Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Q: How do you argue ObamaCare will raise health insurance prices for nearly everyone? A: Ignore tax credits nearly everyone will get for purchasing health insurance through ObamaCare   ( talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line
    More: Fail, obamacare, health insurance, food heritage, sliding scales, Poverty in the United States, Commonwealth Fund  
•       •       •

2412 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Oct 2013 at 11:56 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



541 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-10-21 10:05:00 AM  
SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT! So our taxes will just go up instead. It's simple math. You can't cut the bottom off a blanket, and sew a longer piece to the top, and claim you made the blanket shorter. This is idiocy. Pay it now, or pay it later...you will pay.
 
2013-10-21 10:20:01 AM  

voltOhm: SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT! So our taxes will just go up instead. It's simple math. You can't cut the bottom off a blanket, and sew a longer piece to the top, and claim you made the blanket shorter. This is idiocy. Pay it now, or pay it later...you will pay.


Already have been for many years. My property taxes have a line item which goes to nothing other than paying for medical care for people who show up at county hospitals and consider it too socialist to get their own insurance.

I'm supposed to be upset about not having to pick up the tab for the freebaggers anymore, I suppose, but I'm just having trouble with the idea of making these cheap leeches take a little personal responsibility.

/oblig: Ted Cruz can go jump in a lake.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-10-21 10:44:52 AM  

voltOhm: SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT! So our taxes will just go up instead. It's simple math. You can't cut the bottom off a blanket, and sew a longer piece to the top, and claim you made the blanket shorter. This is idiocy. Pay it now, or pay it later...you will pay.


We're already paying for it.  In my state every healthcare premium (regardless of the size of the business), has a built in cost inflation to cover the many many thousands of people who use the Emergency Room as a doctors office then don't pay.   My wife suffered a heart attack and I took her to the emergency room, they did an immediately blood pressure and heart rate.  They admitted her immediately infront of at least 100+ people.  There was nearly a riot because people had been waiting for hours to see an emergency room doctor because the had a cold or a stomach ache, etc.   I sat in the ER for a while while the looked her over.  I did not see ONE SINGLE person who appeared to have an emergency.  No one was bleeding, no one appeared injured, no one seemed seriously ill.  They were all socializing, knitting, reading magazines and books.

In another case my parents had a next door neighbor who didn't have health insurance.  In one year he had 11 emergency room visits (carried away in an ambulance).  In each case his heart problem resulted in multi-day stays at the hospital.  Because he didn't have insurance they wouldn't do a bypass.  Instead they would stabilize him and send him home.  The cost of those visits must have been staggering over the years.   Eventually he died.

In Baltimore a group of doctors did a study and found that a small handful of people where costing the medical system millions of dollars because their health problems went untreated once they left the ER.  The problems became worse until they were hospitalized, then they were released without care only to become severe again.

These people are a huge cost to the system.  The system isn't going to pay for it, WE pay for it.

We already pay for the uninsured through higher monthly insurance premiums.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-10-21 10:48:06 AM  
NFA: We already pay for the uninsured through higher monthly insurance premiums.

Not only that, hospitals get federal money to compensate them for uninsured patients that they treat in the emergency room.
 
2013-10-21 11:06:49 AM  

voltOhm: SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT! So our taxes will just go up instead. It's simple math. You can't cut the bottom off a blanket, and sew a longer piece to the top, and claim you made the blanket shorter. This is idiocy. Pay it now, or pay it later...you will pay.


We already do pay. Why do you think your premiums went up by double digits every year for as long as you can remember? It's partially because of greed, but partially because a lot of costs to cover the masses of uninsured were being absorbed by the system.

The ACA reduces costs by requiring everyone to be in the risk pool. Even if you refuse to get coverage you still pay into it. The ACA isn't perfect but it's a damn sight better than forcing me to pay for everyone who's uninsured and waits until they have to get the most expensive care there is (the emergency room).

Not to mention that there's a lot of secondary economic benefits to having a healthier population with good healthcare, and more access to opportunities that they wouldn't otherwise have because of crushing medical costs.
 
