Do I have your attention?
Good. The National Journal is hitting the panic button:
Whether the quality of care in the new market is comparable to private offerings remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: The cost of care in the new market doesn’t stack up. A single wage earner must make less than $20,000 to see his or her current premiums drop or stay the same under Obamacare, an independent review by National Journal found. That’s equivalent to approximately 34 percent of all single workers in the U.S. seeing any benefit in the new system. For those seeking family-of-four coverage under the ACA, about 43 percent will see cost savings. Families must earn less than or equal to $62,300, or they, too, will be looking at a bigger bill.
Those numbers include the generous tax subsidies designed to make the new system more attractive to consumers.
Let me reverse that, because unlike National Journal I’ve got no wish to sugar-coat this: two-thirds of single workers and almost 60% of working families will see their rates going up under Obamacare. They’re also looking at the strong possibility that their current health care plans will go away. Neither scenario – as PJ Tatler notes – was part of the Obamacare ‘deal.’ It is, in fact, the antithesis of the Obamacare deal.
Which, by the way, no Republican voted for.
Moe Lane
PS: I think that the President should consider a temporary emergency delay in implementation of the Affordable Care Act until such time as a blue-ribbon brain trust can convene and develop thoughtful synergies for facilitating a new national consensus on the most constructive way to utilize the commonalities in our individual lifepaths (while taking advantage of our diverseness) to tweak the throughput of the ACA. Strictly temporary.
Wait! I thought the Republicans were the stupid party. Looks like the Dems took the mantles of both the evil and stupid parties simultaneously at least for a little while.
HF
Oh, don’t worry, the GOP will start demonstrating how stupid they are the moment they have a majority in the Senate and/or win the White House….
.
I have every confidence they won’t vote to kill any Dem sacred cows because of “polling”, won’t investigate clear crimes and cover-ups because “persecuting” and in general will be happy to be back on top but not do what’s necessary to *stay* there… nor much good.
.
Mew
Yes, the deficit will start going down again, Dictators will give up their nuke programs, it’s going to be awful!
They aren’t going to kill any Dem sacred cows because the system is designed for gridlock, and the Democrats will be able to stop them cold while waving the bloody shirt. Killing programs requires a supermajority in the House and Senate, as well as the Presidency, unless you are willing to have a little logrolling going on, and seeing that Republicans are still upsets about W’s Steel tariffs, confidence is not high.
As to “investigate clear crimes”, anything like that would involve the “Justice” department, which is so corrupt it took out a sitting American Senator using a Pedophile as their beard. Yes, give the “Justice” department more face time to tell lies about Republicans. That’ll work!
” I know no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their stringent execution.”
–Ulysses Grant
You’re much too facile with those buzzwords.
I’ve noticed the same thing.
Do remember that ObamaCare was passed by “Reconciliation”. If we are in power 2020 (Coming really soon, isn’t it?) then we can just let it die, by the rules. Let the Democrats keep playing their “next election, we’ll start it up next election” game. The fewer hostages in the system in 2020, the better for all of us……