Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
4 posters
Page 1 of 1
Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
Interactive toll to enter all your government freebies to determine what you will pay for Obamacare if you have to shop it on the "market".
About this tool
http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/
This tool illustrates health insurance premiums and subsidies for people purchasing insurance on their own in new health insurance exchanges (or “Marketplaces”) created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Beginning in October 2013, middle-income people under age 65, who are not eligible for coverage through their employer, Medicaid, or Medicare, can apply for tax credit subsidies available through state-based exchanges.
Additionally, states have the option to expand their Medicaid programs to cover all people making up to 138% of the federal poverty level (which is about $33,000 for a family of four). In states that opt out of expanding Medicaid, some people making below this amount will still be eligible for Medicaid, some will be eligible for subsidized coverage through Marketplaces, and others will not be eligible for subsidies.
With this calculator, you can enter different income levels, ages, and family sizes to get an estimate of your eligibility for subsidies and how much you could spend on health insurance. As premiums and eligibility requirements may vary, contact your state’s Medicaid office or exchange with enrollment questions.
So, I crunched the numbers for a family of four, two parents, two children, parents were thirty and smoked.
$14,019 a year.
$1168 a month.
More than mortgage or rent.
LOL - I can't wait to hear the wailing from all the people who thought they were getting "free" healthcare.
About this tool
http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/
This tool illustrates health insurance premiums and subsidies for people purchasing insurance on their own in new health insurance exchanges (or “Marketplaces”) created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Beginning in October 2013, middle-income people under age 65, who are not eligible for coverage through their employer, Medicaid, or Medicare, can apply for tax credit subsidies available through state-based exchanges.
Additionally, states have the option to expand their Medicaid programs to cover all people making up to 138% of the federal poverty level (which is about $33,000 for a family of four). In states that opt out of expanding Medicaid, some people making below this amount will still be eligible for Medicaid, some will be eligible for subsidized coverage through Marketplaces, and others will not be eligible for subsidies.
With this calculator, you can enter different income levels, ages, and family sizes to get an estimate of your eligibility for subsidies and how much you could spend on health insurance. As premiums and eligibility requirements may vary, contact your state’s Medicaid office or exchange with enrollment questions.
So, I crunched the numbers for a family of four, two parents, two children, parents were thirty and smoked.
$14,019 a year.
$1168 a month.
More than mortgage or rent.
LOL - I can't wait to hear the wailing from all the people who thought they were getting "free" healthcare.
Anti Federalist- Posts : 1385
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-16
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
Here's Why Obamacare Opponents are Pushing for Delay
http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/09/the-push-to-delay-obamacare-begins
Peter Suderman|August 9, 2013 9:24 am
With the effort to defund Obamacare in a government-shutdown showdown stalling out due to lack of support, there’s a new focus for opponents of the law: Not defund, but delay.
A group of right-leaning activists, led by Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, released a letter this week asking House Speaker John Boehner to delay virtually all of the law’s headline provisions—the mandates, subsidies, and taxes—for a year.
The mention of the law’s widely disliked individual mandate may get some attention, but it’s the insurance subsidies that matter most. Once those tax credits start being doled out to middle income individuals and families—people up to 400 percent of the poverty line, or about $90,000 for a family of four, are eligible—the law, and its spending, will become extremely difficult to repeal. The policy goal here is largely to delay the law’s spending.
Here’s the thinking behind the letter's tactical agenda: For one thing, it tacitly walks back the push by some of the law’s opponents to refuse to pass a continuing resolution if it funds Obamacare—potentially shutting down the government in the process. That effort was controversial, even amongst Obamacare’s opponents, in large part because it left no room for negotiation. This redirects some of the energy that would have gone toward the defunding push, and helps unify the law’s opponents: A delay request is something basically everyone should be able to support.
It’s also a more plausible ask of potentially sympathetic Democrats who might be on the fence about the law, or just worried about implementation hurdles. Which is not to say that the chances of a significant delay are high; to the contrary, they are very, very low. At best.
But there’s a big difference between asking for Democrats to agree to wholly defund their biggest domestic policy achievement in decades and asking them to wait just one more year for its major provisions to take effect—especially when the federal government admits it is struggling to meet crucial data security deadlines, when the administration has already delayed some significant provisions, when a gang of Democrats in the House have already voted to delay the law’s mandate, and when pro-Obamacare state officials implementing the law are saying things like, “I wish we had one more year” to get Obamacare off the ground.
This is a letter built on the assumption that that even if you think Obamacare is a great idea, it’s not yet operationally ready for the real world. It implicitly urges the GOP to work with Democrats to give folks working on the law the extra time a growing number now say they wish they had.
That sort of less-combative ask puts Republicans in a better bargaining position. As does the letter’s cautious lack of a hard line. The biggest problem with the Senate-led defunding push was that it was all or nothing, committing legislators and their allies to full defunding, full stop, with no wiggle room to support anything else. The new letter leaves supporters free to accept half a loaf rather than nothing at all, if that’s the best deal they think they can get.
Which is why it also signals that many of the law's opponents are looking to actually weaken the law, if possible (which, at this point, it may not be!), rather than start a big, impulsive fight they are virtually guaranteed to lose.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/09/the-push-to-delay-obamacare-begins
Peter Suderman|August 9, 2013 9:24 am
With the effort to defund Obamacare in a government-shutdown showdown stalling out due to lack of support, there’s a new focus for opponents of the law: Not defund, but delay.
A group of right-leaning activists, led by Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, released a letter this week asking House Speaker John Boehner to delay virtually all of the law’s headline provisions—the mandates, subsidies, and taxes—for a year.