2013-10-21 11:11:58 AM  
I've been collecting stories of people who have benefited from the ACA on a tumblr: http://acasuccessstories.tumblr.com.  The idea is to provide a counter to the rampant disinformation and flat-out lies (such as the ones mentioned in the TFA for this thread), by giving people a place to tell their own story about what the ACA has done for them. If you have a success story, I'd like to ask you to submit it here.
 
2013-10-21 11:16:16 AM  
How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.
 
2013-10-21 11:17:15 AM  

voltOhm: SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT!


My health insurance premiums and Rx drug bill come to more than my mortgage payment, so as far as paying, I have you covered.
 
2013-10-21 11:23:23 AM  

serial_crusher: How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.


That's not how it works. Your premiums are reduced; you don't pay up front out of pocket if you qualify for the subsidies.
 
2013-10-21 11:41:26 AM  

Cyclometh: serial_crusher: How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.

That's not how it works. Your premiums are reduced; you don't pay up front out of pocket if you qualify for the subsidies.


Hmm, didn't know that.  Is "tax credit" the appropriate word to use to describe the subsidies then?

What happens if you're making poverty level income 11 months of the year, then get a $100,000 bonus in December?  Do you have to pay the subsidy back?
 
2013-10-21 11:55:21 AM  

serial_crusher: Cyclometh: serial_crusher: How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.

That's not how it works. Your premiums are reduced; you don't pay up front out of pocket if you qualify for the subsidies.

Hmm, didn't know that.  Is "tax credit" the appropriate word to use to describe the subsidies then?

What happens if you're making poverty level income 11 months of the year, then get a $100,000 bonus in December?  Do you have to pay the subsidy back?


If your income changes, you may have to pay portions of it back based on when it changed. I'm tracking my income as a freelancer very carefully because right now I qualify for pretty much zero-cost healthcare (Sole provider for a family of four, making a lot less than last year), but since my income should be close to double by this time next year, I'll probably be adjusting my income on my state exchange every month or two and then paying out of pocket for at least some of my costs.

Which is fine; right now I need the coverage and can't afford it, but when I can I want to be able to contribute because it means other people have the same opportunity I do.

Beats the living shiat out of paying almost $2k/month in COBRA.
 
2013-10-21 11:55:33 AM  

Cyclometh: I've been collecting stories of people who have benefited from the ACA on a tumblr: http://acasuccessstories.tumblr.com.  The idea is to provide a counter to the rampant disinformation and flat-out lies (such as the ones mentioned in the TFA for this thread), by giving people a place to tell their own story about what the ACA has done for them. If you have a success story, I'd like to ask you to submit it here.


People should also include positive stories dealing with the Obamacare death panels (ODPs).  They are not killing everyone they deal with which is a fact that cannot be understated.
 
2013-10-21 11:56:15 AM  

serial_crusher: What happens if you're making poverty level income 11 months of the year, then get a $100,000 bonus in December?


C'mon now.
 
2013-10-21 11:57:37 AM  

serial_crusher: How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.


My girlfriend in-law, nice person, works 40 hours a week, very low pay, is paying a little over $400 for employer insurance for her and her months old daughter.  She's easily beyond 9.5% cutoff and qualifies for exchange insurance.  Not only will she be getting better insurance but she's going to save *at least* $150 a month (did the math on Kaiser Foundation's web site).  My wife and I had to clue her in to this (she was asking us) because the idiots at her job were feeding her all the ACA misinformation.  And that's what pisses me off about the right-wing bullshiat heard on cable news and elsewhere.  Here's a single mom with an 8-month old who is afraid to get off her shiatty employer insurance because of what emotionally invested morons are telling her at work.
 
2013-10-21 11:59:09 AM  

serial_crusher: What happens if you're making poverty level income 11 months of the year, then get a $100,000 bonus in December? Do you have to pay the subsidy back?


guys how do years work

anyone

help plz
 
2013-10-21 11:59:33 AM  

serial_crusher: Cyclometh: serial_crusher: How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.

That's not how it works. Your premiums are reduced; you don't pay up front out of pocket if you qualify for the subsidies.

Hmm, didn't know that.  Is "tax credit" the appropriate word to use to describe the subsidies then?


