Greg
-
The Basics
-
Greg on Patch
-
More Stuff
Comments
-
On the Blog Post Obamacare: An Affront to Our Freedoms And Wrong For Business and Families
-
On the Blog Post Obamacare: An Affront to Our Freedoms And Wrong For Business and Families
Greg
12:32 pm on Monday, May 20, 2013
ReplyRegardless of your view on the ACA, it is time to think about what it really does. Many of the comments that I read or hear lead me to believe that people think that somehow the government is going to provide insurance, I have yet to find that to be true. Insurance is going to be paid for and the middle class is going to pay the most.
An example from an earlier post was about the fast food employers not thinking that they will be affected and that is probably true, but what is the reality?
"fast food workers under 26 years old -- which covers 40 percent of the industry's employees -- may just choose to stay on their parents' plan since Obamacare raises the age of eligibility to 26"
What does this mean? While an 18 to 26 year may be able to stay on a parents insurance someone is going to have to pay for it. This rule in the ACA allows employers to charge the parent for the additional premiums and if the parent purchases insurance through the open/exchange market the parent will still be paying the premium. In the end the parent could have just bought a health policy for their adult child so the only real difference is that if the adult child does not obtain insurance they will have to pay a fine.
Most people don't really understand health insurance and most insurance people don't fully understand the ACA -
On the Blog Post Obamacare: An Affront to Our Freedoms And Wrong For Business and Families
-
On the article Would a Lower OWI Threshold Make Wisconsin Safer?
Greg
10:18 am on Sunday, May 19, 2013
ReplyIs anyone else having a problem replying using a mobile device? It has been a problem for a few weeks.
I think that the problem is more of a drinking problem than more are willing to admit. Alcohol related vehicle deaths are declining, but alcohol problems are not. This seems like a head in the sand proposal with a high feel good potential. Addressing the larger problem of alcohol could save the lives of more children than were killed in Sandy Hook, see co-sleeping, but that is not as easy. Either way I don't think that this should be a federal mandate, States can make this decision. (Obama didn't run on it)
I personally would have no problem with zero tolerance and ignition interlocks since I don't use alcohol, but it needs to be decided and enforced at the state level to work. -
On the Blog Post Speaker's Briefing: Bill Balances Separation of Powers
Greg
1:04 am on Sunday, May 19, 2013
ReplySorry Luke, but if you can learn from a great mind, such as Carl Spackler, your time on this earth will have more meaning. Your friends are the harmless squirrel and the friendly rabbit.
-
On the Blog Post Speaker's Briefing: Bill Balances Separation of Powers
Greg
12:55 am on Sunday, May 19, 2013
ReplyHe said "on your deathbed you will receive total consciousness", so I got that goin' for me.
-
On the article Details Emerge for Family-Friendly Event Replacing Pirate Fest
-
On the article Would a Lower OWI Threshold Make Wisconsin Safer?
Greg
12:36 am on Sunday, May 19, 2013
ReplyI would like to see how they got to the 500 to 800 lives saved number. Many stats get twisted to support an action. Many "alcohol related" accidents have nothing to do with alcohol causing the accident. A person with .03 bac is hit by a texting driver crossing the center line, it is an alcohol related accident and stat.
-
On the Blog Post Speaker's Briefing: Bill Balances Separation of Powers
-
On the Blog Post Obamacare: An Affront to Our Freedoms And Wrong For Business and Families
Greg
4:58 pm on Friday, May 17, 2013
The existing system has people without coverage so the failure comes into play when the 28 year old opts out and then needs care. Obaqmacare does not cover him any more than he was covered without it, he is just out of pocket for the fine. Obamacare has just thrown salt into his wounds. Failure!
Greg
12:33 pm on Monday, May 20, 2013
Regardless of your view on the ACA, it is time to think about what it really does. Many of the comments that I read or hear lead me to believe that people think that somehow the government is going to provide insurance, I have yet to find that to be true. Insurance is going to be paid for and the middle class is going to pay the most.
An example from an earlier post was about the fast food employers not thinking that they will be affected and that is probably true, but what is the reality?
"fast food workers under 26 years old -- which covers 40 percent of the industry's employees -- may just choose to stay on their parents' plan since Obamacare raises the age of eligibility to 26"
What does this mean? While an 18 to 26 year may be able to stay on a parents insurance someone is going to have to pay for it. This rule in the ACA allows employers to charge the parent for the additional premiums and if the parent purchases insurance through the open/exchange market the parent will still be paying the premium. In the end the parent could have just bought a health policy for their adult child so the only real difference is that if the adult child does not obtain insurance they will have to pay a fine.
Most people don't really understand health insurance and most insurance people don't fully understand the ACA.