Obamacare welfare (subsidies) will be given without verification of need!

[Trajan]

I'll tell ya, the nutter attempt to make people believe that Obamacare is an "unmitigated disaster", a "government takeover", a "monstrosity"..........is getting very desperate.

With good reason, I suppose. You fuckers NAMED IT! In a move reminiscent of how you called yourselves "teabaggers".....only to whine about it later......this law, when it proves to be a moderate success, will burn you every time it is mentioned.

Obama-care. It does have a nice ring to it. Say it with me O-B-A-M-A-C-A-R-E.

I wonder which of your talking heads will be the first to implore you to start calling it by another name? When will your revisionist History charge the man with arrogantly naming a law after himself?

no one has to do a thing, Obama is doing it on his own.

There is no way they would have pulled the mandate for 'a year' and decided to forgo validation for their favorite trumpeted program ( that they counted on to help carry the 14 midterms) if they didn't realize they were in danger of a "third world" experience.

The risk software on the exchanges, apparently cannot even be adjusted for smokers, as to length of time smoking, etc. to rank their risk and cost. They will have had 54 months ( come October), thats a long time.

Oh and the Electronic notices for Medicaid users, for example; regards their eligibility for a tax subsidy, what they can receive, enrollment processes etc. has been pushed back a year too, seems to me these are some of the folks that 'needed Obamacare most'.


Oh and it was Max Baucus that said; "I just see a huge train wreck coming down..."

Some people have trouble with numbers and difficulty comprehending that which their opponent is trying to say.

At issue is HOW MANY BUSINESSES ARE ACTUALLY EFFECTED BY THE MANDATE.

That means you eliminate all businesses with less than 50 employees.
That means you eliminate all businesses with more than 50 employees who already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines.

Remaining is a very small percentage of BUSINESSES.

Have a great day.

I was wondering how you'd play it, I knew; a) you could never get to 2% of bus's and b) I was hoping you'd surprise us all and display a sense of intellectual honesty....The No. of Biz's means shit, and you know it, what a fail...

If we had a million bus's with 5 employees that didn't offer coverage or 10000 with 100, how does that change the paradigm? The Mandate is the Mandate and it applies to all such bus's and everyone there in who NEEDS the coverage. Its the people ( as in votes) , you know the 18, 30, or 45 million ( whatever number the DNC and obamacare is throwing around these days depending on how much trouble the ACA is in).

So, lets move on-

I added the quote to a rant of yours earlier, and my remarks back wanna take a 'hack' at that? Or...? what? Is it time?


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=NJDWd91nlI4#t=7s]Medicine time - YouTube[/ame] playing the music...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Some people have trouble with numbers and difficulty comprehending that which their opponent is trying to say.

At issue is HOW MANY BUSINESSES ARE ACTUALLY EFFECTED BY THE MANDATE.

That means you eliminate all businesses with less than 50 employees.
That means you eliminate all businesses with more than 50 employees who already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines.

Remaining is a very small percentage of BUSINESSES.

Have a great day.

That might make sense if the mandate did not cost the businesses that have more than 50 employees and provide health insurance money. Since it does you are an idiot.

 

[Trajan]

Some people have trouble with numbers and difficulty comprehending that which their opponent is trying to say.

At issue is HOW MANY BUSINESSES ARE ACTUALLY EFFECTED BY THE MANDATE.

That means you eliminate all businesses with less than 50 employees.
That means you eliminate all businesses with more than 50 employees who already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines.

Remaining is a very small percentage of BUSINESSES.

Have a great day.

That might make sense if the mandate did not cost the businesses that have more than 50 employees and provide health insurance money. Since it does you are an idiot.

Hes the "lone laugher", he sits in a corner giggling to himself, what did you expect?

....framing it his way- is like Hitler screaming at his generals to stfu, they still have 300 divisions, and the generals thinking, yea, but on paper only, they're only 3,000 men in each....

 

[LoneLaugher]

Some people have trouble with numbers and difficulty comprehending that which their opponent is trying to say.