Yes it is. Section 1401 of HR 3590 which amends the tax code and creates Section 36B is titled "Refundable tax credit providing premium assistance for coverage under a qualified health plan." This credit can be advanced per Section 1412.

What happens if you're making poverty level income 11 months of the year, then get a $100,000 bonus in December?  Do you have to pay the subsidy back?

You would have to remit it per the rules in Section 36B(f)(2).
 
2013-10-21 11:59:33 AM  
Did anyone tell the thread shiatter yet that we already pay for medical care for the uninsured?
 
2013-10-21 12:00:26 PM  

UberDave: serial_crusher: How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.

My girlfriend in-law, nice person, works 40 hours a week, very low pay, is paying a little over $400 for employer insurance for her and her months old daughter.  She's easily beyond 9.5% cutoff and qualifies for exchange insurance.  Not only will she be getting better insurance but she's going to save *at least* $150 a month (did the math on Kaiser Foundation's web site).  My wife and I had to clue her in to this (she was asking us) because the idiots at her job were feeding her all the ACA misinformation.  And that's what pisses me off about the right-wing bullshiat heard on cable news and elsewhere.  Here's a single mom with an 8-month old who is afraid to get off her shiatty employer insurance because of what emotionally invested morons are telling her at work.


Send her to the tumblr to tell her tale. :)
 
2013-10-21 12:00:42 PM  
serial_crusher:

What happens if you're making poverty level income 11 months of the year, then get a $100,000 bonus in December?


Have one hellacious New Year's party?
 
2013-10-21 12:00:46 PM  

voltOhm: SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT! So our taxes will just go up instead. It's simple math. You can't cut the bottom off a blanket, and sew a longer piece to the top, and claim you made the blanket shorter. This is idiocy. Pay it now, or pay it later...you will pay.


Yes, although I believe the ACA to be a good start, the logic here is frightening.  Government paying for something is not getting it for free.
 
2013-10-21 12:02:00 PM  

AngryDragon: Government paying for something is not getting it for free.


We were  never getting it for free. Under the ACA, we're going to get it for a damn sight less than we were before.
 
2013-10-21 12:04:08 PM  
I get no subsidy.

Employer provided.  Still have no idea what I'll be paying next year because they've been dragging their feet on that.

Usually we have it end of September.  We'll have it November 1st.

//Know it meets the bronze level, which should mean it covers preventative care.  Should.
 
2013-10-21 12:04:28 PM  
Are these subsidies for the lucky folks who live in states whose governors allowed the expansion or can anyone get them?
 
2013-10-21 12:04:41 PM  

UberDave: serial_crusher: How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.

My girlfriend in-law, nice person, works 40 hours a week, very low pay, is paying a little over $400 for employer insurance for her and her months old daughter.  She's easily beyond 9.5% cutoff and qualifies for exchange insurance.  Not only will she be getting better insurance but she's going to save *at least* $150 a month (did the math on Kaiser Foundation's web site).  My wife and I had to clue her in to this (she was asking us) because the idiots at her job were feeding her all the ACA misinformation.  And that's what pisses me off about the right-wing bullshiat heard on cable news and elsewhere.  Here's a single mom with an 8-month old who is afraid to get off her shiatty employer insurance because of what emotionally invested morons are telling her at work.


"Girlfriend in-law"?
 
2013-10-21 12:06:00 PM  

Headso: Did anyone tell the thread shiatter yet that we already pay for medical care for the uninsured?


Where are those death panels when you need them?
 
2013-10-21 12:06:18 PM  

AngryDragon: voltOhm: SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT! So our taxes will just go up instead. It's simple math. You can't cut the bottom off a blanket, and sew a longer piece to the top, and claim you made the blanket shorter. This is idiocy. Pay it now, or pay it later...you will pay.

Yes, although I believe the ACA to be a good start, the logic here is frightening.  Government paying for something is not getting it for free.


Apparently very few people know the taxpayer and society already paid for the uninsured. Can I ask you where you believed the money came from when a hobo goes to the ER?
 
2013-10-21 12:06:20 PM  

Cyclometh: AngryDragon: Government paying for something is not getting it for free.

