Slashdot Mirror


Obamacare Could Help Fuel a Tech Start-Up Boom

dcblogs writes "The arrival of Obamacare may make it easier for some employees to quit their full-time jobs to launch tech start-ups, work as a freelance consultant, or pursue some other solo career path. Most tech start-up founders are older and need health insurance. 'The average age of people who create a tech start-up is 39, and not 20-something,' said Bruce Bachenheimer, who heads Pace University's Entrepreneurship Lab. Entrepreneurs are willing to take on risks, but health care is not a manageable risk, he said. 'There is a big difference between mortgaging your house on something you can control, and risking going bankrupt by an illness because of something you can't control,' said Bachenheimer. Donna Harris, the co-founder of the 1776 incubation platform in Washington, believes the healthcare law will encourage more start-ups. 'You have to know that there are millions of Americans who might be fantastic and highly successful entrepreneurs who are not pursuing that path because of how healthcare is structured,' said Harris"

16 of 671 comments (clear)

  1. yep by geekoid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If th e US has a civilized Health Care system, I would start my own business much easier. Or join a start up without worrying about health care.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As a small business owner, I cannot agree. I do have the impression at this point that ACA does not do enough to decouple health care financing from employment, but even so, it looks like ACA will help most small businesses, including mine.

    2. Re:yep by Charliemopps · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's the problem, employers are starting to stop worrying about healthcare because, hey, the government will do it for you right?

      I pretty much didn't like this from the start but I'm no fool, I'll take advantage of any government program I can. But this one sucks. First, my employer dropped 4 of our 6 healthcare options this year because some didn't qualify (they were the super cheap options the younger sales guys usually took) and some because they would have fallen into the "Cadillac" class. So now we can pick from either Blue Cross or a local HMO. Our rates also went up by 15% and they specifically stated this was due to compliance with the new law. We were told we could go to the exchanges if we wanted, but the prices were ridiculous, even with the subsidies they were totally unaffordable. I'm not even sure if I'd get a subsidy, but even the highest one still out-priced me. I can't imagine how a poor person could pay for it.

      The republicans are idiots. The worst thing they could do to Obama would be to let this thing run its course. It's a disaster.

    3. Re:yep by AuMatar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nope. I applied multiple times int he last 2 years and get rejected on at least a half dozen times by several companies. In one of the most liberal states in the nation (Maryland). You're just wrong.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    4. Re:yep by AuMatar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ask me in 3-5 years. It hasn't even been fully implemented yet. The majority of it comes into law on Jan 1. How can it be bringing down costs when only a tiny portion of it is running, and the most important part (exchanges) aren't on yet.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    5. Re:yep by Minupla · · Score: 4, Interesting

      *shrugs*

      I know GPs who have done a stint in the US and moved back here to practice. When I ask them, the answer boiled down to "Money aint everything kid."

      I guess a few years later I can understand. My (US citizen by birth) wife and I are here in Canada with our daughter. I've had offers to go down to the US at substantial salary increases. I run them by my wife and she thumbs down them all. "Not worth it - after you calculate in health care and private school for the kid, the extra money goes quick".

      At one point she was paying 500$/mo out of her 10$/hr job for health insurance. Her huge crime? She was born with a congenital heart defect (e.g. a preexisting condition).

      Incidentally - her Dad was a vet. They went bankrupt on her infant open heart surgery.

      I don't know if Obamacare is the right answer or not, but I gotta tell you folks, I wouldn't trade ya. Sorry.

      Min

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    6. Re:yep by Arterion · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The idea of your employer being in any way connected to your health care is just vile. I am sorry to hear about your personal situation, most of the analysis I've done shows that the exchanges are competitive with employer-provided health care, and in many cases cheaper with subsidies. If it turns out at the end of the year your employer insurance over-charged, I believe they have to refund you some of your premiums. They can't just pocket the difference and call it a day anymore. This is totally new. How well it will work remains to be seen. There is also the somewhat shady option of just paying the penalty for no insurance, and if something major happens, sign up then since you can't be denied for pre-existing conditions now...

