01 Oct 13
Originally posted by utherpendragonIf all of them buy in, it may work. But if some don't buy in, the extra cost gets passed on to those that do. And that extra cost will cause some of them to drop out too. In the end, as the necessary cost goes up, we may see very few young healthy people buy in.
but its now the law of the land , right ?
and as far as his base goes, he is not running for re-election so whats the point ? he doesnt need a base.
the point is, if young people who feel no need for health insurance at this point in their lives, dont buy into this non-sense, Obamacare will collapse. It wont work. He needs their money. Obama care is screwed with out them. And more than half the Nation opposes Obamacare.
But on the other end (the old and sick), they will buy in immediately. They now have opportunity to enter a contract to pay perhaps $500 per month to a company who will have the obligation to pay $5000 per month back to them. Who wouldn't do that?
Ultimately all the sick people are going to buy insurance and fewer healthy people will buy it. The cost of insurance under the "affordable" care act is going up,... way up.
A truly socialized medicine would be better than ObamaCare. The old status quo would have been better than ObamaCare. Anything would be better than ObamaCare.
01 Oct 13
Originally posted by caissad4You might need to do further research. At the income level implied by your post (and depending on age, the state in which you live, etc.), your subsidized premium could well be under $100 per month, and less than 5.0% of your income. You might want to check here: http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/.
The 'Affordable' Care Act is a farce. According to the govt website it will cost me 12% of my income and still have a deductible to pay every year. I simply cannot afford to pay $180 a month . For me it is just another tax increase (penalties for not being able to afford this) nevermind the coming increase in Medicare taxes. I have generally voted Democrat ...[text shortened]... lass in America. Way to go Obama !
I have no faith or hope in the US political system. Not now.
I currently purchase individual insurance at a reasonable rate, but I will research the ACA exchange where I live anyway.
Originally posted by caissad4You miserable greedy wretch!
The 'Affordable' Care Act is a farce. According to the govt website it will cost me 12% of my income and still have a deductible to pay every year. I simply cannot afford to pay $180 a month . For me it is just another tax increase (penalties for not being able to afford this) nevermind the coming increase in Medicare taxes. I have generally voted Democrat ...[text shortened]... lass in America. Way to go Obama !
I have no faith or hope in the US political system. Not now.
Pay your fair share!! ðŸ˜
01 Oct 13
4 edits
Originally posted by whodeyIf $180 per month is 12% of Caissa’s income, then her annual income is about $18,000. In apparently the most expensive state (Wyoming) she could purchase ACA insurance for herself for about $775 per year (after the tax credit subsidy, and depending on age)—about $65 permonth, or 4.31% of income—using the Kaiser Family Foundation estimator at the site I posted ( http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/). [Note: figures based on the Silver Plan.]
You miserable greedy wretch!
Pay your fair share!! ðŸ˜
For a two-person household, the subsidized premium would be about $30 per month—2% of household income (in a state that does not expand Medicaid coverage). [Again, based on the Silver Plan.]
However, larger families below the ACA poverty threshold are ineligible for any tax credit subsidy. Then she’s dependent on Medicaid eligibility in her state—
“Obamacare expands Medicaid to many low-income adults, including adults without dependent children. However, more than two dozen states have chosen not to expand Medicaid under the law or are still debating the matter. In states that expanded Medicaid, you may qualify for Medicaid as a single individual if you earn less than about $16,000 a year, while other family sizes can qualify at higher incomes. In states that did not expand, you may have few or no options for affordable coverage. In that case, you will not have to pay a penalty for not having coverage” (http://kff.org/health-reform/fact-sheet/obamacare-you-if-you-are-low-income-and-may-qualify-for-medicaid/; my bold).
There is also no tax penalty for not purchasing insurance if the (tax-credit subsidized) premiums are more than 8% of income (http://kff.org/infographic/the-requirement-to-buy-coverage-under-the-affordable-care-act/).