We were  never getting it for free. Under the ACA, we're going to get it for a damn sight less than we were before.


Well that remains to be seen, but hopefully so.  In absolute terms.

Saying that the government's subsidies reduce the cost is ridiculous though.
 
2013-10-21 12:07:08 PM  
We would also have accepted the "obvious" tag.
 
2013-10-21 12:07:38 PM  
wow these very concerned posters are correct

there should be something that funds this

like an individual mandate to reduce the impact of forcing insurance companies to insure the less profitable

or higher medicare taxes on wealthy people

or limits on tax deductions for medical expenses and fsas

or an excise tax on cadillac policies

or a tax on certain medical devices and certain brand name drugs

or a limitation on expenditures under medicare advantage when they're overpaying compared to regular medicare

or a reduction in medicare reimbursements to substandard hospitals

or even just a tax on indoor tanning to piss boehner off

those all could be things that could help pay for it

and i am very concerned about the lack of any of these in what i believe obamacare does
 
2013-10-21 12:07:41 PM  

mrshowrules: Cyclometh: I've been collecting stories of people who have benefited from the ACA on a tumblr: http://acasuccessstories.tumblr.com.  The idea is to provide a counter to the rampant disinformation and flat-out lies (such as the ones mentioned in the TFA for this thread), by giving people a place to tell their own story about what the ACA has done for them. If you have a success story, I'd like to ask you to submit it here.

People should also include positive stories dealing with the Obamacare death panels (ODPs).  They are not killing everyone they deal with which is a fact that cannot be understated.


I notice your little idea would immediately exclude those people that WERE killed by the Obamacare death panels.  If they're dead, how will they tell their stories?  Nice try, Lib.
 
2013-10-21 12:07:50 PM  

Cyclometh: UberDave: serial_crusher: How do poor folks feel about paying an increased monthly premium on the promise that they'll get a tax refund at the end of the year?  If I was living check to check I'd be a little miffed.

My girlfriend in-law, nice person, works 40 hours a week, very low pay, is paying a little over $400 for employer insurance for her and her months old daughter.  She's easily beyond 9.5% cutoff and qualifies for exchange insurance.  Not only will she be getting better insurance but she's going to save *at least* $150 a month (did the math on Kaiser Foundation's web site).  My wife and I had to clue her in to this (she was asking us) because the idiots at her job were feeding her all the ACA misinformation.  And that's what pisses me off about the right-wing bullshiat heard on cable news and elsewhere.  Here's a single mom with an 8-month old who is afraid to get off her shiatty employer insurance because of what emotionally invested morons are telling her at work.

Send her to the tumblr to tell her tale. :)


I believe she tried several times but the site was down or repeatedly crashed when she tried to enter her information.
 
2013-10-21 12:07:57 PM  

UberDave: girlfriend in-law


How does that work?  Wife's brother's girlfriend?
If they have an 8 month old, he should have married her...
 
2013-10-21 12:08:13 PM  

gadian: Are these subsidies for the lucky folks who live in states whose governors allowed the expansion or can anyone get them?


Unless the courts hear one of the cases arguing that individuals in states covered by the federal exchange aren't eligible for the tax credits, everyone is. And I highly doubt the courts will hear that case because how do you prove standing and being harmed by somebody getting a tax credit?
 
2013-10-21 12:08:36 PM  

Kome: "Girlfriend in-law"?


His brother-in-law's girlfriend, I'm guessing.
 
2013-10-21 12:08:40 PM  

MisterTweak: voltOhm: SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT! So our taxes will just go up instead. It's simple math. You can't cut the bottom off a blanket, and sew a longer piece to the top, and claim you made the blanket shorter. This is idiocy. Pay it now, or pay it later...you will pay.

Already have been for many years. My property taxes have a line item which goes to nothing other than paying for medical care for people who show up at county hospitals and consider it too socialist to get their own insurance.

I'm supposed to be upset about not having to pick up the tab for the freebaggers anymore, I suppose, but I'm just having trouble with the idea of making these cheap leeches take a little personal responsibility.

/oblig: Ted Cruz can go jump in a lake.