At issue is HOW MANY BUSINESSES ARE ACTUALLY EFFECTED BY THE MANDATE.

That means you eliminate all businesses with less than 50 employees.
That means you eliminate all businesses with more than 50 employees who already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines.

Remaining is a very small percentage of BUSINESSES.

Have a great day.

That might make sense if the mandate did not cost the businesses that have more than 50 employees and provide health insurance money. Since it does you are an idiot.

You have made a claim that interests me. Please elaborate.

How does the mandate cost businesses that already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines money?

Explain this with some reasonable supporting evidence and watch how a man admits a mistake.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Some people have trouble with numbers and difficulty comprehending that which their opponent is trying to say.

At issue is HOW MANY BUSINESSES ARE ACTUALLY EFFECTED BY THE MANDATE.

That means you eliminate all businesses with less than 50 employees.
That means you eliminate all businesses with more than 50 employees who already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines.

Remaining is a very small percentage of BUSINESSES.

Have a great day.

That might make sense if the mandate did not cost the businesses that have more than 50 employees and provide health insurance money. Since it does you are an idiot.

You have made a claim that interests me. Please elaborate.

How does the mandate cost businesses that already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines money?

Explain this with some reasonable supporting evidence and watch how a man admits a mistake.

Obama delayed the reporting requirements of the employer mandate because businesses that provided health insurance objected. Why would they object to that, and why would Obama listen, if it did not affect them?

I await your total lack of comprehension.

 

[Flopper]

96% of the businesses in the US have fewer than 50 employees? Whose ass did you pull that lie out of? Do you have anything to support other than a PR piece?

The Affordable Care Act does not require businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees to provide their employees with healthcare coverage. To put this into perspective, 96 percent of the businesses in the U.S. have fewer than 50 employees

Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes

 

[LoneLaugher]

That might make sense if the mandate did not cost the businesses that have more than 50 employees and provide health insurance money. Since it does you are an idiot.

You have made a claim that interests me. Please elaborate.

How does the mandate cost businesses that already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines money?

Explain this with some reasonable supporting evidence and watch how a man admits a mistake.

Obama delayed the reporting requirements of the employer mandate because businesses that provided health insurance objected. Why would they object to that, and why would Obama listen, if it did not affect them?

I await your total lack of comprehension.

I'm sorry. I was expecting you to support your claim. Was I expecting too much?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

96% of the businesses in the US have fewer than 50 employees? Whose ass did you pull that lie out of? Do you have anything to support other than a PR piece?

The Affordable Care Act does not require businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees to provide their employees with healthcare coverage. To put this into perspective, 96 percent of the businesses in the U.S. have fewer than 50 employees

Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes

I ask you for something other than a PR piece, and you post the same PR piece.

Typical.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You have made a claim that interests me. Please elaborate.

How does the mandate cost businesses that already offer health insurance that meets the guidelines money?

Explain this with some reasonable supporting evidence and watch how a man admits a mistake.

Obama delayed the reporting requirements of the employer mandate because businesses that provided health insurance objected. Why would they object to that, and why would Obama listen, if it did not affect them?

I await your total lack of comprehension.

I'm sorry. I was expecting you to support your claim. Was I expecting too much?

I didn't have to wait long.

By the way, I actually supported it the first time I made it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Obama delayed the reporting requirements of the employer mandate because businesses that provided health insurance objected. Why would they object to that, and why would Obama listen, if it did not affect them?

I await your total lack of comprehension.

I'm sorry. I was expecting you to support your claim. Was I expecting too much?

I didn't have to wait long.

By the way, I actually supported it the first time I made it.

Humor me. How much money will the mandate cost businesses with over 50 employees who already provide adequate health insurance coverage for their employees?

I have yet to get your answer. You made the claim. Please support it.

 

[Flopper]

96% of the businesses in the US have fewer than 50 employees? Whose ass did you pull that lie out of? Do you have anything to support other than a PR piece?

