Comments 1 - 17 of 17 Search these comments
Hmm... this poverty cliff needs to get amended, like making the subsidy phase out progressively.
You don't know what you're talking about. It already DOES phase out progressively. Those closer to 138% of poverty level get more of a subsidy than those closer to 400%.
For a single guy, $45,960=400% of poverty.
So above this amount of AGI, you're outta luck and will pay through the nose.
Yes, lets pretend 30% of the state dont work 'under the table' making the entire income limit benefit giveaways a complete sham/fraud.
I know it's supposed to, but the article makes it sound like once you go over 401% you lose $12,000 in subsidies. So either the article is BS, or this is not sufficiently progressive.
With Kaiser's subsidy calculator (for a famliy of 2 over 60in CA):
Income @ 140% poverty = $20k subsidy
Income @ 400% poverty = $15k subsidy
Income @ 401% poverty = $0 subsidyProgressive like getting hit by a train.
Again, you don't know what you're talking about. It's true that if your income is above 400% of the poverty level, you don't get a subsidy. That doesn't mean the subsidy amounts aren't progressive:
Do you understand what the word "progressive" means?
Obamacare's winners and losers in Bay Area.. lots of losers who supported Obama.
http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_24248486/obamacares-winners-and-losers-bay-area
"I was laughing at Boehner -- until the mail came today,"
Cindy Vinson and Tom Waschura are big believers in the Affordable Care Act. They vote independent and are proud to say they helped elect and re-elect President Barack Obama.
Yet, like many other Bay Area residents who pay for their own medical insurance, they were floored last week when they opened their bills: Their policies were being replaced with pricier plans that conform to all the requirements of the new health care law.
Vinson, of San Jose, will pay $1,800 more a year for an individual policy, while Waschura, of Portola Valley, will cough up almost $10,000 more for insurance for his family of four.
I am saying, it ALSO needs to be made progressive in the 401%+ case. The fact that there is a big cliff is bad. The fact that it's progressive from 133 to 400 doesn't change that it's bad.
That's not what you said. You said:
Hmm... this poverty cliff needs to get amended, like making the subsidy phase out progressively.
It DOES phase out progressively, as I just proved.
Now you're changing your argument after the fact.
I'm not sure what you want. Obviously, the point at which people are eligible for subsidies needs to stop SOMEWHERE. 400% of the poverty line seems pretty reasonable. Where would YOU like it to discontinue? I know the republicans had an "alternate" plan where EVERYONE gets a tax credit, even rich people. I like the plan where the people who NEED the subsidy get the subsidy. YMMV. You make over $46K and you're single? Suck it up. Buy some fucking health insurance. Stop whining. Let's say you're 35 and you're single and you make $47K and you live in the Bay Area. You can get health insurance for $250/month on the California exchange, WITHOUT a subsidy. What exactly is the problem here? I had to go on Cobra one year and it cost over $400/month. I absolutely don't understand what you guys are bitching about.
Obamacare's winners and losers in Bay Area.. lots of losers who supported Obama.
http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_24248486/obamacares-winners-and-losers-bay-area
People like Marilynn Gray-Raine.
The 64-year-old Danville artist, who survived breast cancer, has purchased health insurance for herself for decades. She watched her Anthem Blue Cross monthly premiums rise from $317 in 2005 to $1,298 in 2013. But she found out last week from the Covered California site that her payments will drop to about $795 a month.
Winner winner, chicken dinner. C'mon - NOBODY should have to pay $1298 for health insurance. Are you kidding?
Well it seems SOMEBODY WILL pay.. there is no denying that..
LIke I said.. winners and losers.. will you be as lucky as Marilyn.. your results will vary.
Well it seems SOMEBODY WILL pay.. there is no denying that..
Only if it's a zero sum game, which it isn't.
Mercury News lost me when they published house resales during the crash and only included the previous sale price if it was LOWER. If the prior sale was higher, and the price had gone down, they censored the prior sale info. Not a reputable organization.
Of course, I want people to have health care," Vinson said. "I just didn't realize I would be the one who was going to pay for it personally."
That is the problem and of course the glee of the takers. Back then people who fell on hard times would receive alms and say thank you and be very grateful. Now they take forcefully by laws and kick the hand that feeds them and call them names. What a world and you wonder why companies are moving offshore.
The premiums are the just the cost to be in the exclusive club getting billed by the healthcare industry.
Especially those with "Free" premiums, are going to end up owing the most. There's going to be a conflict of interest when their other social safety net benefits start being cut, because they owe the IRS too much money in unpaid copays, coins while not meeting their yearly max out of pocket quota.
Obamacare was written by retards and radical sodomites.
Especially those with "Free" premiums, are going to end up owing the most. There's going to be a conflict of interest when their other social safety net benefits start being cut, because they owe the IRS too much money in unpaid copays, coins while not meeting their yearly max out of pocket quota.
Gibberish.
Obamacare was written by retards and radical sodomites.
PhRMA who helped write the law is not stupid.
A few compromises kept the profit eroding re-import provision out of the law. $150M spent via a pair of 501(c)(4) organizations got them a share of the $62B annual increase in health care spending resulting from the law.
That's brilliant in an evil genius sort of way.
Winner winner, chicken dinner. C'mon - NOBODY should have to pay $1298 for health insurance. Are you kidding?
Bwahahaha. Out of 19 plans offered to me by Covered California, only 7 have monthly premium less that said $1298. The rest is higher. The most expensive at $1638 is Alameda Alliance for Health which describes itself as "not-for-profit managed care health plan committed to making high quality health care services accessible and affordable to lower-income people of Alameda County".
You're doing selective quoting.
Bullshit.
What I also said when I clarified my position in the 2nd post is "this is not sufficiently progressive.
Oh, "clarified"? Is that a synonym for "back pedaled"? LOL.
This is a bad situation both for the individual and for all tax payers. Say I earn $115,000, I can say screw you and forego $5000 income on purpose, at no loss to me but at a cost to the IRS (ie to other taxpayers) of the $5,000 rebate + taxes lost on that $5000 I did not earn.
Well of course you can, and I would suggest you do exactly that if that is your situation. I don't consider that "screwing" anyone; I consider it being smart.
The subsidies must end somewhere, but not in this sudden manner. Are you saying there's no way that can be done?
How would you do it? Do you want to go past 400% of poverty level? Wouldn't they have to raise taxes to do that?
Bwahahaha. Out of 19 plans offered to me by Covered California, only 7 have monthly premium less that said $1298. The rest is higher. The most expensive at $1638 is Alameda Alliance for Health which describes itself as "not-for-profit managed care health plan committed to making high quality health care services accessible and affordable to lower-income people of Alameda County".
That is total b.s. - Even for a 55 year old in Alameda, that company offers a plan for $573. A 30 year old would only pay $292. And why would you go with the most expensive company and then bitch about the price? Duh. A 55 year old could get Blue Shield for $462. And a 30 year old could get Blue Shield for $235. And that's one of the most expensive places in California to get insurance. It's even cheaper in other zip codes.
http://www.sfgate.com/business/networth/article/Lower-2014-income-can-net-huge-health-care-subsidy-4891087.php
#politics