Problem is now not only will you be paying for them, you'll also be paying for the implementation and maintenance of yet another unnecessary bureaucratic behemoth.

 / unnecessary bureaucratic behemoth
// Is my new bands name.
 
2013-10-21 12:09:17 PM  

BMulligan: We would also have accepted the "obvious" tag.


It's hard telling what to tag politics articles with these days. Dumbass/obvious/asinine/fail all seem to blend together.

/subby
 
2013-10-21 12:09:41 PM  

Kome: "Girlfriend in-law"?


I'm still trying to figure that one out too. Presumably his sisters ex-husbands girlfriend?
 
2013-10-21 12:09:56 PM  

Headso: AngryDragon: voltOhm: SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR THAT! So our taxes will just go up instead. It's simple math. You can't cut the bottom off a blanket, and sew a longer piece to the top, and claim you made the blanket shorter. This is idiocy. Pay it now, or pay it later...you will pay.

Yes, although I believe the ACA to be a good start, the logic here is frightening.  Government paying for something is not getting it for free.

Apparently very few people know the taxpayer and society already paid for the uninsured. Can I ask you where you believed the money came from when a hobo goes to the ER?


Also not the point.  It talks about health insurance prices.  Subsidies do not reduce the overall cost though they may reduce the point cost to a specific person or group under limited circumstances.  That cost is still borne, just not by the beneficiary.
 
2013-10-21 12:10:06 PM  

serial_crusher: UberDave: girlfriend in-law

How does that work?  Wife's brother's girlfriend?
If they have an 8 month old, he should have married her...


Sorry, I clicked submit too soon.  Meant to add:
If they've been dating less than 8 months and she's already soliciting financial advice from his family, she sounds clingy.

/ I guess it could be 17 months if he's into the preggos.
 
2013-10-21 12:10:33 PM  

Serious Black: gadian: Are these subsidies for the lucky folks who live in states whose governors allowed the expansion or can anyone get them?

Unless the courts hear one of the cases arguing that individuals in states covered by the federal exchange aren't eligible for the tax credits, everyone is. And I highly doubt the courts will hear that case because how do you prove standing and being harmed by somebody getting a tax credit?


which tax credit is the medicare expansion again

i always forget that part
 
2013-10-21 12:11:55 PM  

Cyclometh: I've been collecting stories of people who have benefited from the ACA on a tumblr: http://acasuccessstories.tumblr.com.  The idea is to provide a counter to the rampant disinformation and flat-out lies (such as the ones mentioned in the TFA for this thread), by giving people a place to tell their own story about what the ACA has done for them. If you have a success story, I'd like to ask you to submit it here.


Gonna throw out the stories that don't fit your narrative huh. Typical.
 
2013-10-21 12:12:53 PM  

serial_crusher: UberDave: girlfriend in-law

How does that work?  Wife's brother's girlfriend?
If they have an 8 month old, he should have married her...


Or at least sewn a scarlet "A" on her frock, right?
 
2013-10-21 12:12:56 PM  

sprawl15: Serious Black: gadian: Are these subsidies for the lucky folks who live in states whose governors allowed the expansion or can anyone get them?

Unless the courts hear one of the cases arguing that individuals in states covered by the federal exchange aren't eligible for the tax credits, everyone is. And I highly doubt the courts will hear that case because how do you prove standing and being harmed by somebody getting a tax credit?

which tax credit is the medicare expansion again

i always forget that part


Um, it's none of them?

Did you have a stroke recently? Or maybe your account got taken over by whoever was running winterwhile...
 
2013-10-21 12:12:57 PM  
There is absolutely no question that wealthy people with high-paying jobs who for some idiotic reason don't have health insurance will be paying higher premiums. This new mandate is definitely going to be a minor inconvenience to at least twelve and possibly as many as 50 people across the country. SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING.
 
2013-10-21 12:12:57 PM  
Whatever, I find it hard to believe that the profit-from-death industry would do such a horrible thing as raise prices in order to be grandfathered in.
 
2013-10-21 12:13:09 PM  
My employer provider policy with BCBS is probably Platinum level and costs $1,350/month. Of that, I pay $450 and my employer pays $900.

