[Peace-discuss] Wages and Health Care

[C. G. Estabrook]

What's remarkable is that no major US corporations are calling
for national health care so that they can lay their burden
down.  Why not?  

The reason seems to be that such a plan would give workers a
measure of independence.  As it is now, the threat of losing
one's health insurance is almost a stronger inducement not to
strike, protest, or quit than losing pay.  The current system
is another weapon in the arsenal of the private tyrannies in
which we move and live and have our being...  --CGE

---- Original message ----
>Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:39:05 -0700 (PDT)
>From: David Green <davegreen84 at yahoo.com>  
>Subject: [Peace-discuss] Wages and Health Care  
>To: Peace Discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>
>>From Dean Baker's weekly Economic Reporting Review:
>www.cepr.net
>
>Labor Compensation at Delphi 
>
>Auto-Parts Supplier Files for Chapter 11
>Sholnn Freeman
>Washington Post, October 9, 2005, Page A18
>http://err.c.topica.com/maad6ZYablhorbpnt1wbaeQBpp/
>
>Auto Supplier Delphi Nears Bankruptcy
>Danny Hakim
>New York Times, October 9, 2005, Page A14
>http://err.c.topica.com/maad6ZYablhosbpnt1wbaeQBpp/
>
>These articles report on plans by Delphi, the
>country’s largest auto 
>supplier, to file for bankruptcy. The Post article
>quotes an auto 
>industry analyst as saying that Delphi’s total
>compensation package for an 
>average worker is “close to $125,000 to $130,000 per
>year.” It is 
>important to note that this measure includes all labor
>costs incurred by 
>Delphi, including costs for providing wages and
>benefits to laid off workers 
>and retirees, averaged over the number of active
>employees at Delphi. 
>While workers at Delphi receive substantially more pay
>and better 
>benefits than most workers in the United States, only
>about half the sum 
>mentioned in this article actually refers to wages or
>benefits seen by 
>current workers. (The Times article places wages in
>the range of $26 to $30 
>an hour.)  
>
>At one point the Times article notes that the U.S.
>auto industry is at 
>a disadvantage competing against Japanese firms
>because they have 
>nationalized health care. While this is true, it is
>important to note that a 
>nationalized health care system only provides an
>advantage because it 
>is far more efficient than the U.S. system. The
>nationalized health care 
>system also must be paid for, and if the Japanese
>system were as 
>inefficient as the U.S. health care system, then
>Japanese firms would be 
>paying roughly the same amount in taxes to the
>government to support the 
>health care system as U.S. firms pay to private
>insurers. However, 
>because the Japanese system costs less than half as
>much per person (and 
>allows the Japanese to enjoy substantially longer life
>expectancies than 
>people in the United States), health care imposes a
>much smaller burden 
>on Japanese firms than it does on U.S. firms.  
>
>*********************************