| 50 is when it starts to get significantly harder to get into Canada, IIRC. I don't know how he would feel about moving. The professional background would be a big plus in an application for residency. But, unless he has investor class savings, he'd be looking at continuing to work, probably at lower pay. But... it would solve the health insurance problem. (So would parts of Europe.) Probably better for him to stay, and stay at 40 hours a week. Maybe a consulting sideline, if his circumstances allow. Which reminds me; for some professional categories, there's pretty good group insurance through professional organizations. Or so I hear, while I've yet to find something like that for myself. By the way, corporate America was crying out for something to be done, when the ACA was proposed and written. Businesses were facing double digit percentage year over year increases, and were saying 'we can't continue to compete particularly with foreign competition that doesn't have these levels of expense -- neither absolute nor yearly increases'. I view it as a very middle of the road proposal. It kept the existing insurance and provider structures and worked to increase the customer base. It also had provisions for getting over the "hump" period where previously uninsured were incorporated, caught up on deferred care, and during which insurers' actuaries would have a chance to determine and model the new population. Reflecting Obama's rhetoric leading into his first term, it was designed to bring people together. And it was also successful in measures that don't get as much credit. For example, it really did provide some significant cost controls for group insurance. One reason the hue and cry from employers died down. But it was deliberately sabotaged -- rather than improved --
with the goal of turning it into political fodder by a party whose leadership put itself before all else. I think I agree with you, that employer-provided group insurance has become quite anti-competitive. |