The Affordable Care Act - Tracking The Tentacles And Marxist Wet Dreams...

[Selene]

Horror File #1:

You would think that when your party is burying a hole that is getting harder and harder to get out of, you wouldn't want to that hole get deeper faster. But here is Kathleen Murphy, Democrat running for the House of Delegates against Barbara Comstock, telling a forum in Great Falls that she believes it should law to force doctors to accept Medicare and Medicaid patients. Forced by government decree, mind you. A birdie sent me this:

FYI last night at the Great Falls Grange debate, Democrat delegate candidate Kathleen Murphy said that since many doctors are not accepting medicaid and medicare patients,

she advocates making it a legal requirement for those people to be accepted

.

She did not recognize that the payments are inadequate to cover the doctors' costs. She also did not recognize there is a shortage of over 45,000 physicians now and that it is forecast to be 90,000 in a few years

.

Democrats appear to want to make physicians slaves of the state, but Democrats don't admit they would just drive more doctors out of practice into retirement and other occupations. The Obamacare law and regulations are causing millions of people to lose their health insurance, drop many doctors and hospitals. The HHS internal forecast is 93 million Americans would lose their health insurance due to the Obamacare law and rules about adequacy of insurance.

Many more people will be uninsured. The penalties for being uninsured start at $95 per year, but the penalties can't be collected by the IRS if a person does not have a tax refund to attach.

The out of pocket costs required by Obamacare's Silver Plan for a non-smoking mother and father with two children making a gross before income taxes of $50,000 (roughly average salary for VA) would be $13,765 per year including the deductible of $10,400. That's 28% of their gross income -- not very affordable and about the same as guidelines for a mortgage payment. For such a family making $100,000 of gross income, The cost would be $21,431 including the deductible of $12,700, or 21% of gross income.

With such high deductibles doctors are stuck with trying to collect cash from the patients, even at regulated charge structures. Thus is makes sense for primary care doctors not to participate in Obamacare, medicare and medicaid. They should encourage patients to participate in Concierge Care and insurance programs run by the doctors themselves with patients who can do simple math. Patients can take out catastrophic insurance with high deductibles for major surgeries. Tax deductability for individual medical savings accounts would make health care more affordable.

The head of Obamacare programs, Berwick, loves the socialized medical system in the UK, but never mentions that malpractice insurance is minimal.

In the UK, panels of doctors review and approve malpractice awards, rather than emotional juries misled by trial lawyers. Malpractice reform like this with caps on malpractice awards would go a long way in making health care affordable.

I hope physicians rise up and speak out for common sense, protecting quality medical care in the US and giving patients freedom to choose

What are doctors going to do when they get nationalized?

Do you seriously want to be treated by someone who has a gun to his head?

Or, by sombody who hates their job?

Or, worse, by somebody who would want to seek out a job like that because they do not have the skill levels to compete?

I seem to remember a character in that crazy Russian lady's book who told a story about that...

A...

[turkeyfoot]

Concierge medicine is a practical alternative to ACA at the moment. As long as private practice doesnt become illegal, the price of doing business for drs and patients alike will drop when transactions are based on cash without the insurance paperwork and associated administration tangle.

I understand the offer of cash based payments done with hospitals will sometimes adjust the costs incurred on a medical bill.

A flight to concierge medicine by drs who band together to offer services to those, like myself who will pay a penalty, is what I hope for.

[Selene]

Concierge medicine is a practical alternative to ACA at the moment. As long as private practice doesnt become illegal, the price of doing business for drs and patients alike will drop when transactions are based on cash without the insurance paperwork and associated administration tangle.

I understand the offer of cash based payments done with hospitals will sometimes adjust the costs incurred on a medical bill.

A flight to concierge medicine by drs who band together to offer services to those, like myself who will pay a penalty, is what I hope for.

Agreed.

By the time we arrive at a minimal implementation which should be by June or July of 2014, there may be a serious effort to scrap it and just put a patch on the pre PPACA system and create a rational assigned risk pool that can be intelligently administered by each insurance company or by election of diferent voluntary plans that would be based on their own funding similar to Medical Savings Accounts.

A...

[moralist]

Concierge medicine is a practical alternative to ACA at the moment. As long as private practice doesnt become illegal, the price of doing business for drs and patients alike will drop when transactions are based on cash without the insurance paperwork and associated administration tangle.

I understand the offer of cash based payments done with hospitals will sometimes adjust the costs incurred on a medical bill.