The mention of the law’s widely disliked individual mandate may get some attention, but it’s the insurance subsidies that matter most. Once those tax credits start being doled out to middle income individuals and families—people up to 400 percent of the poverty line, or about $90,000 for a family of four, are eligible—the law, and its spending, will become extremely difficult to repeal. The policy goal here is largely to delay the law’s spending.
Here’s the thinking behind the letter's tactical agenda: For one thing, it tacitly walks back the push by some of the law’s opponents to refuse to pass a continuing resolution if it funds Obamacare—potentially shutting down the government in the process. That effort was controversial, even amongst Obamacare’s opponents, in large part because it left no room for negotiation. This redirects some of the energy that would have gone toward the defunding push, and helps unify the law’s opponents: A delay request is something basically everyone should be able to support.
It’s also a more plausible ask of potentially sympathetic Democrats who might be on the fence about the law, or just worried about implementation hurdles. Which is not to say that the chances of a significant delay are high; to the contrary, they are very, very low. At best.
But there’s a big difference between asking for Democrats to agree to wholly defund their biggest domestic policy achievement in decades and asking them to wait just one more year for its major provisions to take effect—especially when the federal government admits it is struggling to meet crucial data security deadlines, when the administration has already delayed some significant provisions, when a gang of Democrats in the House have already voted to delay the law’s mandate, and when pro-Obamacare state officials implementing the law are saying things like, “I wish we had one more year” to get Obamacare off the ground.
This is a letter built on the assumption that that even if you think Obamacare is a great idea, it’s not yet operationally ready for the real world. It implicitly urges the GOP to work with Democrats to give folks working on the law the extra time a growing number now say they wish they had.
That sort of less-combative ask puts Republicans in a better bargaining position. As does the letter’s cautious lack of a hard line. The biggest problem with the Senate-led defunding push was that it was all or nothing, committing legislators and their allies to full defunding, full stop, with no wiggle room to support anything else. The new letter leaves supporters free to accept half a loaf rather than nothing at all, if that’s the best deal they think they can get.
Which is why it also signals that many of the law's opponents are looking to actually weaken the law, if possible (which, at this point, it may not be!), rather than start a big, impulsive fight they are virtually guaranteed to lose.
Anti Federalist- Posts : 1385
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-16
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
Could you give me the info that you put in the calculator.
Donzel- Posts : 297
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-07-25
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
I can't wait either for those who think they are getting free health care to be shocked. They deserve what they voted for. But you tell me, how a family can possible pay that. They won't.
WHL- Admin
- Posts : 6057
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-01-14
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
Donzel wrote:Could you give me the info that you put in the calculator.
Anti Federalist- Posts : 1385
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-16
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
You forgot to post this:
Amount you pay for the premium:$6,791 per year (which equals 13.58% of your household income and covers 48% of the overall premium) You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$7,318 (which covers 52% of the overall premium)
Amount you pay for the premium:$6,791 per year (which equals 13.58% of your household income and covers 48% of the overall premium) You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$7,318 (which covers 52% of the overall premium)
Donzel- Posts : 297
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-07-25
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
Still, you are saying they make 14,000 and they have to pay 6800? Almost half their salary? And who pays the other 7? We, the taxpayers.
WHL- Admin
- Posts : 6057
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-01-14
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
RomneyCare shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as the Marxist-designed ObamaCare.
Last edited by News Hawk on Fri Aug 09, 2013 7:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
So true, ObamaCare is much better.News Hawk wrote:RomneyCare shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as the Marxist-designed ObamaCare.
Donzel- Posts : 297
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-07-25
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
HUH??? Who makes 14,000? Where does it say that?WHL wrote:Still, you are saying they make 14,000 and they have to pay 6800? Almost half their salary? And who pays the other 7? We, the taxpayers.
Donzel- Posts : 297
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-07-25
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
The family in Anti's example? Did I read that wrong?
WHL- Admin
- Posts : 6057
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-01-14
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
Oh, I see. In the box it was 50,000. Sorry.
WHL- Admin
- Posts : 6057
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-01-14
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
You could receive.Donzel wrote:You forgot to post this:
Amount you pay for the premium:$6,791 per year (which equals 13.58% of your household income and covers 48% of the overall premium) You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$7,318 (which covers 52% of the overall premium)
There is no guarantee of that.
And how is it better that I get to pick up the tab for that?
And how is having to pay out $565 bucks a month, for the "cheap ass" cut rate policy a bargain?
I could lease a Mercedes S class or Escalade for that a month.
Anti Federalist- Posts : 1385
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-16
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
Oh God help me, a "True Believer".Donzel wrote:So true, ObamaCare is much better.News Hawk wrote:RomneyCare shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as the Marxist-designed ObamaCare.
Get back to me in three years, when you and News Hawk swap places, after Team Red takes over the tyranny for eight years.
Anti Federalist- Posts : 1385
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-16
Re: Find out how much you will pay for Obama/Romney Care.
Noooo.Donzel wrote:So true, ObamaCare is much better.News Hawk wrote:RomneyCare shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as the Marxist-designed ObamaCare.
RomneyCare was intended for a single state.
(Not that that's a good thing, with Washington so willing to bail out any—every—failed Socialized system).
Similar topics
» Romney is “the father of health-care reform,” said Gruber.
» A dishonest presidency
» Obama Spied on Romney!!!
» Metadata helps find terrorists -- and Obama voters
» Bergdahl a Hero?
» A dishonest presidency
» Obama Spied on Romney!!!
» Metadata helps find terrorists -- and Obama voters
» Bergdahl a Hero?
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum