Obamacare_NO_01_280x271One of the many reasons I cannot support the PPACA (Obamacare) is that it creates more problems than it intended to solve.

Case in point: it was intended to ensure everyone had health insurance.  Sounds wonderful, right?  Well, the problem is that the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) has projected that persons without insurance may actually go up, not down.

Here is essentially what is happening.  As businesses are being mandated to cover part of any full time employee’s health insurance, they are cutting people back in hours so they don’t meet full time requirements.  This is especially true since insurance rates are increasing.  The business just can’t afford to take the hit.

Now, there is also the fact that individuals who once had health insurance through their employers that have it cut, they still have to get it according to the individual mandate, or else they will be fined by the IRS.

The problem is, their wages haven’t matched the new bill they now have to pay, so they either suffer with less money and buy insurance, or they don’t buy insurance and then suffer with less money.  It’s lose, lose for those individuals.

They also do not qualify for any assistance like Medicare. Why? Because they are over the income threshold.  That doesn’t make buying their own insurance any more affordable for them.  They will literally be left with less money, no matter what road they choose.

This is just one of the many reasons I will never support this, and want it fully repealed.  It is not good for the American people.

Advertisements

One thought on “One Reason I Can’t Support Obamacare

  1. I am confused by this post. I have some issues with the ACA, but I think some of the issues you listed might be misconstrued. Anyone over 65 is eligible for Medicare, there is no income threshold (you just have to be able to get into movies at a discount).

    I have my issues with big government and the ACA, but I can’t help but see some merit as well. I hope you don’t mind if I air some things out on here (sort of pros and cons list) and maybe get your feedback.

    Even large companies have been known for purposely not giving employees enough shifts to be full time, or even at more upscale/office jobs hours are sometimes cut to just under the threshold of hours a week needed, this way many employees could not receive benefits but companies can still claim to offer great benefit packages as recruitment incentive. It is obvious from this site you are passionate about a lot of topics, and are lucky enough to be passionate about your work, which makes you the exception, not the rule. You might be the type of person who would pay the insurance for everyone you work with if you could. Unfortunately some of the small businesses that have been particularly vocal about about the ACA have few if any full time employees, and do not even offer insurance for employees to pay themselves, because they don’t care as much and even though there are subsidies and alternative plans for small companies, they just want to put the money in their pocket instead of benefit their employees. I know it’s not everyone, but I know 2 men who run small businesses and the first loves what he does, treats his employees great, subsidizes their insurance because he thinks his employees deserve it. The second cares about nothing other than making money and doing as little as possible to keep the business running. I’d rather not have the government intervene, but many people have few options.

    Most companies receive a discounted group rate or already partially contribute to their employees insurance premiums (some even completely pay for employee insurance as a perk, and potential tax writeoff) . After being laid off from a financial firm, my premium was $120 but then my COBRA was almost $800 a month. Additionally it was quite difficult to get individual insurance in my state at the time, I think a sub-par HMO was almost $2000 a month, but there was no way I was going to take the chance of not having insurance and getting sick or something worse. Even 2 years ago a friend opened a medical practice and had to join a freelancers union because it is so difficult to get health insurance on his own. It is obvious you want the government to stay out of your life decisions, but with such a high incidence of heart disease, Type II Diabetes, and obesity, I am warming up to the idea of having a penalty for not having an individual mandate, though again, I wish it wasn’t through the government. It’s an incentive to get a at least the minimum mandate, and theoretically that should bring down insurance premiums because of preventative care, plus more people will be eligible for subsidies (which are obviously taxes you paid that you could have given straight to the insurance company).

    I half want to like this program because even the Congressional Budget Office project a lower deficit and Medicare spending, which is huge, because they always overestimate to cover their butts, and seem like geniuses with all of their “savings”. And it seems like the government will use the taxes that I’ll never see again to benefit people I know. I’m kind of a states rights type person, and we don’t really know how it’s going to do, but on it’s face, it seems a better program that my state.

    So does it take more government to later have less government in an economy like this? If this was somehow Reagan’s idea, like before anyone knew he had issues, would people be shouting OohRah?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s