A flight to concierge medicine by drs who band together to offer services to those, like myself who will pay a penalty, is what I hope for.

Bingo.

I already operate outside the corrupt third party payer healthcare insurance system simply by dealing directly with my healthcare providers as a cash paying customer. And yes, they do offer discounts.

Greg

[Selene]

I found this interesting...

Eligible Americans Turn Down Obamacare Tax Credits
Some consumers are ditching subsidies out of principle, opting to pay more for health insurance.

Louise Norris – a writer for HealthInsurance.org whose husband, Jay, is a broker for Colorado Health Insurance Insider – says some clients wonder whether it's ethical to take subsidies, and about two clients per month tell Jay they are not interested in receiving them. Of those who have a low income but high net worth, she says: “Technically they are well within the law to [receive subsidies]. Some people are not necessarily opposed to the Affordable Care Act, but they realize they are not the demographic of someone the law was supposed to target.”

In the early days of open enrollment, the Norrises worked with a couple in their early 60s from a small town in eastern Colorado whose income was about $60,000, which made them eligible for a subsidy of roughly $830 a month. The couple refused the subsidy, calling it a government handout.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/01/12/americans-protest-obamacare-by-refusing-health-insurance-subsidies

[Selene]

Another "surprise" in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [PPACA] has appeared...

Three senior House members told The Associated Press that they plan to strongly urge the administration to grant a special sign-up opportunity for uninsured taxpayers who will be facing fines under the law for the first time this year.

The three are Michigan's Sander Levin, the ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, and Democratic Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, and Lloyd Doggett of Texas. All worked to help steer Obama's law through rancorous congressional debates from 2009-2010.

The lawmakers say they are concerned that many of their constituents will find out about the penalties after it's already too late for them to sign up for coverage, since open enrollment ended Sunday.

"Open enrollment period ended before many Americans filed their taxes," the three lawmakers said in a statement. "Without a special enrollment period, many people (who will be paying fines) will not have another opportunity to get health coverage this year.

"A special enrollment period will not only help many Americans avoid making an even larger payment next year, but, more importantly, it will help them gain quality health insurance for 2015," the lawmakers added.

So far, administration officials have deflected questions about whether an extension will be granted.

http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2015-02-16-US--Health%20Overhaul-Penalties/id-b1c64dfc3f7946adba5dcd09c2ec5ff4

A...

Don't you just love the fine which is $95.00 or 1% of your income, whichever is the greater!!

Now the IRS can impute income to you to ramp up the fines...

[Selene]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2015/08/12/for-first-time-americas-uninsured-rate-is-below-10/

[Brant Gaede]

That's going to reverse. Nearly two million haven't filed the tax return with the IRS last April which is required to get coverage next year.

The expanding deductibles are making the ACA a sick enough joke as it is--and always was regardless.

--Brant

[Brant Gaede]

Another "surprise" in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [PPACA] has appeared...

Three senior House members told The Associated Press that they plan to strongly urge the administration to grant a special sign-up opportunity for uninsured taxpayers who will be facing fines under the law for the first time this year.

The three are Michigan's Sander Levin, the ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, and Democratic Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, and Lloyd Doggett of Texas. All worked to help steer Obama's law through rancorous congressional debates from 2009-2010.

The lawmakers say they are concerned that many of their constituents will find out about the penalties after it's already too late for them to sign up for coverage, since open enrollment ended Sunday.

"Open enrollment period ended before many Americans filed their taxes," the three lawmakers said in a statement. "Without a special enrollment period, many people (who will be paying fines) will not have another opportunity to get health coverage this year.

"A special enrollment period will not only help many Americans avoid making an even larger payment next year, but, more importantly, it will help them gain quality health insurance for 2015," the lawmakers added.

So far, administration officials have deflected questions about whether an extension will be granted.

http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2015-02-16-US--Health%20Overhaul-Penalties/id-b1c64dfc3f7946adba5dcd09c2ec5ff4

A...

Don't you just love the fine which is $95.00 or 1% of your income, whichever is the greater!!

Now the IRS can impute income to you to ramp up the fines...

The IRS can only legally collect the fines if you overpay your taxes by taking them out of the refund due. They can't take them out of your bank account, for instance.

--Brant

so I read

[Selene]

The PPACA is so successful that:

One third of Obamacare co-ops have failed.

