Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their "Affordable" care!! But, the common folk cant get the same treatment!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) called attention to this requirement in a House floor speech Thursday, in which he said the policy shows more favoritism toward members of Congress and their staff.

    "We all … have to go and get the gold policy. Not the bronze, not the silver, the gold policy from the exchange. That's the only one we can get," he said.

    "You see, bronze and silver's only good enough for everyone else in the country. For members of Congress and members of the Senate and their staff, it's gold or nothing."


    Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/326409-obamacare-requires-congress-staff-to-buy-gold-level-insurance-plan#ixzz2gkykudPz
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to UserName9's comment:


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.



    So there is no Medicaid at all in those states? It's gone? 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    So there is no Medicaid at all in those states? It's gone? 

     



    There will still be medicaid in its current form, but in some of these states, if you earn over $11 per day then you don't qualify.

    The medicaid expansion was designed to cover the people that fall in between the destitute and those who can afford to pay for the subsidized plans on the exchange......ie. the working poor.

     

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to UserName9's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    So there is no Medicaid at all in those states? It's gone? 

     

     



    There will still be medicaid in its current form, but in some of these states, if you earn over $11 per day then you don't qualify.

     

    The medicaid expansion was designed to cover the people that fall in between the destitute and those who can afford to pay for the subsidized plans on the exchange......ie. the working poor.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I thought one of the points of offering the exchanges was for those who can't afford coverage on their own. You know...the whole subsidies thing?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:



    I thought one of the points of offering the exchanges was for those who can't afford coverage on their own. You know...the whole subsidies thing?



    Yea me too but, evidently it's so affordable that congress and their staff can't afford it with Mr. and Mrs taxpayer giving them money!!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

    I thought one of the points of offering the exchanges was for those who can't afford coverage on their own. You know...the whole subsidies thing?

     

     



    Yea me too but, evidently it's so affordable that congress and their staff can't afford it with Mr. and Mrs taxpayer giving them money!!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm going to re-phrase your complaint with facts ...

    1) Congress and Staffers used to be on a very good health plan that covered about 75% of their premiums

    2) A Republican amendment to the ACA removed this health care plan - the ACA itself did not threaten it

    3) Since this was technically an unauthorized pay cut, the Office of Personnel Management decided to re-imburse congress with the money that would have funded their health care plans.  Congress and staff would then purchase insurance off the state exchanges.

    So my question to you is do you dispute any of these facts and if not why would you frame your argument so dishonestly?  Congress isn't getting anything they didn't have already.  If anything they are being shafted because they are the only employees in the country being kicked off their plans against the will of their employer.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to UserName9's comment:


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.



    Liar.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:



    I thought one of the points of offering the exchanges was for those who can't afford coverage on their own. You know...the whole subsidies thing?

     

     

     

     



    Yea me too but, evidently it's so affordable that congress and their staff can't afford it with Mr. and Mrs taxpayer giving them money!!

     

     



    I'm going to re-phrase your complaint with facts ...

     

    1) Congress and Staffers used to be on a very good health plan that covered about 75% of their premiums

    2) A Republican amendment to the ACA removed this health care plan - the ACA itself did not threaten it

    3) Since this was technically an unauthorized pay cut, the Office of Personnel Management decided to re-imburse congress with the money that would have funded their health care plans.  Congress and staff would then purchase insurance off the state exchanges.

    So my question to you is do you dispute any of these facts and if not why would you frame your argument so dishonestly?  Congress isn't getting anything they didn't have already.  If anything they are being shafted because they are the only employees in the country being kicked off their plans against the will of their employer.

     



    These facts have already been explained to him in about 3 other threads.  Its clearly not sinking in.  He's immune to facts.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to UserName9's comment:

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

     

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.

    [/QUOTE]

    What about the subsidized exchanges? 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     

     

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

     

     

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.



    What about the subsidized exchanges? 