There is a Platnium policy available from BCBS on the exchange that looks better than my policy ($0 deductible, $0 copays for everything) available for $1,132 per month, before subsidies. I would qualify for a $78 a month subsidy. So that plan would cost ~$1,050, or $300 a month less, for a better policy.

My employer could just directly give me $750/month, and I could pay the full policy price myself, and I would save $150/month out of pocket while my employer would save $150/month. And I would get even better coverage.

I mean, yeah, it's an anectdote and all that, but ignoring subsidies sort of defeats the purpose of price comparisons. A friend of a friend on facebook was complaining about how expensive its going to be for her single mom friend with 3 kids who makes $45k/year. At $45k per year with 3 kids, she qualifies for roughly a $700 a month policy, which gets you a $10 copay, $750/year dudctible plan for ~$50 a month in our area. That's incredibly good coverage for super cheap.

You can make anything look bad in a cost comparison if you just make up costs.
 
2013-10-21 12:13:28 PM  

vpb: NFA: We already pay for the uninsured through higher monthly insurance premiums.

Not only that, hospitals get federal money to compensate them for uninsured patients that they treat in the emergency room.


Federal Money? Don't you mean OUR money?
 
2013-10-21 12:16:30 PM  

error 303: My employer provider policy with BCBS is probably Platinum level and costs $1,350/month. Of that, I pay $450 and my employer pays $900.

There is a Platnium policy available from BCBS on the exchange that looks better than my policy ($0 deductible, $0 copays for everything) available for $1,132 per month, before subsidies. I would qualify for a $78 a month subsidy. So that plan would cost ~$1,050, or $300 a month less, for a better policy.

My employer could just directly give me $750/month, and I could pay the full policy price myself, and I would save $150/month out of pocket while my employer would save $150/month. And I would get even better coverage.

I mean, yeah, it's an anectdote and all that, but ignoring subsidies sort of defeats the purpose of price comparisons. A friend of a friend on facebook was complaining about how expensive its going to be for her single mom friend with 3 kids who makes $45k/year. At $45k per year with 3 kids, she qualifies for roughly a $700 a month policy, which gets you a $10 copay, $750/year dudctible plan for ~$50 a month in our area. That's incredibly good coverage for super cheap.

You can make anything look bad in a cost comparison if you just make up costs.


Do you qualify for the subsidy if your employer offers a health plan but you decide to buy through the exchange?
 
2013-10-21 12:18:05 PM  

Cletus C.: error 303: My employer provider policy with BCBS is probably Platinum level and costs $1,350/month. Of that, I pay $450 and my employer pays $900.

There is a Platnium policy available from BCBS on the exchange that looks better than my policy ($0 deductible, $0 copays for everything) available for $1,132 per month, before subsidies. I would qualify for a $78 a month subsidy. So that plan would cost ~$1,050, or $300 a month less, for a better policy.

My employer could just directly give me $750/month, and I could pay the full policy price myself, and I would save $150/month out of pocket while my employer would save $150/month. And I would get even better coverage.

I mean, yeah, it's an anectdote and all that, but ignoring subsidies sort of defeats the purpose of price comparisons. A friend of a friend on facebook was complaining about how expensive its going to be for her single mom friend with 3 kids who makes $45k/year. At $45k per year with 3 kids, she qualifies for roughly a $700 a month policy, which gets you a $10 copay, $750/year dudctible plan for ~$50 a month in our area. That's incredibly good coverage for super cheap.

You can make anything look bad in a cost comparison if you just make up costs.

Do you qualify for the subsidy if your employer offers a health plan but you decide to buy through the exchange?


I don't believe so. I don't think you're even eligible to purchase through an exchange if your employer offers you insurance? Either way it's moot, there's no way my employer is going to redirect their benefit component of my salary into take-home pay. But as a thought experiment I think it's telling.
 
2013-10-21 12:18:27 PM  
They also compared it to the CHEAPEST possible coverage not to similar level of coverage. They even admitted in their article when you did compare it to similar coverage costs went down.
 
Displayed 50 of 541 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report