Under Obamacare, there are winners:
“For others, the policies purchased through the exchanges are proving to be more affordable than what they had.
Bill and Linda Wood, small business owners from Westerville, Ohio, just purchased a plan on the new insurance exchange that will save them about $6,200 on premiums next year alone. This was extremely welcoming news for the Woods, who received a cancellation notice from their insurer last summer stating that their plan did not meet Obamacare standards.
Under their new policy, the Woods will pay a monthly premium of $130 after subsidies, compared to the $360 monthly premium under their old plan.”
And there are losers:
“Ed Anderson, a graphic designer from Columbus, Ohio, who was recently bumped from his wife’s insurance policy for reasons relating to the new law, discovered that his family’s monthly premiums will double even if he chooses the most inexpensive plan available to him through the new federal insurance exchange in his state.
Anderson said he and his wife currently pay a monthly premium of $460 through Blue Cross Blue Shield. But now that he can no longer stay on his wife’s plan, he will have to get his own coverage. The most inexpensive option would cost him a $428 monthly premium. And he and his wife can’t qualify for a federal subsidy because their joint income exceeds the cutoff. The new insurance policy will cost the Andersons an extra $5,000 a year in premiums alone.”
The next time a liberal says that “companies are not going to throw people off their plans”, you can remind them of this:
United Parcel Service plans to drop health insurance benefits for working spouses of nonunion employees if they can get coverage elsewhere. It blames the change partly on the new health-care law.
UPS estimates that 15,000 of the 33,000 spouses it covers will be dropped. The change is scheduled to take effect Jan. 1 for spouses of U.S. employees.
The worldwide parcel-delivery company says it’s just going with the crowd. UPS cited a benefits consultant’s survey that found that more companies are planning to restrict benefits for working spouses.
But remember that the winners in this example are not getting a lower insurance rate – they are only making a lower PAYMENT thanks to the taxpayer subsidizing them. In both of these examples, both families had insurance BEFORE Obamacare that was cancelled BECAUSE OF Obamacare. This little detail makes the real loser the “forgotten man”, the person that Yale University professor William Graham Sumner identified in an a 1876 essay as:
“As soon as A observes something which seems to him wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X, or, in better case, what A, B, and C shall do for X… What I want to do is to look up C. I want to show you what manner of man he is. I call him the Forgotten Man. Perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. He is the man who never is thought of…. I call him the forgotten man… He works, he votes, generally he prays—but he always pays…“
That “forgotten man” is the taxpayer.
TINSTAAFL – There Is No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. Econ 101.