     

     



    What about them?  The exchanges are for people who can afford the monthly payment.  The medicaid expansion is for the people who earn too much for normal medicaid (As low as $3k per year), but not enough to pay for a plan on the exchange.  Working people...dishwashers, cashiers, hospital aids, and any number of jobs that pay minimum wage with no benefits.

     

    This is the real problem with Obamacare.  It depends too much on the misanthropes who govern the bible and ignorance belt states to make decisions about whats best for their population.

    And i'll add that the medicaid expansion is 100% refundable money from the federal government thru 2016, then a minimum of 90% refundable after that.  And they still refused it.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to slomag's comment:



    I'm going to re-phrase your complaint with facts ...

     

    1) Congress and Staffers used to be on a very good health plan that covered about 75% of their premiums

    2) A Republican amendment to the ACA removed this health care plan - the ACA itself did not threaten it

    3) Since this was technically an unauthorized pay cut, the Office of Personnel Management decided to re-imburse congress with the money that would have funded their health care plans.  Congress and staff would then purchase insurance off the state exchanges.

    So my question to you is do you dispute any of these facts and if not why would you frame your argument so dishonestly?  Congress isn't getting anything they didn't have already.  If anything they are being shafted because they are the only employees in the country being kicked off their plans against the will of their employer.

     



    You can frame it anyway you like. The facts is "taxpayers" will be paying for a portion of congresses healthcare now under the "affordable" healthcare act!

     

    It was the POTUS that instructed the OPM to give them taxpayer money. There are many that are being forced out of their current plans and into exchanges that are potentially more expensive with less coverage but, they get no such subsidies. Why not? Is their being shafted not as important as elected officials and their staff being shafted??

    geez!!

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to UserName9's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     

     

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

     

     

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.



    What about the subsidized exchanges? 

     

     



    What about them?  The exchanges are for people who can afford the monthly payment.  The medicaid expansion is for the people who earn too much for normal medicaid (As low as $3k per year), but not enough to pay for a plan on the exchange.  Working people...dishwashers, cashiers, hospital aids, and any number of jobs that pay minimum wage with no benefits.

     

    This is the real problem with Obamacare.  It depends too much on the misanthropes who govern the bible and ignorance belt states to make decisions about whats best for their population.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wrong. There are two options. 

    If your state expands Medicaid

    If your state chooses to expand Medicaid to everyone under 138% of the poverty level under the ACA, you will be eligible for coverage under the program. Medicaid coverage varies from state to state, but out-of-pocket costs are generally modest. Smoking status is not taken into account in Medicaid eligibility.

     

     

    The criteria I used for the calc below is One adult, non-smoker, 30 yrs old making $15,000/yr. You going to tell me $300 per YEAR isn't affordable?

    If your state does not expand Medicaid

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that depending on your state's eligibility requirements, you may still be eligible for coverage through Medicaid.

    Household income in 2014:
    131% of poverty level
    Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:
    $2,877
    Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:
    2%
    Amount you pay for the premium:
    $300 per year
    (which equals 2% of your household income and covers 10% of the overall premium)
    You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:
    $2,577
    (which covers 90% of the overall premium)
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:



    I'm going to re-phrase your complaint with facts ...

     

    1) Congress and Staffers used to be on a very good health plan that covered about 75% of their premiums

    2) A Republican amendment to the ACA removed this health care plan - the ACA itself did not threaten it

    3) Since this was technically an unauthorized pay cut, the Office of Personnel Management decided to re-imburse congress with the money that would have funded their health care plans.  Congress and staff would then purchase insurance off the state exchanges.

    So my question to you is do you dispute any of these facts and if not why would you frame your argument so dishonestly?  Congress isn't getting anything they didn't have already.  If anything they are being shafted because they are the only employees in the country being kicked off their plans against the will of their employer.

     



    You can frame it anyway you like. The facts is "taxpayers" will be paying for a portion of congresses healthcare now under the "affordable" healthcare act!

     

    It was the POTUS that instructed the OPM to give them taxpayer money. There are many that are being forced out of their current plans and into exchanges that are potentially more expensive with less coverage but, they get no such subsidies. Why not? Is their being shafted not as important as elected officials and their staff being shafted??

    geez!!



