes on.

 No. What explains it is that most of these people never had employee provided insurance in the first place.

drummerboy said:

PVW said:

For those puzzled over the enormous jump in unemployment and the lack of a corresponding embrace of M4A, this story in the WaPo is interesting:

The vast majority of laid-off or furloughed workers — 77 percent — expect to be rehired by their previous employer once the stay-at-home orders in their area are lifted, according to a nationwide Washington Post-Ipsos poll.

If most people who are losing their jobs believe they'll be getting them back, I think that goes a long way toward explaining the lack of urgency at replacing employer-sponsored insurance. We'll see how, and if, this changes as this crisis goes on.

 No. What explains it is that most of these people never had employee provided insurance in the first place.

 Not universally. From the article:

"Mogna has been able to keep his employer-sponsored health insurance. He has had to make his monthly payments, but it’s been a big help to know he has the same insurance during a global pandemic."

I said most. Though I've yet to see any actual numbers, from what I understand most of the people of the newly unemployed are generally low paid without benefits.

drummerboy said:

I said most. Though I've yet to see any actual numbers, from what I understand most of the people of the newly unemployed are generally low paid without benefits.

 Ok, not looking to quibble. I think both of these things -- that many who've lost employment didn't have insurance, and that many who did have insurance nonetheless are optimistic that they'll regain their old jobs -- can be true.

PVW said:

If most people who are losing their jobs believe they'll be getting them back, I think that goes a long way toward explaining the lack of urgency at replacing employer-sponsored insurance. We'll see how, and if, this changes as this crisis goes on.

 Hey, that's logic.  Good luck with that.

and there's this projection.  We're probably already at the stage where these researchers estimate that about 7 million people have lost their health insurance.  It's not 30 million, but it's a lot.  But as someone already wrote earlier, how many voters are going to care about those 7 million?  Not enough to make a difference probably.

How the COVID-19 Recession Could Affect Health Insurance Coverage

"how many voters are going to care about those 7 million"

Well, themselves, maybe friends and family, maybe even people who read/hear about it, would be open to persuasion, if someone could approach them, or make a good ad pointing out how dumb, er, counterproductive? it is to tie health coverage to employment.