Posted on 07/01/2012 9:32:48 PM PDT by MrChips
The recent healthcare decision affects us all in different ways. But, let’s consider a very real person named Joe. Now, Joe is a nice fellow who lost his job during this recession and now works two jobs rather than rely on welfare. Joe is also a heart patient, and he does have limited but affordable catastrophic insurance. He hears on television that Obamacare will require him to buy a comprehensive policy that costs almost three times what he is paying now (source: Price Waterhouse), and that his much less expensive catastrophic insurance will be outlawed. Everyone must be the same. Joe works hard at his two jobs, and his salary is just enough to pay his mortgage, put food on the table, and purchase gas for his car, but it is too high for him to qualify for government subsidies under Obamacare. He cannot afford this new insurance, but Joe hears Democrats on television telling him that he is “selfish” and a “free-rider” if he does not buy insurance because clearly, in their arrogant presumption, “he can afford it.” He must pay a tax-penalty, one that will rise from 1% of his income to 2.5% over three years. These Democrats have no idea how hard he has worked all his life to have a home, how much his mortgage payment is, or anything else about his life. They just blindly assume that he can afford their expensive new insurance, a form of insurance that covers Joe for pregnancy, birth-control pills, and pediatric services, none of which he will ever need. Then Joe hears that even if he were to buy this new insurance, he will not be able to deduct it as medical expense on his tax return, as he usually does, because under Obamacare the income threshold for medical deductions has been raised from 7.5% to 10%, a very difficult level to reach. This will cost Joe about $2,000 on top of the $1,000 (or more) tax-penalty he will have to pay if he does not buy insurance. Joe then learns that some woman named Kathleen Sibelius has added an abortion-services surcharge to every month’s premium. Joe is a pro-life Catholic. In the end, it seems, this new insurance will require him to sell his home and to violate his conscience. Joe does not buy this expensive new insurance and lives without any insurance at all, having lost the insurance he once had. Joe decides to vote Republican.
If he is in a lower income bracket, he is going to get a huge subsidy for his insurance. I know these amounts mean more to people who make less money, but a family of 4 making $40k is only going to pay something like $1500 a year for full coverage.
The butt kicker is the family of four that makes $90k a year and used to pay $400-600 a month for employer based coverage. When their employer(s) dumps them because the penalty is only $2500 an employee, they end up having to buy their insurance all on their own. Paying an extra $800 a month for me would mean having to forego 401k inputs and that summer vacation I like to take the kids on. With the sliding subsidy scale and tax for not enrolling they will build a system where it doesn't pay to make any extra money between $50k and $120k because it will all go into medical care and taxes.
Obamacare is all about solidifying the poor and lower middle class into a permanent voting block for the democrats, and destroying the current healthcare system. The ultimate goal is for Obamacare to fail to the point where the only solution will be a redistributive single payer system.
I like it. Could we get a version with citations to the exact points in the law? With cites, it would be a handy persuasive tool for handing out to the benighted public.
Thanks for the post!
And the actual healthcare quality itself will go down while the cost will go up and soon this social medicine will be mostly in name only as they will require you to pay more and more of your own medical costs.
This system of healthcare is already a proven failure,
Joe is single and makes about $45,000. He does not qualify for subsidies. But, he makes far less than before he lost his job and is saddled with a large mortgage and other expenses. He does not have $500/month lying around to buy insurance.
Joe is single and makes about $45,000. He does not qualify for subsidies. But, he makes far less than before he lost his job and is saddled with a large mortgage and other expenses. He does not have $500/month lying around to buy insurance.
Feel free to use it.
Joe is screwed.
Yes, I am.
Joe goes Galt, tells the Feds to piss up a rope, joins a militia with his family and fights to return America to what is right.
Or the Feds penalize Joe, he gets overly despondent and eats a bullet.
Or Joe happens to know how to fly and takes an aircraft on a one way mission...
Of which has actually happened.
So I beg to argue, what should all of our Joes need to do?
I have a son named Joe and he knows what MUST be done.
Yes, but catastrophic-only plans were also available at a minimal cost. And the penalty assessment in Kaiser’s numbers do not square with the subsidy eligibility. It makes no sense not to be penalized when not also eligible.
But, the whole point about Joe is that it is arrogant to assume what he can and cannot afford. Joe should be the one who decides that, not government.
Again I see the term “Bronze Level” which I take to be the lowest level of coverage available. We were promised the same plan that Senators get, but I’ll bet that Senators have better coverage than that.
there may well be many MD members of those militia. Maybe the only place to get coverage.
Joe’s suffering will be on John Roberts’ head, that we can say for sure.
Now tell us about José’s Healthcare Plan.
V-E-R-Y well done and said, MrChips.
“Joe decides to vote Republican” ‘bout freekin’ time, Joe!
So if I lose my job with the employer-paid health plan and go to work at a job with no health benefits, I’m basically in a bad place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.