The Affordable Care Act does not require businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees to provide their employees with healthcare coverage. To put this into perspective, 96 percent of the businesses in the U.S. have fewer than 50 employees

Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes

I ask you for something other than a PR piece, and you post the same PR piece.

Typical.

There's Forbes, Business Week, and Comstock. Then there's Politifact and a dozen other publications plus the White House and the Senate, but I'm sure you wouldn't believe them either.


"That’s because 96 percent of all businesses have fewer than 50 employees.."
Advice for Small Employers Confused by Obamacare - Businessweek

To put this into perspective, 96 percent of the businesses in the U.S. have fewer than 50 employees
Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes


"What’s more, 96 percent of all businesses in America have fewer than 50 employees."
https://www.comstocksmag.com/we-are-96

"In other words, 96 percent of U.S. small businesses are specifically exempted from fines on employers who don't insure their employees."
PolitiFact | U.S. Chamber says health care law hammers small businesses in an attack on Betsy Markey, D-Colo.

 

[Trajan]

You do realize that the mandate itself will affect how hiring at that level goes forward, as its already applying downward pressure on full time jobs, example, of the trend; more jobs were created at the part time level than full time ala the 195k as of the last employment report?


here, I'll help you, this is where you need to be focused,

Firms with 5 to 9 employees 6,878,051
Firms with 10 to 19 employees 8,497,391
Firms with 20 to 99 employees 20,684,691

You do realize that the Affordable Care Act does not require businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees to provide their employees with healthcare coverage. (And if they do have fewer than 25 employees and choose to provide insurance anyway, the Act provides a tax credit to offset the cost.) Since 96% of the businesses in the US have less than 50 employees it seems a bit ridiculous to claim that the ACA is going to have a major impact on employment.
Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes

of course and? what? all of this happens in a vacuum? you do realize that anyone in bus. wants to grow their biz, I mean do I really need to post that? Sooner or later biz will pick up, that 20 million is key. Since the bottom fell out benefits and concomitantly 40 hour a week jobs at the levels the subsidies were going to be provided mean something.

You realize the the postponement of the mandate will cost money, right?

 

[Trajan]

You do realize that the Affordable Care Act does not require businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees to provide their employees with healthcare coverage. (And if they do have fewer than 25 employees and choose to provide insurance anyway, the Act provides a tax credit to offset the cost.) Since 96% of the businesses in the US have less than 50 employees it seems a bit ridiculous to claim that the ACA is going to have a major impact on employment.
Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes

96% of the businesses in the US have fewer than 50 employees? Whose ass did you pull that lie out of? Do you have anything to support other than a PR piece?

That seems plausible. But I wonder what percentage of workers work for a company with more than 50 employees? Wanna bet it's a good deal more than 4%?

sure and the sweet spot is the basket of 20-99 and IF this economy ever takes off, the basket below that. And for the big boys that is the multi nationals and bus's with thousands of employees that offer Cadillac plans, those folks are going to take it in the neck via the ACA tax on such.

 

[Trajan]

You do realize that the mandate itself will affect how hiring at that level goes forward, as its already applying downward pressure on full time jobs, example, of the trend; more jobs were created at the part time level than full time ala the 195k as of the last employment report?


here, I'll help you, this is where you need to be focused,

Firms with 5 to 9 employees 6,878,051
Firms with 10 to 19 employees 8,497,391
Firms with 20 to 99 employees 20,684,691

You do realize that the Affordable Care Act does not require businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees to provide their employees with healthcare coverage. (And if they do have fewer than 25 employees and choose to provide insurance anyway, the Act provides a tax credit to offset the cost.) Since 96% of the businesses in the US have less than 50 employees it seems a bit ridiculous to claim that the ACA is going to have a major impact on employment.
Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes

wow, what a smokescreen.

so the number of businesses is what counts not the individual count of people that are ( presently) and hence going to only get below the 30 hour minimum work and or get hired by a 'company' that won't grow over 50. The number of companies isn't whats going to drive the cost, its the NUMBER of folks that will need larger subsidies.