    "taxpayers" aren't paying any more than they were.  You understand that, right - they are just getting the money that was going toward their insurance plans.

    If you are a private employer, and you decide to cut your employee's plan, you can either pocket the savings or re-imburse your employee.  Why would you assume that employers would just pocket the savings?  They still need to incent their employees.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [/QUOTE]

    "taxpayers" aren't paying any more than they were.  You understand that, right - they are just getting the money that was going toward their insurance plans.

    If you are a private employer, and you decide to cut your employee's plan, you can either pocket the savings or re-imburse your employee.  Why would you assume that employers would just pocket the savings?  They still need to incent their employees.

     [/QUOTE]

    The problem is with this new law they were put under the ACA law and were told to go through exchanges.

    They did not meet the criteria set for common folks (they made too much money for subsidies) but, Obama ordered that they get them anyway!!

    I guess you think that's ok since it's D thing?

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     

     

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

     

     

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.



    What about the subsidized exchanges? 

     

     

     



    What about them?  The exchanges are for people who can afford the monthly payment.  The medicaid expansion is for the people who earn too much for normal medicaid (As low as $3k per year), but not enough to pay for a plan on the exchange.  Working people...dishwashers, cashiers, hospital aids, and any number of jobs that pay minimum wage with no benefits.

     

     

    This is the real problem with Obamacare.  It depends too much on the misanthropes who govern the bible and ignorance belt states to make decisions about whats best for their population.



    Wrong. There are two options. 

     

    If your state expands Medicaid

    If your state chooses to expand Medicaid to everyone under 138% of the poverty level under the ACA, you will be eligible for coverage under the program. Medicaid coverage varies from state to state, but out-of-pocket costs are generally modest. Smoking status is not taken into account in Medicaid eligibility.

     

     

    The criteria I used for the calc below is One adult, non-smoker, 30 yrs old making $15,000/yr. You going to tell me $300 per YEAR isn't affordable?

    If your state does not expand Medicaid

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that depending on your state's eligibility requirements, you may still be eligible for coverage through Medicaid.

    Household income in 2014:
    131% of poverty level
    Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:
    $2,877
    Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:
    2%
    Amount you pay for the premium:
    $300 per year
    (which equals 2% of your household income and covers 10% of the overall premium)
    You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:
    $2,577
    (which covers 90% of the overall premium)




    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    This isn't true.  People below the poverty level do not qualify for subsidies.  It sounds bizarre, but thats the way the rules are laid out.  People below the poverty level were meant to go on the expanded medicaid program.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to UserName9's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     

     

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

     

     

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.



    What about the subsidized exchanges? 

     

     

     



    What about them?  The exchanges are for people who can afford the monthly payment.  The medicaid expansion is for the people who earn too much for normal medicaid (As low as $3k per year), but not enough to pay for a plan on the exchange.  Working people...dishwashers, cashiers, hospital aids, and any number of jobs that pay minimum wage with no benefits.

     

     

    This is the real problem with Obamacare.  It depends too much on the misanthropes who govern the bible and ignorance belt states to make decisions about whats best for their population.



    Wrong. There are two options. 

     

    If your state expands Medicaid

    If your state chooses to expand Medicaid to everyone under 138% of the poverty level under the ACA, you will be eligible for coverage under the program. Medicaid coverage varies from state to state, but out-of-pocket costs are generally modest. Smoking status is not taken into account in Medicaid eligibility.

     

     

    The criteria I used for the calc below is One adult, non-smoker, 30 yrs old making $15,000/yr. You going to tell me $300 per YEAR isn't affordable?

    If your state does not expand Medicaid

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that depending on your state's eligibility requirements, you may still be eligible for coverage through Medicaid.

    Household income in 2014:
    131% of poverty level
    Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:
    $2,877
    Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:
    2%
    Amount you pay for the premium:
    $300 per year
    (which equals 2% of your household income and covers 10% of the overall premium)
    You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:
    $2,577
    (which covers 90% of the overall premium)

     




     

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    This isn't true.  People below the poverty level do not qualify for subsidies.  It sounds bizarre, but thats the way the rules are laid out.  People below the poverty level were meant to go on the expanded medicaid program.

