Posted on 11/28/2016 4:53:59 AM PST by simpson96
News flash, kids: Things aren’t free. Things cost money. And “free” things provided to you by the government cost other people’s money.
Donald Trump gets it — somewhat. He vows to repeal ObamaCare’s most burdensome federal mandates that are jacking up the price of private health insurance. But he also plans to preserve the most politically popular provisions of the Orwellian-titled Affordable Care Act, including the so-called “slacker mandate.” It’s the requirement that employer-based health plans cover employees’ children until they turn 26 years old.
That’s right: Twenty-freaking-six.
Is it any wonder why we have a nation of dependent drool-stained crybabies on college campuses who are still bawling about the election results one week later?
Trump briefly mentioned during a “60 Minutes” interview on CBS this weekend that the slacker mandate “adds cost, but it’s very much something we’re going to try and keep.” That’s because most establishment Republicans in Washington, D.C., are resigned to keeping it. Once the feds hand out a sugary piece of cradle-to-grave entitlement candy, it’s almost impossible to snatch it back.
Who pays for this unfunded government mandate? As usual, it’s responsible working people who bear the burden.
Earlier this year, the National Bureau of Economic Research found the No Slacker Left Behind provision resulted in wage reductions of about $1,200 a year for workers with employer-based insurance coverage — whether or not they had adult children on their plans. In effect, childless working people are subsidizing workers with adult children who would rather stay on their parents than get their own.
(Excerpt) Read more at winchesterstar.com ...
The slacker mandate is ridiculous, but the worst is mandatory coverage for pre-existing conditions. That’s not insurance, it’s welfare.
Portability, yes, but pre-existing conditions, no.
The "slacker mandate" under ObamaCare -- which requires employer-based health care plans to cover adult children of their employees up to the age of 26 -- is not intended to actually provide health care to these people to help them pay their medical expenses.
The whole purpose of this provision is to inflate the pools of insured people with large numbers of young people who will have exorbitant insurance premiums paid for them but will rarely incur any major medical expenses.
In other words, the "slacker mandate" isn't intended to benefit the "slackers" at all. It's intended to benefit the older people in these insurance plans whose premiums would be even higher without all these younger people in the plans.
Medicaid provided coverage for those with pre existing conditions, no?
“No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.”
I want a bumper sticker like that!
The purpose of this was to keep the brain dead kids voting Dem. If the dummies had to pay for Obamacare they’d have woken up sooner. Coupled with the massive college debt, the kids would have started to vote Republican before the normal age of 30. This pacified them.
The slacker mandate and the requirement that the insurance companies accept pre-existing conditions. That provision alone will keep the cost of health insurance in the stratosphere. I fear Trump is going for single payer. He indicated at one point that he supported that. Not completely excising obamacare will render his presidency economically a did. His non medical economic policies may well bring a lot more employment and higher incomes but all that extra earned money will go to medicine because the bits and pieces of o-care he seems to want to keep will suck all that extra income away.
That actually worked out well for us.
My daughters are in grad school and it’s cheaper for everyone if they remained on our insurance instead of getting their own. It helped them tremendously when they wre ona really tight budget.
That’s the ONE AND ONLY provision of obamacare that I did not have any problem with.
But now that they are out on their own, gainfully employed by employers who have their own healthcare plans, they are OFF!
The fault isn’t really obamacare, but parents who let their kids mooch off them and don’t get the kids off their (raised to be) lazy butts and out working for a living.
I heard once that there are only a couple hundred thousand people with true, I uninsurable pre-existing conditions.
If that’s true, let’s deal with them and fix the rest of the problem.
I now have one kid in the 20-26 range. But, she’s also in school full time and working full time. None of my kids fit the snowflake description. Three have jobs and are in high school or college, one is working full time and completely on her own.
The system of raising them then letting them go off has worked for millennia and still works today.
“Who pays for this unfunded government mandate?”
The forgotten man
slacker mandate, eh? seems everybody wants to be adults when it comes to sex and booze, but personal responsibility? no way!
LOL
As I recall I was on my parents insurance till 22 as long as I was taking a full load in college. After 22 I was on my own but the Army took care of that.
The plan was a major medical policy in that my parents took care of all the basic stuff and the major medical kicked in beyond a certain level. It was what they and their employer could afford.
Today the world is upside down with everyone beginning with an entire panorama of benefits and someone else responsible for paying for them.
Yesterday there was a large AP, of course, story dealing with how Trump’s proposed tax cuts will mostly benefit the top 1% and even hurt some in the middle range. No one takes into consideration years ago EVERYONE with over a mere $600 or so paid income tax at a rate of what was about 15%. I know because I have my returns going back to 1963 and while I was making a few K a year I was paying a good % of income tax. The tax system will NEVER be fixed now as most pay little or no tax and some even get money back after paying no tax, a complete travesty for an income tax.
Michelle, just asking....
would this prove that those who made the decision 50 plus years ago never to have children were foreseeing the future of our government? Snowflakes melt and with ‘global warming’ they melt more rapidly.
“A teardrop from a snowflake”
I really don’t mind the age 26 cut off, especially since the economy is so pitiful for younger employees.
Kids that age only need catastrophic coverage.
A $300 a year plan with a $5k deductible is sufficient. But those don’t exist anymore thanks to Obama.
My youngest kid has a chronic illness that will require that he have full coverage insurance. He’s currently on a treatment regimen with an $11,000 charge every two months. There may be a surgical option that may eliminate that but his doctor wants to hold off.
He’s the one we need to be concerned about.
He’s probably going into a skilled trade and will hopefully land a good job.
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.