If neither the Insurance Company, nor the employer, pays for birth control, then such birth control will be purchased by the employees** with funds gained from their work.
As such, the total compensation they receive from their opting-out-employer, as compared to an opting-in-employer, would be less. In a free market, the employer would then have to increase wages slightly to offset the decreased utility of the total package, if they wa nted to maintain the same quality of labor force... so, money from religious objectors would still be "subsidizing" contraception.
** Of course, reality being what it is, some percentage of that employee base will neglect birth control and have a pregnancy that they otherwise would not have. Labor and delivery costs are non-controversial as far as insurance payments go, but if I happen to share an insurance company with one of these Catholic organizations, my premiums will rise to help pay for all those ass-backward-policy-inspired babies.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 17/2/12 02:27 (UTC)As such, the total compensation they receive from their opting-out-employer, as compared to an opting-in-employer, would be less. In a free market, the employer would then have to increase wages slightly to offset the decreased utility of the total package, if they wa nted to maintain the same quality of labor force... so, money from religious objectors would still be "subsidizing" contraception.
** Of course, reality being what it is, some percentage of that employee base will neglect birth control and have a pregnancy that they otherwise would not have. Labor and delivery costs are non-controversial as far as insurance payments go, but if I happen to share an insurance company with one of these Catholic organizations, my premiums will rise to help pay for all those ass-backward-policy-inspired babies.