Skip to main content

(Click to enlarge)

So the Affordable Care Act gives people the freedom to quit their jobs and start their own business. Or to work part-time and simply enjoy life more. The horror! It’s almost as though opponents of Obamacare want us to be chained to miserable jobs. Hmm…


Get a signed print of this cartoon from the artist. Follow Jen on Twitter and Facebook.

Originally posted to Comics on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 06:50 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  OMG Some Obamacare enrollees enjoying life (34+ / 0-)

    Obamacare and pot legalization could end America as we know it.

    “Industry does everything they can and gets away with it almost all the time, whether it’s the coal industry, not the subject of this hearing, or water or whatever. They will cut corners, and they will get away with it. " Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D, WVa

    by FishOutofWater on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 07:12:02 AM PST

  •  Interesting how no one in the liberal... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jimfox, Aunt Pat

    blogsphere is discussing the delay of the employer mandate. The mainstream and right-wing media is all over this, but not a peep from the left.

    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

    by HairyTrueMan on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 07:18:47 AM PST

    •  Because if affect very few companies? (5+ / 0-)

      And it's really a non-issue.

      •  How many companies does it affect? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JeffW

        Do you have any numbers to back this assertion? I have something.

        Under the new Treasury rule, firms with 50 to 99 full-time workers are free from the mandate until 2016. And firms with 100 or more workers now also only need cover 70% of full-time workers in 2015 and 95% in 2016 and after, not the 100% specified in the law.

        http://online.wsj.com/...

        Sounds significant to me. Do you think the President is worried that the mandate will have a negative impact on the economy? Perhaps Obama is considering the CBO report that is mocked in this cartoon. Look on Page 124 of the report.
        Businesses also may respond to the employer penalty by seeking to reduce or limit their full-time staffing and to hire more part-time employees. Those responses might occur because the employer penalty will apply only to businesses with 50 or more full-time-equivalent employees, and employers will be charged only for each full-time employee (not counting the first 30 employees).

        If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

        by HairyTrueMan on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:08:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The correct link for the report. (0+ / 0-)

          If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

          by HairyTrueMan on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:11:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  One article I saw quote that it affects (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          doinaheckuvanutjob, Silina

          less than 2% of companies.

          One thing you're not taking into account is that there may already be a number of companies that already meet the mandate's minimum requirements.  Regardless of whether the mandate is delayed or not, since they meet it either way there really won't be any impact one way or another on their business or employees.

          If I'm an employer that fits the criteria but I already provide health care insurance for 95% of my full-time employees, what difference does any of this make as a practical matter?  None.

          •  Can you post a link to that article please? (0+ / 0-)

            Also, I notice that you're only mentioning the 95% for companies that employ over 100 people, which is the number for 2016 AND subsequent years, down from a requirement of 100%. It's only 70% in 2015.

            Please tell me why President Obama is making this change to the law. Do you think it's political? Does he think it will affect the economy? Have the companies successfully lobbied for the exemption? Did they promise something in exchange for the exemption?

            Since you say there is no impact, why do it?

            If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

            by HairyTrueMan on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 12:39:54 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not sure of the exact article I saw, (0+ / 0-)

              however here is a CNNMoney story that includes that number:

              Obamacare Employer Mandate Eased

              Mid-sized companies with the equivalent of 50 to 99 full-time employees will now have until 2016 to provide affordable coverage under Obamacare, a year later than expected, the administration announced Monday.

              And larger companies are getting a bit of a break too -- they must offer insurance to only 70% of full-time workers in 2015, rather than 95%. The higher threshold will begin in 2016.

              Only 2% of the nation's firms are considered mid-sized, with another 2% defined as large.

              Companies with fewer than 50 people on staff, which make up 96% of businesses, are not subject to the Obamacare employer mandate.

              So, I guess technically when you add the mid-size and large companies together, you get 4%.  Still... not a massive number overall.

              As for the rest of your questions, I don't particularly pretend to know what the motivations are.

              •  Thanks. (0+ / 0-)

                That's 4% of firms, not employees. Biff's Plumbing probably has a lot fewer employees than say Walmart or Travelers for instance. And we're talking about $2000 in penalties per employee for not complying with the mandate. So considering that the fine is per person, it's weird that a serious journalist would be providing numbers about the firms instead of individuals.

                And the permanent 5% exemption for large companies allows them to not provide insurance for a substantial number of people without facing any penalties. And those people will need to purchase their own coverage or face a penalty.