      As for the poor, the law was written so that anyone making 138% FPL or less would get Medicaid. From there up to 400% would get subsidies. But half the states aren't doing the Medicaid expansion. This is a pretty big wrench in the cogs, and it remains to be see how it plays out. The idea was to get people with no insurance out of the ER and into preventative medicine, which is much cheaper to provide. Plus the moral arguments about helping the poor and sick, etc.

      I've been saying the same thing about the Republicans. If Obamacare is so awful, why not just sit back with a smug grin and let it fail for two years, then rake up in 2016? I have this suspicion they're afraid it might actually work. If all the poor, white people that voted for them suddenly can do see a doctor and get medicine and take care of nagging ailments under the auspices of "Obamacare", that's gonna devastate them at the polls with that demographic.

      As it stands for my family, there is myself, my brother, and my nephew who I know off the top of my head could get in on the Medicaid expansion. We currently have no health insurance. My brother actually has diabetes, so he needs it pretty badly. As it stands here in Tennessee, Obama is still evil and those damn liberals, etc., since we STILL won't have coverage in 2014. But if the expansion had went in, the three of us would have Obamacare, and it would be a hard argument for any of us (or my parents) to say Obamacare is bad when we're suddenly getting medical treatment we've needed for a while.

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
    7. Re:yep by Urza9814 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They just sold everyone else's souls. As I see it, everyone who brags here about how they're getting cheap health care due to this law at everyone else's expense is betraying the rest of their society.

      No, you've got that backwards -- the rest of society is betraying *them* slightly less.

      Why is some CEO's right to get a gold-plated cellphone or even your right to spend $20 at the movie theater worth more than their right to maybe live without being in constant pain -- or to live at all?

      Not that I'm a fan of Obamacare...it's a corporate handout, nothing more; what we really need is a single-payer system...but saying you're being "betrayed" because someone doesn't want to have to choose between food and healthcare is frankly kind of disgusting.

  2. The Real Problem Isn't Health Coverage by smpoole7 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That simply doesn't wash. While I certainly want everyone to have coverage and to get the best treatment, the fact is, BY LAW in the United States, no hospital can refuse to provide essential care. I have a friend who had breast cancer, and who went through the entire course of treatment without paying a penny. I have another who suffered kidney failure and went through years of dialysis -- without paying a dime.

    The real killer is *being*out*of*work. You're so sick, you can't work, so you have no income. For that, health insurance (whether Obamacare or something else) doesn't do a thing. You need coverage to pay the bills while you're out of work.

    THAT'S why people go bankrupt.

    Not taking sides either way, I'm just pointing that out. The fact is, also under the law, even if you have assets, as long as you pay the hospital what you can afford (even if it's only $5 a week), they can't do anything to you. If they take you to court, you can tell the judge: I was out of work for a year, I can afford to pay them $25 a month and that's it. The judge will almost always agree.

    I've been in court and have watched it happen.

    Again: you can make an argument for universal health care. But I just wanted to set the record straight about that.

    --
    Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
  3. Actually by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Interesting
    He's right. The present system ties people to their jobs. Aside from all the hate by certain groups, there is something to be said for some of the provisions.

    If you say, have some disease, and it is cured, and you want health coverage, you are stuck in your present job with it's present health coverage. Change jobs, and ooopsies, it's a preexisting condition. So a friend of my spouse who had breast cancer, is stuck in her job. Because if it recurs, which isn't likely at this point, but possible, she is bankrupt.

    And despite all the hate, there is a lit fuse in the present system. People without health care do get treatment for their illnesses and minor issues. They go to the Emergency room. There, they get the most expensive treatment available to people - emergency room care. Before my father passed away last year, he was in the emergency room three times. And it was a little strange. Most of the people there just seemed to have minor problems, like sore throats, colds, sick kids. I'd asked about that, and the eanswer was "it's poor folk with no insurance." But rest assured that it is paid for, by your's and my premiums, and by Government.

