Nice article that unintentionally outlines some of the biggest Obamacare failures.
http://www.sfgate.com/business/netwo...dy-4891087.php
Take, for example, Jacqueline Proctor of San Francisco. She and her husband are in their early 60s. They have been paying $7,200 a year for a bare-bones Kaiser Permanente health plan with a $5,000 per person annual deductible. "Kaiser told us the plan does not comply with Obamacare and the substitute will cost more than twice as much," about $15,000 per year, she says. Oops... can't keep your current planThis new plan, Kaiser's cheapest offering for 2014, would consume about 25 percent of their after-tax income. The new plan still has a $5,000 deductible but provides coverage for things her current policy does not, such as maternity care, healthy child visits and coverage for dependents up to age 26. Proctor has no use for such coverage, since her son is 30. duh duh duh, adding additional coverages to all policies costs money?!?!?! And implicitly forces people who do not need such coverage (like the elderly or poor young people just starting out) to subsidize the coverage for others (like relatively richer people in their peak earning years with grad school children who will one day likely be wealthy)To get a subsidy, the couple's modified adjusted gross income for 2014 income would need to fall below $62,040, which is 400 percent of poverty for a family of two. (For a single person, the cutoff is $45,960. For other size households, see www.tinyurl.com/pwugnus.)
Thats right, a household of two (with probably good accumulated wealth since they're 60 and have had a lifetime of work), making $62k a year, gets a fapping subsidy from taxpayers. It is one thing to help poor people, those people are not poor.This post brought to you by Irony, the letter O, and the number 17 trillion.Proctor estimates that her 2014 household income will be $64,000, about $2,000 over the limit. If she and her husband could reduce their income to $62,000, they could get a tax subsidy of $1,207 per month to offset the purchase of health care on Covered California. Oh, so that'll be good for our economy! Give people $15,000 from taxpayers if they earn a mere $2000 less per year! What could go wrong with that productivity disincentive!?!?!