                If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

                by HairyTrueMan on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:43:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Using the Small Business Administration's stats, (0+ / 0-)

                  it looks like around 10% of American workers work at mid-sized businesses. ( http://www.sbecouncil.org/... ) I'm ballparking here, based on numbers from 2009 that say that 34.9% of workers are employed by firms with fewer than 100 people, and 17.7% work at companies with fewer than 20.

                  That means that 17.2% work at companies between 20 and 99 employees. It seems from the stats that there are fewer and fewer companies the higher the employee count you're looking at, so I'm gonna round to 10% being between 50 and 99% (though I wouldn't be surprised if it were lower than that -- but let's go with it).

                  But we're only looking at uninsured Americans. The White House says that 78% of firms with 10-25 employees offer health insurance. ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/... ) This number goes up the more employees you have, but let's call it 80% of companies with 50-100 employees.

                  That leaves 20% of 10% of American workers -- around 2% of employees -- who are actually affected by this. And again, that's probably a high estimate.

                  But wait! How many of those 2% of American workers are eligible for federal insurance subsidies? I don't know, but it's probably a positive number. So we're talking about a very, very small number of people who were affected.

                  •  Oh, forgot to do large businesses. New math: (0+ / 0-)

                    Add 30% (max uninsured allowed) of 65.1% (# of workers employed by >100-person businesses) of the percentage of big firms that don't already offer insurance.

                    How many is that? The White House says 78% of businesses with 10-25 employees offer insurance, and 99% of firms with more than 200 employees offer insurance, so, splitting the difference (which seems to me would end up with a low number, but whatever) gets to 90%.

                    So let's say .3 * .651 * .1 + .02 (mid-sized unemployed) = .04 -- a maximum of 4% of workers who are impacted by this. (Again, this does not factor in the federal subsidies at least some of those workers are receiving.) And of course, that's workers, not citizens, which reduces that number even further.

                    But you're right: the remaining 1-2% affected by this absolutely deserve better, and they deserve it now. We should make sure not to leave them behind.

                    •  I'll stipulate that your math is correct. (0+ / 0-)

                      I'll agree that approximately two percent of the total workforce of 150,000,000 people (it's actually larger) will be affected by this regulatory change. That's three million workers. It think the concern from the Obama Administration and Democrats up for reelection in 2014 is that many of these people would be laid off or have their hours cut below the 30-hour threshold. But now the corporations get to avoid the penalties and these lucky souls get to pay for their own coverage, which is mandated by the ACA.

                      If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

                      by HairyTrueMan on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 07:00:52 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Many of whom couldn't before. (0+ / 0-)

                        That was a percentage I forgot to take out: those who are happy to now have access to insurance on the exchanges.

                        I also forgot that a huge number of them will also be able to get insurance through their spouses' employer. And a whole bunch of them will be people under 26 years old who can now get on their parents' health care. So, just looking at this particular delay, we're probably looking at a couple million people.

                        Now, I don't think the delay was political, or at least not entirely so. I think businesses were having a hard time figuring out what they were going to do, and the Administration thought it better that they delay a bit. We can agree to disagree about that, though regardless of the priority of every factor, I'm sure we can agree it was a difficult decision.

                        What concerns me is a much bigger number than the million or two whose coverage has been delayed -- at least they will get coverage eventually. It's a number we won't know until late this year or early next: the number of people who pay the $95 and go without health insurance.

                        For them, paying $95 for nothing makes more sense than paying the rate offered to them on the exchange or by their employer for health insurance. Each one of those people will represent a failure of the new system that we need to address.

                        Obamacare is going to get millions more people access to health care two years from now than had it two years ago. In fact, it's already doing that. It's a huge step forward, and a great improvement, and nowhere near enough.

                        And you're right: if even a small number of employers start reducing people's hours, that's not fair to any of those whose work hours are reduced, even ignoring the windfall received by other part-time workers who are hired to fill the gap they're leaving, and the federal subsidies they're likely to receive for their insurance.

                        We've made the best we can of a system where employers are on the hook for providing for the health and wellbeing of their employees, but we've taken it just about as far as we can.

                        I hope that you'll continue applying pressure and asking important questions about health care in this country, and that when the opportunity comes, you'll stand with progressives and fight for a system that de-links work and wellbeing, and truly provides health care for all.

                •  In many cases, that will be cheaper anyway. (0+ / 0-)

                  Today's employers, particularly those with lots of "pawn" employees, interpret "provide" health insurance to "let you buy it out of your own pre-tax money" rather than add any of their own money to yours.  The only benefit the workers get from their employer affiliation is guaranteeing they will be ALLOWED to buy it (provided they have not let their previous coverage lapse for even one day) and pay a somewhat lower rate because of the group.  Whereas, Obamacare gives them a guarantee even if their previous coverage DID lapse, or they never had any at all, AND provides a group rate, AND if they are in the "Wal Mart" salary bracket or less, a subsidy (unless they are in a VERY low bracket and their state's governor hates them).