New York’s Obamacare co-op drew the most consumer complaints.
Feds admit more Obamacare co-op failures are coming.
Obamacare co-op execs hid millions in lavish pay, consulting fees.
House panel says Obamacare co-op illegally diverted $25 million.
‘Luxurious’ funding lets Obamacare co-ops undercut commercial rivals.
Obamacare co-ops mostly not ready for opening day.
Four investigations of Obamacare co-ops.
Obamacare’s Louisiana co-op riddled with self-dealing, conflicts of interest.
Groups led by insider trader, child abuser got Obamacare co-op loans.
Obama political ally got $340 million Obamacare co-op loan.
Obamacare co-ops being formed behind closed doors.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/16/co-op-flop-the-biggest-obamacare-disaster-youve-never-heard-about/

[Selene]

[turkeyfoot]

Another "surprise" in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [PPACA] has appeared...

Three senior House members told The Associated Press that they plan to strongly urge the administration to grant a special sign-up opportunity for uninsured taxpayers who will be facing fines under the law for the first time this year.

The three are Michigan's Sander Levin, the ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, and Democratic Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, and Lloyd Doggett of Texas. All worked to help steer Obama's law through rancorous congressional debates from 2009-2010.

The lawmakers say they are concerned that many of their constituents will find out about the penalties after it's already too late for them to sign up for coverage, since open enrollment ended Sunday.

"Open enrollment period ended before many Americans filed their taxes," the three lawmakers said in a statement. "Without a special enrollment period, many people (who will be paying fines) will not have another opportunity to get health coverage this year.

"A special enrollment period will not only help many Americans avoid making an even larger payment next year, but, more importantly, it will help them gain quality health insurance for 2015," the lawmakers added.

So far, administration officials have deflected questions about whether an extension will be granted.

http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2015-02-16-US--Health%20Overhaul-Penalties/id-b1c64dfc3f7946adba5dcd09c2ec5ff4

A...

Don't you just love the fine which is $95.00 or 1% of your income, whichever is the greater!!

Now the IRS can impute income to you to ramp up the fines...

The IRS can only legally collect the fines if you overpay your taxes by taking them out of the refund due. They can't take them out of your bank account, for instance.

--Brant

so I read

Thats technically accurate. For someone filing quarterly though, its difficult to hit the mark where the refund can be lower than the penalty. For many the way to avoid paying a penalty for underpayment of taxes is to pay 110% of the previous yrs taxes.

The late filing penalty is 5% of the additional taxes owed amount for every month (or fraction thereof) your return is late, up to a maximum of 25%. If you file more than 60 days after the due date, the minimum penalty is $135 or 100% of your unpaid tax, whichever is smaller.

That almost assuredly complicates avoiding the "shared responsibility payment". Pick your poison. ) I am uninsured this year making me liable for $x. The math works in my favor for now.

[Selene]

The lawmakers say they are concerned that many of their constituents will find out about the penalties after it's already too late for them to sign up for coverage, since open enrollment ended Sunday.

Thats technically accurate. For someone filing quarterly though, its difficult to hit the mark where the refund can be lower than the penalty. For many the way to avoid paying a penalty for underpayment of taxes is to pay 110% of the previous yrs taxes.

The late filing penalty is 5% of the additional taxes owed amount for every month (or fraction thereof) your return is late, up to a maximum of 25%. If you file more than 60 days after the due date, the minimum penalty is $135 or 100% of your unpaid tax, whichever is smaller.

That almost assuredly complicates avoiding the "shared responsibility payment". Pick your poison. ) I am uninsured this year making me liable for $x. The math works in my favor for now.

Correct.

For now, if you file quarterly, that is as good a temporary fix as available.

That is the point of the marxist's incrementalism.

The real damage is being done in the regulation segments of the state.

A...

[Brant Gaede]

Oh! The humanity!

https://youtu.be/pUVDmXvXcbk

[Selene]

Oh! The humanity!

https://youtu.be/pUVDmXvXcbk

Now that is one of the greatest pieces of tape from a rhetorical and medium perspective.

Most folks only heard his voice. Close your eyes and listen to just the voice.

When matched in real time, as in this YouTube, [ which I thank you for] that is Sublime to me.

I still get chills up my spine when I hear deep into his voice.

A...

[Selene]

Here is a Happy Thanksgiving from the thugs in the Prince's Palace on the Hill...

http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain?operation=OPERATION_GET_AGENCY_RULE_LIST&currentPub=true&agencyCode=&showStage=active&agencyCd=0000&Image58.x=31&Image58.y=10&Image58=Submit

[Selene]

Since Chris Mathews' old boss, Tip O'Neal knew that "all politics is local."