    [/QUOTE]

    Right...I simply made all that up....sigh

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     

     

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

     

     

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.



    What about the subsidized exchanges? 

     

     

     



    What about them?  The exchanges are for people who can afford the monthly payment.  The medicaid expansion is for the people who earn too much for normal medicaid (As low as $3k per year), but not enough to pay for a plan on the exchange.  Working people...dishwashers, cashiers, hospital aids, and any number of jobs that pay minimum wage with no benefits.

     

     

    This is the real problem with Obamacare.  It depends too much on the misanthropes who govern the bible and ignorance belt states to make decisions about whats best for their population.



    Wrong. There are two options. 

     

    If your state expands Medicaid

    If your state chooses to expand Medicaid to everyone under 138% of the poverty level under the ACA, you will be eligible for coverage under the program. Medicaid coverage varies from state to state, but out-of-pocket costs are generally modest. Smoking status is not taken into account in Medicaid eligibility.

     

     

    The criteria I used for the calc below is One adult, non-smoker, 30 yrs old making $15,000/yr. You going to tell me $300 per YEAR isn't affordable?

    If your state does not expand Medicaid

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that depending on your state's eligibility requirements, you may still be eligible for coverage through Medicaid.

    Household income in 2014:
    131% of poverty level
    Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:
    $2,877
    Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:
    2%
    Amount you pay for the premium:
    $300 per year
    (which equals 2% of your household income and covers 10% of the overall premium)
    You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:
    $2,577
    (which covers 90% of the overall premium)

     

     




     

     

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    This isn't true.  People below the poverty level do not qualify for subsidies.  It sounds bizarre, but thats the way the rules are laid out.  People below the poverty level were meant to go on the expanded medicaid program.




    Here's how ACA works in states that did not expand Medicare.

     

     

    Henderson is a part-time worker at a day-care center. He did not qualify for tax credits to purchase health coverage because his income is below the poverty line. Since Georgia is not expanding the Medicaid program, that meant Henderson was essentially responsible for his entire premium.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/03/meet-chad-henderson-the-obamacare-enrollee-tons-of-reporters-are-calling/



    exactly

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     

     

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

     

     

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.



    What about the subsidized exchanges? 

     

     

     



    What about them?  The exchanges are for people who can afford the monthly payment.  The medicaid expansion is for the people who earn too much for normal medicaid (As low as $3k per year), but not enough to pay for a plan on the exchange.  Working people...dishwashers, cashiers, hospital aids, and any number of jobs that pay minimum wage with no benefits.

     

     

    This is the real problem with Obamacare.  It depends too much on the misanthropes who govern the bible and ignorance belt states to make decisions about whats best for their population.



    Wrong. There are two options. 

     

    If your state expands Medicaid

    If your state chooses to expand Medicaid to everyone under 138% of the poverty level under the ACA, you will be eligible for coverage under the program. Medicaid coverage varies from state to state, but out-of-pocket costs are generally modest. Smoking status is not taken into account in Medicaid eligibility.

     

     

    The criteria I used for the calc below is One adult, non-smoker, 30 yrs old making $15,000/yr. You going to tell me $300 per YEAR isn't affordable?

    If your state does not expand Medicaid

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that depending on your state's eligibility requirements, you may still be eligible for coverage through Medicaid.

    Household income in 2014:
    131% of poverty level
    Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:
    $2,877
    Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:
    2%
    Amount you pay for the premium:
    $300 per year
    (which equals 2% of your household income and covers 10% of the overall premium)
    You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:
    $2,577
    (which covers 90% of the overall premium)

     

     




     

     

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    This isn't true.  People below the poverty level do not qualify for subsidies.  It sounds bizarre, but thats the way the rules are laid out.  People below the poverty level were meant to go on the expanded medicaid program.