  •  The pre-existing conditions forms were pages long (14+ / 0-)

    Obamacare is a big blow to the paper industry.

    •  Especially when you also consider the flurry... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      smileycreek, MrLuckyman

      ...of paperwork to respond to questions, if you've had a pre-existing condition (to prove I was now completely healthy... thanks St. Luke's!!), and all the copies of medical records to go along with that appeal.  

      After all that, they still denied the insurance coverage! (back in 2007).

      Now, I just have to say I want coverage, select the coverage and cost we can afford, pay the premium, and "viola"...  As of March 1st, our whole family of three will finally have good coverage for $330/month.  

      Thank you, President Obama!

    •  Congress claimed there were (0+ / 0-)

      too many pages to read, however, the ACA had as many words as a Harry Potter book, which children can easily complete, doesnt say much for Congress does it? They are so turned off by having to actually do something other then filibuster....The papers were copied the same way they have been for decades, congress was well aware of that, they were formatted the same way they have been for decades,  there are large spaces, some pages had a few sentences. etc. each page wasnt chocked full, quite the contrary....Congress isnt working for this country, they work for Koch brothers and Company... we get the honors of paying Congress salaries, their lifetime of top notch healthcare, their raises, etc. you know everything they deny  us.

    •  And by delaying many thousands of deaths (0+ / 0-)

      for years or even decades, it could hurt the FUNERAL industry, and the obituary writing industry, and ...

  •  I'd be happy if "Obamacare" cost about 200 jobs (20+ / 0-)

    Republicans in the House.

    And God said, "Let there be light"; and with a Big Bang, there was light. And God said "Ow! Ow My eyes!" and in a flash God separated light from darkness. "Whew! Now that's better. Now where was I. Oh yea . . ."

    by Pale Jenova on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 07:46:16 AM PST

  •  Love the cartoon. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    koosah, JeffW, VirginiaJeff

    And in an ironic twist the ad above stated; "You may be infected".

    "Onward through the fog!" - Oat Willie

    by rocksout on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:03:47 AM PST

  •  Okay.... (7+ / 0-)

    So I have a question. If people are leaving second jobs because they no longer need TWO jobs to get by (and get health insurance)...

    Doesn't that mean that a lot of job openings will now become available for those who are unemployed?

    And why is nobody selling it that way?

    "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

    by Diogenes2008 on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:47:42 AM PST

    •  If the progressive powers-that-be knew how to (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JeffW, Calamity Jean, Tonedevil

      sell progressive ideology to progressive voters, we'd win every election 98% to 2%.

      This shirt is dry clean only. Which means... it's dirty. -- Mitch Hedberg

      by Greasy Grant on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:11:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, but.... (0+ / 0-)

        I haven't even seen anyone HERE saying it.

        "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

        by Diogenes2008 on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 09:20:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I've seen it mentioned here several times. (5+ / 0-)

          Try this front-page post from last Friday, which includes this quote:

          We should add that the budget office believes that health reform will actually reduce unemployment over the next few years.
        •  I've been saying it (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Diogenes2008, foresterbob, Tonedevil

          and I've seen a lot of front-page diaries mentioning it, plus how the GOP is willfully misinterpreting the CBO report.

          You've also got people leaving their primary jobs to strike out on their own as self-employed, or people going back to college to make a career change, or just people retiring because they don't have to worry about that gap in coverage till they're eligible for Medicare. If they're in a higher-level position, people move up the ladder to fill that and subsequent positions, which means they likely get a salary boost and opens up space for an entry-level worker to start their career.

          There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

          by Cali Scribe on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 11:25:35 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ah (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            foresterbob, Calamity Jean

            Well, I've been sick, so there's that. :) Glad people are saying it.

            We need to say it often, and loudly.

            Thanks!

            "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

            by Diogenes2008 on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 11:36:47 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Blaming Obamacare (0+ / 0-)

            I must have missed something along the way. How does Obamacare enable anyone to quit their job? Here in the state of Md. My daughter , son in law and two children cannot afford insurance coverage , so they are paying the penalty. They do not have a high income. How is it that Obamacare enables some people to be able to quit their job and others can't afford the premium , and have no coverage?
                 Someone , please enlighten me.

            •  If they have a low income and (0+ / 0-)

              can't afford the premiums, they are supposed to get subsidies.  They may even be eligible for Medicaid. Have they actually tried to get insurance?  Something sounds a little fishy here if you don't mind my saying so.

