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?
Repeal ObamaCare!
Via: Memeorandum
Via: The New York Times
Posts
9 comments:
Everyone should immediately change their deductions to eliminate tax refunds. Get as much of your money as you can each pay check, don't leave anything for the IRS to take from you.
I can certainly commiserate with William...been there, done that. I would suggest to him to change the witholding on his W-4, so he gets his money as he earns it, instead of getting a refund. Then the IRS can't take his money for not buying insurance.
Another use for the NYT is to line the cat's litter box.
Until they find another way to "stick it to us", it seems we should all make sure we don't have a refund coming. It's silly to allow the government to use your money interest-free for a year and then get all excited when you get it back. Another fact is, most people overpay on their taxes.
Need more deductions? Start a business - any business. Sole-prop with no employees.
William Mann thinks he lives pay check to pay check right now? You just wait till he gets sick. Oh no worries though we'll all end up paying for him any way. This is a conservative blog? Are you serious? Why do conservatives tout out at every opportunity 'personal responsibility' but when it comes to a Democratic plan to secure personal responsibility you get all up in arms?
And most likely the Democrats will raise a tax for the "poor and uninsured" like Mr Mann, and if people voiced their opposition for double-paying for insurance [self, and tax], the Democrats and NYT will call these people hater, angry, racist people who don't want to pay their "fair share" for people who can't afford individual mandated insurance.
Is it too conspiracy-ish to say the Dems did this intentionally just so they can tax us again in the future for one product, and NYT wrote this article just to prepare for the future tax?
I wouldn't be surprised when 2014 comes, NYT is all out there saying an extra tax insurance for mandate is needed.
@Serious
"...but when it comes to a Democratic plan to secure personal responsibility you get all up in arms?"
You need a dictionary. Taking something at below cost from a government that confiscated money from others to give it to you is not personal responsibility.
You need to head back to Left Blogistan where inanities like this are applauded.
Amen.
Government-run health care is filled with various pratfalls (and political correctness).
For example:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100421/health/health_wait_times_specialists
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100420/health/health_ont_drug_battle
This is a system Americans now have to work with.
Love the picture. My Father also used to say the NYT was the best paper to train puppies, as a dog just knows what's appropriate.
@silverfiddle said,
"You need to head back to Left Blogistan where inanities like this are applauded. "
Oh ok I see so you like to surround your self with like minded individuals and "argue" amongst yourself. That's the way conservatives get things done...Mhmm oookay. The GOP is not about governing they don't govern at all anymore they merely position themselves for the next election and the best way to do that is to constantly bash any agenda that does in fact try to legislate and govern. Way to go :rolleyes:
The new law requires you to obtain insurance which is what any personally responsible citizen should have done in the first place that way people like you or me regardless of your leanings won't be stuck with the bill in the form of higher taxation which you are so deeply opposed to. It's not rocket science.
Post a Comment