Here is another example why the New York Times is only suitable for fish wrap. The Times is just now figuring out that even with subsidies, some people still will not be able to afford to buy health insurance under ObamaCare.
New York Times: William Mann of Pittsburgh earns just enough to get by. He is 46, doesn’t own a car, hasn’t taken a vacation in three years and hasn’t had health insurance for most of his adult life.
But Mr. Mann says he still can’t afford it. He lives too close to the edge, and won’t be buying insurance, even though he will face a fine under a provision called the individual mandate, which penalizes most Americans who don’t buy coverage starting in 2014. The requirement is one of the most controversial aspects of the overhaul.
“I just can’t put that kind of money out for a ‘maybe’ — maybe I’ll get sick and use it,” said Mr. Mann, who makes just over $25,000 a year as an administrative assistant at a small wine distribution company. “That’s a lot of money.”
“The people who make all these decisions don’t live like the way I do,” Mr. Mann added, echoing other uninsured people in his income group. “They don’t live like the rest of us.”
Any American who is living paycheck to paycheck is going to have the same problem. This should have been terribly obvious to everyone inside the beltway. There are many people who simply have no extra money to buy something as expensive as health insurance, no matter how much you subsidize it.
Many people on tight budgets will have no choice but to pay the fine rather than buy the insurance. The IRS is already planning to take the penalty out of tax refunds for anyone who does not have proof of health insurance. People like Mann will then end up with no health insurance and no refund. Now how is this any better than what we had before?
Via: The New York Times