              I also think it's a bad economic decision to skip paying for health care, especially when you have kids.  My daughter has asthma that is mostly under control, and she's had a hospital stay, an ER visit and two ambulance rides in the last couple of years.  If we didn't have insurance, we'd be selling our house right about now.  And you can get in a car accident at any time.  Even if your daughter's family  is healthy at the moment, they are playing a dangerous game with their financial future to forgo health care coverage.

              •  If they have a low income and (0+ / 0-)

                I do not know their financial situation. I know it takes all they earn for mortgage heating fuel , water sewer , electricity ,Insurances etc. The husband commutes quite a distance each day , so he spends as lot for gasoline.
                     As I understand , their income is too high to get any subsidy. All they told me was that the monthly premium is too high for them to afford it.
                  I have gone to the Md Health connection site trying to learn and see if I could find something for them, but to no avail. It seems you have to deal with insurance companies , and you are at their mercy.
                I have read about how it works in some states , but doesn't seem the same here. It's funny because Md supports the ACA.
                    I have been worrying for the last six years. They are in their 50's now , and that's when things start to go wrong , and it doesn't take much to have a catastrophe. I don't know the answer.

  •  Perfect and compelling! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, Calamity Jean

    We have it within our power to make the world over again ~ Thomas Paine

    by occupystephanie on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 08:56:19 AM PST

  •  Very well done (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW

    The "job loss" being the undoing of 70 year olds having to work hit home for me--money is one of the false idols we're told about but so is the economy and unemployment rate. They're just more abstract.

  •  I keep thinking back to Universal Basic Income (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    annan

    Ever since I heard about it a while back, it seems to tie into everything- the exact same benefits in this cartoon would apply to UBI* as well... but we have to get Universal Basic Healthcare working first.

    Universal Basic Income- everybody gets a paycheck from the government, regardless of employment status. It would eliminate a lot of the current welfare programs, because they wouldn't be needed, and it would be a lot harder to defraud. Of course, it would also put bargaining power back into the hands of labor (who wants to wash dishes for next to nothing when you're already getting a paycheck?) so I'm sure corporations would hate it (despite the fact that it would also probably eliminate the need for minimum wage.)

    -this space for rent-

    by EsnRedshirt on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 11:08:26 AM PST

  •  Panel 4 reminds me of the new Caddillac ad... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    meinoregon

    where the spokesdude goes off on how awesome it is that Americans only take 2 weeks of vacation a year, unlike those lazy French.  Pisses me off every time I see it.

    I don't know what's been trickling down, but it hasn't been pleasant---N. Pelosi

    by Russycle on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 11:10:34 AM PST

  •  My husband worked till 72 in order to cover me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean, Tonedevil

    When I became eligible for Medicare, he continued to work for the additional insurance.  He finally retired and it seems as if all we do is fill out insurance forms.  Oh for single payer!

    One Washington-Inslee! One Country-Obama!

    by yakimagrama on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 11:51:43 AM PST

  •  Nailed it. Kudos, Jen. (nt) (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tonedevil

    I'm a Christian, therefore I'm a liberal.

    by VirginiaJeff on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 12:19:53 PM PST

  •  Memory Hole: Paul Ryan on "Job Lock" (6+ / 0-)

    "[The] key question that ought to be addressed in any healthcare reform legislation is, are we going to continue job-lock or are we going to allow individuals more choice and portability to fit the 21st century workforce?"
    - Paul Ryan, May 2009:

    "Work for something because it is good, not just because it stands a chance to succeed." -- Vaclav Havel

    by greendem on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 12:47:45 PM PST

  •  Golden Handcuffs? (0+ / 0-)

    "It’s almost as though opponents of Obamacare want us to be chained to miserable jobs. Hmm…"

    •  Who are you listening to?? (0+ / 0-)

      Try signing up for obamacare so you can see how totally unbelievable awful it is!!!!!

      •  You dont know (0+ / 0-)

        Yeah, ok professor if you say so...... my sister enrolled has been covered since Jan. 1... she had no problems enrolling, said she had many options.. She now pays $800 LESS a month for coverage...she had to drop her private insurance because she couldnt afford the $1400/month anymore, she found herself uninsured for the first time in her life, she is 63 yo, has some medical issures that need to be followed by a physician, she was worried about being unisured, but had NO choice.... but now she has coverage she can afford, and an Rx plan, are you aware that all Insurance providers now have to include Rx plans? Is that a bad thing in your eyes too? She has been to see her new primary, who she likes better then her previous doctor and used the Rx plan with NO problems, she is actually happier with her coverage now as its more personalized and affordable...she is self employed with a small practice in the field of psychoanalysis she is also a LCSW..she works  long hours...she pays taxes just like everyone else..this isnt a hand out..people who enroll in ObamaCares are paying the premiums with their own money, they are taking responsibility for themselves instead of mooching off the taxpayers when they require medical attention...what is your problem with all Americans being able to access healthcare for themselves and their families? Do you pay for your families insurance?  WTF is wrong with you? I dont know what state you live in but that might have something to do with it...are you seeing RED over the ACA?