Nor does the number of companies mean anything ala any penalties they MAY choose to pay PER INDIVIDUAL, BUT it will to stay under that 50...how?

Do you know what part-time "job sharing," is and I don't mean IN firms, but across different businesses? Why is that important?

The ACA carrys an equivalency clause by number of employees per hours collectively worked for the company, in short- 2 15 hour a week workers equal one full-time worker for ACA standards vis a vis offering health care benefits.

 

[lynn63]

In 2011 there were 4.8 million businesses with under 50 employees and there were 1.6 million businesses with over 50 employees. Total number of employees for under 50 was 29 million and total number of employees over 50 was 79 million.

As you can see, the majority of the working population work for a company that employs over 50 employees. The delay in the mandate puts the burden on the employee that works part time for those over 50 employees to get their own insurance.

Most of those companies insure their full time workers but do not insure their part time workers, temps, seasonal workers etc. The employer mandate creates higher cost for these type of employees
so by delaying it for them, those employees will already have gotten their coverage before 2015.

Wait and see, the government is not going to enforce this for employers in 2015 and will cancel it altogether since everyone was already required to obtain it in 2014.

 

[Flopper]

You do realize that the mandate itself will affect how hiring at that level goes forward, as its already applying downward pressure on full time jobs, example, of the trend; more jobs were created at the part time level than full time ala the 195k as of the last employment report?


here, I'll help you, this is where you need to be focused,

Firms with 5 to 9 employees 6,878,051
Firms with 10 to 19 employees 8,497,391
Firms with 20 to 99 employees 20,684,691

You do realize that the Affordable Care Act does not require businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees to provide their employees with healthcare coverage. (And if they do have fewer than 25 employees and choose to provide insurance anyway, the Act provides a tax credit to offset the cost.) Since 96% of the businesses in the US have less than 50 employees it seems a bit ridiculous to claim that the ACA is going to have a major impact on employment.
Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes

of course and? what? all of this happens in a vacuum? you do realize that anyone in bus. wants to grow their biz, I mean do I really need to post that? Sooner or later biz will pick up, that 20 million is key. Since the bottom fell out benefits and concomitantly 40 hour a week jobs at the levels the subsidies were going to be provided mean something.

You realize the the postponement of the mandate will cost money, right?

Sure that 20 million is important. Starting in 2014, Small businesses with up to 100 employees, 50 in some states will be able to compare and buy health insurance on the exchanges for their employees. Starting in 2017, states can allow businesses with more than 100 employees to purchase coverage in the SHOP Exchange.

There is also a provision in the law that allows larger businesses to discontinue offering healthcare benefits and thus allow their employees to buy their health insurance from whoever they choose on the exchanges. This will be at a cost to the business of $2,000/yr per employee but there can also be a big benefit to employer.

Whose cost? It will be a cost savings in 2014 for larger businesses that don't already offer health insurance benefits. For the government it will be an additional cost in 2014 because those employees of the larger companies that don't offer insurance will be able to buy on the exchanges and thus receive a tax credit if they are eligible.

IMHO, large business with large healthcare insurance costs are going to be winners because they will be able send their employees to the exchanges to get their insurance. Whether their employees get a better deal is questionable.

 

[Trajan]

You do realize that the Affordable Care Act does not require businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees to provide their employees with healthcare coverage. (And if they do have fewer than 25 employees and choose to provide insurance anyway, the Act provides a tax credit to offset the cost.) Since 96% of the businesses in the US have less than 50 employees it seems a bit ridiculous to claim that the ACA is going to have a major impact on employment.
Is The Affordable Care Act Really Bad For Business? - Forbes

of course and? what? all of this happens in a vacuum? you do realize that anyone in bus. wants to grow their biz, I mean do I really need to post that? Sooner or later biz will pick up, that 20 million is key. Since the bottom fell out benefits and concomitantly 40 hour a week jobs at the levels the subsidies were going to be provided mean something.

You realize the the postponement of the mandate will cost money, right?