01 Oct 13
For further analysis of the effects of not expanding Medicaid (as opposed to states that do expand coverage), click on the Rand study here—
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/01/obamacare-health-care-savings_n_4024377.html?utm_hp_ref=business
Or go here: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR300/RR383/RAND_RR383.sum.pdf
The complete study can be found here: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR300/RR383/RAND_RR383.pdf
Originally posted by moon1969What I find fascinating is that Obama has bowed to kings, has appeased despots, coddled tyrants, and somehow slipped out of his statement to attack Syria (mind you, I don't think attacking Syria would have been a good thing, but how he was for it before he was against it made the United States a laughingstock in the international community), but he will not negotiate with Republicans, saying he "won't talk to anyone with a bomb strapped to their chest" (and thus equating people who believe, as I do, that Obamacare is a terrible, destructive law with terrorists).
Explaining and informing. Makes sense. A great opportunity for college students without medical insurance to enroll. A great subsidy and preexisting conditions accepted.
Quite the statesman you libretards have elected.
01 Oct 13
Originally posted by sasquatch672The President and America came out great. Focused attention and got an admission from Syria on their chemical weapons, without firing a shot. Incredibly effective.
What I find fascinating is that Obama has bowed to kings, has appeased despots, coddled tyrants, and somehow slipped out of his statement to attack Syria (mind you, I don't think attacking Syria would have been a good thing, but how he was for it before he was against it made the United States a laughingstock in the international community), but he will ...[text shortened]... errible, destructive law with terrorists).
Quite the statesman you libretards have elected.
02 Oct 13
Originally posted by vistesdUnfortunately I am a smoker. This doubles the insurance cost. I hope you are correct about 8%. But at least the rates won't be raised for my neighbor who gets drunk 4 times a week or another who seems stoned all the time.
There is also no tax penalty for not purchasing insurance if the (tax-credit subsidized) premiums are more than 8% of income (http://kff.org/infographic/the-requirement-to-buy-coverage-under-the-affordable-care-act/).[/b]
02 Oct 13
Originally posted by caissad4Ah. I hadn't checked smoker's rates. I hope there are no exceptions to the 8% for you. It looks as of my premium costs would be about the same, or more, as what I pay now. We recently moved, and rates are better here than they were in the state we moved from, where the ACA rates would have been a bit less.
Unfortunately I am a smoker. This doubles the insurance cost. I hope you are correct about 8%. But at least the rates won't be raised for my neighbor who gets drunk 4 times a week or another who seems stoned all the time.
02 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by techsouthIf all buy in....has anyone thought that had they done that before
If all of them buy in, it may work. But if some don't buy in, the extra cost gets passed on to those that do. And that extra cost will cause some of them to drop out too. In the end, as the necessary cost goes up, we may see very few young healthy people buy in.
But on the other end (the old and sick), they will buy in immediately. They now have opp ...[text shortened]... old status quo would have been better than ObamaCare. Anything would be better than ObamaCare.
Obamacare we would not have Obamacare? The thing that has changed
is now by the power of the law, taxes and fines will be dealt out to people
and business that were not there before, a thousands of pages of new
rules....but if everyone buys in....
We are in so much trouble.
Kelly
02 Oct 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyIt is not in the constitution. I believe the supreme court has been corrupted as has congress and the white house. Imagine if there was a law that said anyone assembling for worship or prayer will be fined $5000. The people cry foul and the supreme court rules that since there is a fine and a fine is a tax, the law is constitutional. Also there was no part of the law preventing people from going to church and freedom of religion is maintained.This is the kind of thing we can expect from our system currently.
Where in the Constitution of the Once Proud Republic of The United States of America is the Mandated Purchase of a Product or Service permitted? We're living in the twilight of commonsense; and our children and their children will pay dearly.
I thought you guys trusted in God? 😵 There is talk of rebellion afoot, you would not rebel against duly appointed authority, would you? Embrace it, think of all the healthy Americans that you will produce! It may even be an incentive for people like cassiad4 to give up smoking!