  •  Blaming Obamacare (0+ / 0-)

    I must have missed something along the way. How does Obamacare enable anyone to quit their job? Here in the state of Md. My daughter , son in law and two children cannot afford insurance coverage , so they are paying the penalty. They do not have a high income. How is it that Obamacare enables some people to be able to quit their job and others can't afford the premium , and have no coverage?
         Someone , please enlighten me.

  •  Who here has signed up for it? (0+ / 0-)

    Both my kids (40ish) have and find it to be horrible.  Plans like from $500+ a month (mother and 1 child)with deductible ($4000.) and many higher....... which you will never reach if you are an average person with average illnesses per year.  In other words, pay 500 every month (total $6000) for the year and pay every doctor bill in full with no co-pays.....whether its your primary or a specialist and all your prescriptions because you will never reach the $4000. by the end of any year (while you are struggling with food,transportation,heat,light,taxes everywhere,and more)........or be FINED on your tax return for not having any insurance.   NICE AMERICA!    I'm ashamed!!!.

    •  My sister has been (0+ / 0-)

      covered since Jan. 1... with no problems enrolling, said she had many options.. She now pays $800 LESS a month for coverage...she had to drop her previous insurance because she couldnt afford $1400/month anymore, she found herself uninsured for the first time in her life, she is 63 yo, has some medical conditions that need to be followed by a physician, she was worried about being uninsured, but had NO choice.... now she has coverage she can afford, and an Rx plan, are you aware that all Insurance providers now have to include Rx plans? She has seen her new primary, who she likes better then her previous doctor and has used the Rx card with NO problems, she is actually happier with her coverage now, as its more personalized and affordable...she is self employed with a small practice in the field of psychoanalysis she is also a LCSW..she works  long hours, helping others...she pays taxes just like everyone else..this isnt a hand out..people who enroll in ObamaCares are paying the premiums with their own money, they are taking responsibility for themselves instead of mooching off the taxpayers when they require medical attention....which leads me to ask you this... Why SHOULDNT people who have healthcare thats accessible and affordable, cover themselves? Why should the taxpayers be responsible for their personal medical bills, just because they OPT NOT TO? Why should I have to pay for someone who now has options? I dont owe them anything, neither does this country, (exception for those who serve/served). You dont think thats mooching off the system? Who wipes these peoples butts after a bowel movement? Take responsibility for your own personal bills, you arent the taxpayers responsibility..
      Another question... prior to your sons signing up for Obamacare, who was covering their costs? Who paid when they had to go to hospital, see doctors, tests etc.? Me? Your neighbors? The lousy tax that they have to pay doesnt come anywhere near what emergency hospitalization or surgery would cost.. so taxpayers get stuck paying the rest .. why shouldnt those who think their shit doesnt stink have to pay a tax? Parasitic and arrogant, if you ask me.   GROW UP!!
      Your sons didnt do a very good job using the resources that are available to them when signing up for most affordable for their personal income, what you are saying isnt true, take advantage of the resources and multitude of people, who can help them with it, rates are different in each state........ Are you also against the expansion of Medicaid? what is it about Americans being able to access healthcare for themselves and their families, that makes you ashamed of your country? You should be more ashamed of the fact this is the only developed country that DOESNT have healthcare coverage for all its citizens.. thats pathetic if you ask me. Universal Healthcare is the real solution, how do you feel about that? So you think its more American to mooch off the taxpayers? Guess you see Red for the ACA as well.....

  •  No one is going to (0+ / 0-)

    quit their jobs, become lazy do nothings because they now have affordable healthcare..in order to keep receiving the coverage they have to pay for it with their own earnings, if they dont work,  how do they think these people will be able to continue making their payments?
    Are they really that upset that people arent going to be glued to a job that they cant stand, but stay because of the benefits? Now people can work two part time jobs if need be and have coverage.. someone can get a job they actually like and dont have to worry about coverage...its mind boggling how the ACA is causing such an uproar in the bowels of those who already have coverage...nasty, arrogant Americans, nothing like looking out for your neighbors.
    The ideal situation would have been Universal Healthcare but OMG I cant even imagine what would happen if that was proposed....lol..

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site