    Right...I simply made all that up....sigh

     




    I wouldn't say you made it up, but you certainly cut and pasted it from a source that was wrong on the facts.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:



    "taxpayers" aren't paying any more than they were.  You understand that, right - they are just getting the money that was going toward their insurance plans.

    If you are a private employer, and you decide to cut your employee's plan, you can either pocket the savings or re-imburse your employee.  Why would you assume that employers would just pocket the savings?  They still need to incent their employees.

     [/QUOTE]

    The problem is with this new law they were put under the ACA law and were told to go through exchanges.

    They did not meet the criteria set for common folks (they made too much money for subsidies) but, Obama ordered that they get them anyway!!

    I guess you think that's ok since it's D thing?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I just don't understand your argument.  These people took jobs that offered health care benefits.  You've swiped their plans and forced them into the exchanges.  Now you're angry that they are being compensated for the loss of benefits they were promised when they took the job?

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to UserName9's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    In response to UserName9's comment:

     


    Thanks for the fake outrage quote of the day.

    Meanwhile 26 republican led states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for the sole purpose of denying access to health care to their poorest residents.

    You really need to hate people to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

     



    Liar.

     

     

     




    Oh....its no lie.  The Robert's Court struck down the mandatory expansion of Medicaid, leading to red states deciding not to expand.  (Hello Jim Crow)

     

     

    The ironic thing is the taxpayers of the states who refused to implement the Medicaid solution will continue to subsidize public hospitals serving the poor through the most expensive way known to humans, the ER.



    What about the subsidized exchanges? 

     

     

     



    What about them?  The exchanges are for people who can afford the monthly payment.  The medicaid expansion is for the people who earn too much for normal medicaid (As low as $3k per year), but not enough to pay for a plan on the exchange.  Working people...dishwashers, cashiers, hospital aids, and any number of jobs that pay minimum wage with no benefits.

     

     

    This is the real problem with Obamacare.  It depends too much on the misanthropes who govern the bible and ignorance belt states to make decisions about whats best for their population.



    Wrong. There are two options. 

     

    If your state expands Medicaid

    If your state chooses to expand Medicaid to everyone under 138% of the poverty level under the ACA, you will be eligible for coverage under the program. Medicaid coverage varies from state to state, but out-of-pocket costs are generally modest. Smoking status is not taken into account in Medicaid eligibility.

     

     

    The criteria I used for the calc below is One adult, non-smoker, 30 yrs old making $15,000/yr. You going to tell me $300 per YEAR isn't affordable?

    If your state does not expand Medicaid

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that depending on your state's eligibility requirements, you may still be eligible for coverage through Medicaid.

    Household income in 2014:
    131% of poverty level
    Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:
    $2,877
    Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:
    2%
    Amount you pay for the premium:
    $300 per year
    (which equals 2% of your household income and covers 10% of the overall premium)
    You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:
    $2,577
    (which covers 90% of the overall premium)

     

     




     

     

    If your state does not expand Medicaid, you will be eligible to purchase subsidized coverage through the exchanges.

    This isn't true.  People below the poverty level do not qualify for subsidies.  It sounds bizarre, but thats the way the rules are laid out.  People below the poverty level were meant to go on the expanded medicaid program.



    Right...I simply made all that up....sigh

     

     




    I wouldn't say you made it up, but you certainly cut and pasted it from a source that was wrong on the facts.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It has the cutoff at about $10,000 per year. Meaning <= $10K no subsidies towards ACA plan. But when I put $12K in the calculator it shows subsidized premiums. My guess is anyone making $10K per year is already on Medicaid

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: Huge taxpayer subsidies (our money) is going to congress and their staff to help them pay for their

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:



    It has the cutoff at about $10,000 per year. Meaning <= $10K no subsidies towards ACA plan. But when I put $12K in the calculator it shows subsidized premiums. My guess is anyone making $10K per year is already on Medicaid

     



    You would think, but if you are family of 3 living in Texas and your household income is $5001, then you make too much to qualify for medicaid......Its nearly the same story in the neighboring red states.

     

Share