Who Will They Blame in 2014

steve63

New Member
2
Folks, i know I'm preaching to the choir here when I say get ready for 50 - 100% increases when community rating hits the small business commercial market in 2014. With the combination of cr, hcr taxes, and essential benefits, the exact demographic (under 30 population) that reelected the pres are going to be in for major sticker shock. Especially when they heard the president say that health insurance would be "affordable" and that if you like your current plan, you can keep it. Not to mention the people that are going to be in for a surprise when they find out they don't qualify for a subsidy.

So my question is, who are "they" ( liberals, the media, the white house) going to blame when all this goes down? They are squeezing the profits out of the insurance companies with the mlr requirements, so can they continue to point the finger there?The general public has no clue whats coming and the carriers have stayed quite because they don't want the negative attention.

Will they continue to blame the carriers? Do they go after providers? Where do the next cuts come from? Do they move their agenda forward and push for a single payor system?

So who's the next evil villain ?
 
People don't educate themselves enough to bother with facts. The prez will get on his pulpit, blame the insurance companies, liberal press will cover it. Game over. Where have you been for the past 4 years? It's like groundhog day with this guy on every topic.

Plus, most young democrats don't make money, so they will get subsidies. Who do you think voted for this guy?
 
Plus, most young democrats don't make money, so they will get subsidies. Who do you think voted for this guy?

Actually, I don't agree with that assessment. If the young democrats are welfare recipients or below 250% of FPL, then perhaps you have a valid point, but many of the young liberals are college educated yet leaning to the left. They won't get subsidies.

A single person making more than $45,960 or a married couple making more than $62,040 for instance are not below 400% of FPL and won't get a subsidy.

And even those making less than that, who do qualify for a subsidy in theory will find that their subsidy is $0 because they have to pay up to 9.5% of their income for it. So, they will be left paying the actual premium (which is much higher for young folks than the premium on their current plans).

For instance, let's take that young liberal who makes $45,000 and just barely squeeks into the "under 400% of FPL" category. He qualifies for a subsidy. But he has to pay the lesser of the actual premium or up to 9.5% of his income as his share of the premium. Well, 9.5% of $45,000 is $4275, which is $356.25 monthly. So, he has to pay the lesser of the actual premium or $356.25, and the subsidy kicks in after that. Let's say he's a male age 28 and his premium has been around $180. Predictions are that it will double to around $360 for a person his age. So, he pays $356.25, and his subsidy is $3.75. I don't think he will be happy.
 
Last edited:
I agree, and of course was making a blanket political statement. I just was making a comment about the high unemployment rate amongst college graduates, but they of course will get medicaid if unemployed.
 
Back
Top