i dont have health coverage this year. cancelled it this year. my main gripe is that the coverage sucks. the cost of premiums in my experience is okay. im just not satisfied with out of pocket costs that i get for the premium. at this job and the last one the cost and coverage was about the same. the companies they had handling the health coverage both would claim that each job offered way better coverage than any other job, even their own. i definitely hope thats not the case.

what i definitely agree with you is that the main benefit to M4A is that you dont need to depend on a job for health coverage. you dont need to stick around at a bad job because the health coverage is good.

from what i have seen employers complain about the cost to cover employees as well, that its a limitation to them hiring more employees.

i have a couple of fears (dont know how well founded they are) with M4A. will it give most americans the same quality of coverage theyre used to? more so are these claims of keeping the same dr and such believable? that seems to be something people got burned on before and will be an easy target for it. i have definitely seen claims that coverage would improve in general but there needs to be more backing to it. the second fear is what happens to people employed in the private health industries? a lot of people will lose their job right? i want to say no but it seems logical. i hope someone can prove im wrong on that.

i dont think those two concerns should keep us from moving to M4A but i think it needs to be accounted for and addressed upfront.