    The problem is, as insurance costs go up, and people drop off the rolls, the emergency room will become more and more used for more and more people. A real positive feedback loop, Eventually no one except people who can pay for their medical bills out of hand will afford health insurance. Then, unless we are going to force peole to go without medical treatment, we'll have a bizzare form of universal coverage. Not a good idea at all.

    Reading the opposition plan, it is some bafflegab about doing the same thing as we are doing now, except for more bafflegab about affordability.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  4. Re:Exactly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It also creates the exchanges, which ensure that you, as an individual can purchase healthcare at group rates.

    Can't say that we've seen a tech boom here in Massachusetts, things were moving along rather well anyway, but speaking as someone doing a startup, right now, in the state, with access to exchanges...it's awesome.

  5. Conservatives Positioning Themselves For Credit by damn_registrars · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is just another case of conservatives (this time the slashdot variety, but that isn't terribly important) trying to jockey for position to take credit if the Health Insurance Company Bailout Act of 2010 works out well for anyone beyond just the insurance industry. They are planting the ideas of possible potential benefits so that they can say "we told you so" if they pan out. As much as they are bitching (read: exhibiting massive grandstanding) on capital hill right now, the conservatives put themselves in the ultimate can't-lose position here; if it works they can say it was based on what Romney did and if it doesn't they can say it was overreaching.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  6. Re:Unmitigated bullshit by schematix · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nevada is a poor example. Their taxes are low because the tourism industry heavily subsidizes the entire state budget. Tax collection is quite high, but it's not coming out of the pockets of the residents of the state. Sales tax and vehicle registration taxes are also quite high. As far as unemployment, Nevada (especially Las Vegas), has a very uneducated, unhealthy, and transient population. Many people moved there during the construction boom, and the economy of the state is not diverse enough to accommodate the bust.

    --
    Scott
  7. Absolutely ridiculous by erroneus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Most people are healthy and only need to learn to stay healthy. Most are better off with a medical savings account than with medical insurance. Why give money away for someone else to make billions off of it while you get little more than weak promises that in the event something bad happens, you might get minimal care?

    We live in such a debt financing society we've all completely forgotten how to save money for bad days. Does a credit card really substitute for a savings?

    1. Re:Absolutely ridiculous by JayBean · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The answer to this is a MSA + a high deductible insurance plan. You use the MSA to cover smaller expenses and the insurance plan for situations like yours (which sounds like it was bad).

      The added benefit of an MSA is that it causes people to shop around a little.

      Insurance is not a bad thing by any stretch. Even that dream of single payer is really just an national insurance plan. It starts to get problematic when large numbers of people want insurance to cover smaller issues ("insurance covers birth control? I want my Viagra free!"). This leads to the costs going up on everyone.

  8. Re:Because they'll actually be able to buy coverag by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I am 35, healthy, and actually founded a startup last year. In 2012, I paid $187 a month for good individual coverage. This year that coverage went up to $200 a month.

    Well that's absolute proof then, that the program that starts tomorrow is so bad that it went back in time and caused your insurance company to raise your rates. Because insurance rates never went up until Obamacare was passed.

    I feel your pain. My dog never had worms before and now he's got worms. Goddamn Obama...

    Of course they told me that I can buy insurance on the Exchange, but rates and coverage options are not available yet.

    Because you live in a state where the governor and legislature put their fingers in their ears since 2010 and said, "We're not going to obey the law". First they were waiting for the Supreme Court, and then they were waiting for Romney to get elected so it could be repealed.

    Call your governor and ask why they haven't set up the exchanges yet. If you lived in my state, you'd be able to go sign up for care at less than your $187/month tomorrow morning.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.