Welcome to local baby!

And it has the same effect on businesses--it hurts and destroys them. Ellie Bufkin writes at The Federalist,

By now most people have heard that many popular restaurants in New York City have abolished tipping, and raised their menu prices by up to 40 percent, which now gives them the ability to pay everyone on staff more and provide full-time health coverage. Some restaurants tried a different tactic, including Brooklyn pizzeria Franny’s. They announced that checks would soon include a line item that reads “3% surcharge for Obamacare,” then quickly reversed that decision after complaints. Now they will raise all their prices, despite their concerns this means “putting $22 pizza on the menu.”

A manager at Franny’s compared the line-item to a fuel surcharge. When gas prices go up, delivery companies will often charge their clients a percentage of their order to offset the extra expenditure. Citing Obamacare’s inflated health-insurance premiums and requirement that eateries like Franny’s insure their full-time staff, restaurants have asked their guests to pay.

Restaurants like Franny’s operate with razor-thin margins, which is so often the reason that the food and beverage workforce does not have employee-sponsored health care. This a very transparent way of letting the public know how the new health-care law affects a small operation like theirs.

Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2015/12/restaurants-try-to-make-customers-eat-obamacare/#4O0HYRb68t0Tu0HQ.99

So now, you can get a pizza at Franny's in Brooklyn for only $22.00, or, roughly $3.30 per slice [assuming a six (6) slice pizza...

Just a day after Franny's in Prospect Heights started levying a three percent surcharge on its menu to offset the costs of implementing the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare), the restaurant announces in a letter to guests that it is retracting that fee and reconfiguring its pricing. Francine Stephens, a co-owner at the restaurant, tells Eater the charge has already been removed and that an updated menu would be posted today.

The Affordable Care Act requires businesses with 50 or more full-time staffers to provide reasonably priced health insurance by 2016 or face yearly penalties of at least $2,000 per worker.

Here's the full text of the letter Franny's sent to guests:

It is appearing that many of our guests are viewing the proposed ACA surcharge as anti-Obamacare, which is so unfortunate, because it is in fact, quite the opposite! Through this surcharge, franny's is embracing Obamacare. Clearly our intent was misunderstood and our guests have made it clear that they would prefer to see higher prices as opposed to a surcharge. We've always worked in the service of our staff and guests and will amend our prices accordingly while removing the surcharge entirely.

Initially, we thought, before we start putting $22 pizza on the menu, let's be transparent about what that money is actually going towards. However, it seems given the stated preference of our guests as well as the potential for misinterpretations into the future, we will retract the surcharge and reconfigure our menu pricing instead.

We hold it essential to who we are as a company to take care of our staff—and our guests. We are listening to you all.

Previously: Franny's Levies a Three Percent Obamacare Surcharge on Guest Checks [ENY]

This area in Brooklyn, like almost the entire rest of the borough of Kings County, NY City is extremely progressive marxist population. At this particular location, the community is heavily Jewish also...see this special event...lol

https://frannysbrooklyn.com/event-registration/

http://ny.eater.com/2015/12/2/9835508/frannys-has-retracted-its-obamacare-surcharge

[Brant Gaede]

Cut the pizza into 4 pieces.

--Brant

problem solved (thanks, Yogi)

[Selene]

Cut the pizza into 4 pieces.

--Brant

problem solved (thanks, Yogi)

Well done Brant!

[Brant Gaede]

8 works too.

--Brant

it's the new (old) math!

[Selene]

The stick's getting a lot bigger — but it's not clear that many more people will choose the carrot as a result.

Households that opt to go without health insurance in 2016 are set to get hit with an average Obamacare fine of $969.

That is 47 percent higher than the average $661 penalty per uninsured household for this year, a new analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation revealed Wednesday.

And households without insurance that earn too much to qualify for financial aid to buy Obamacare plans will pay an even larger fine for 2016 — an average of $1,450, versus the average of $1,177 for 2015.

Uninsured households that would qualify for Obamacare subsidies to help pay for coverage face an average fine of $738 — nearly double the $389 average for this year.

"It's a substantial increase," said Larry Levitt, senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, about the higher average fines.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/08/that-obamacare-penalty-will-be-bigger-than-you-think.html

[Brant Gaede]

While my understanding is the IRS can only collect this by taking it out of your refund, it's going to make a mess for most regardless.

--Brant