Sure that 20 million is important. Starting in 2014, Small businesses with up to 100 employees, 50 in some states will be able to compare and buy health insurance on the exchanges for their employees. Starting in 2017, states can allow businesses with more than 100 employees to purchase coverage in the SHOP Exchange.

There is also a provision in the law that allows larger businesses to discontinue offering healthcare benefits and thus allow their employees to buy their health insurance from whoever they choose on the exchanges. This will be at a cost to the business of $2,000/yr per employee but there can also be a big benefit to employer.

Whose cost? It will be a cost savings in 2014 for larger businesses that don't already offer health insurance benefits. For the government it will be an additional cost in 2014 because those employees of the larger companies that don't offer insurance will be able to buy on the exchanges and thus receive a tax credit if they are eligible.

IMHO, large business with large healthcare insurance costs are going to be winners because they will be able send their employees to the exchanges to get their insurance. Whether their employees get a better deal is questionable.

IMHO, large business with large healthcare insurance costs are going to be winners because they will be able send their employees to the exchanges to get their insurance. Whether their employees get a better deal is questionable.

Oh I see, so big biz will win, and the 'people' will, well, they'll get what they get.

wow, I must have had this whole obamacare gig wrapped backwards, I didn't realize who was supposed to be better off here....

so, when those individuals go to the exchanges and look for insurance, what? They'll sign up or pay the pittance "tax" penalty knowing that when they get sick they can then, take a policy fitting the coverage they now need....who pays the cost for that?

 

[Flopper]

of course and? what? all of this happens in a vacuum? you do realize that anyone in bus. wants to grow their biz, I mean do I really need to post that? Sooner or later biz will pick up, that 20 million is key. Since the bottom fell out benefits and concomitantly 40 hour a week jobs at the levels the subsidies were going to be provided mean something.

You realize the the postponement of the mandate will cost money, right?

Sure that 20 million is important. Starting in 2014, Small businesses with up to 100 employees, 50 in some states will be able to compare and buy health insurance on the exchanges for their employees. Starting in 2017, states can allow businesses with more than 100 employees to purchase coverage in the SHOP Exchange.

There is also a provision in the law that allows larger businesses to discontinue offering healthcare benefits and thus allow their employees to buy their health insurance from whoever they choose on the exchanges. This will be at a cost to the business of $2,000/yr per employee but there can also be a big benefit to employer.

Whose cost? It will be a cost savings in 2014 for larger businesses that don't already offer health insurance benefits. For the government it will be an additional cost in 2014 because those employees of the larger companies that don't offer insurance will be able to buy on the exchanges and thus receive a tax credit if they are eligible.

IMHO, large business with large healthcare insurance costs are going to be winners because they will be able send their employees to the exchanges to get their insurance. Whether their employees get a better deal is questionable.

IMHO, large business with large healthcare insurance costs are going to be winners because they will be able send their employees to the exchanges to get their insurance. Whether their employees get a better deal is questionable.

Oh I see, so big biz will win, and the 'people' will, well, they'll get what they get.

wow, I must have had this whole obamacare gig wrapped backwards, I didn't realize who was supposed to be better off here....

so, when those individuals go to the exchanges and look for insurance, what? They'll sign up or pay the pittance "tax" penalty knowing that when they get sick they can then, take a policy fitting the coverage they now need....who pays the cost for that?

In my opinion, big business always wins.

so, when those individuals go to the exchanges and look for insurance, what? They'll sign up or pay the pittance "tax" penalty knowing that when they get sick they can then, take a policy fitting the coverage they now need....who pays the cost for that?

If you don't sign up for health insurance, you are correct you will be able to sign up later when you become ill. However, you can only signup during open enrollment unless you meet a specify set of events of which not buying insurance and getting sick is not one of them. Also once you sign up, coverage will not begin initially. The bottom line is that if you don't sign up for insurance, you will get coverage eventually. However, you can have huge uncovered expenses before your converge starts.

 

[Trajan]

oh for god sakes.......