ACA Supreme Court Tuesday

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Have you not learned that math and logic have no place here?

What do you think about Obamacare extending the life of Medicare 20 years?

[Riot]

One opinion about the oral arguments today, predicts a 7-2 win (with Thomas and Scalia dissenting)

Nothing from Thomas but he is assumed to be opposed.

Pretty firm opposition from Scalia who was almost dismissive of arguments favoring the mandate and made the truly absurd broccoli analogy.

Alito seemed critical, with a couple of exceptions, but not dismissive.

Roberts and Kennedy had good questions for both sides. Towards the end I thought both were favoring the Government's position. The search for a limiting rule was evident in Kennedy's question and he was offered a couple. Breyer tried to help out there.

Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor seemed to clearly understand, for several reasons, why this falls within Congress' power.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

What do you think about Obamacare extending the life of Medicare 20 years?

Sounds like a forecast, I have read 12 in most opinion pieces but see nothing that is written in the actual law yet. Though I am only on page 677 so far. As a small business owner whose employees make a decent wage all I have seen so far has not been pleasant.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Sounds like a forecast, I have read 12 in most opinion pieces but see nothing that is written in the actual law yet. Though I am only on page 677 so far. As a small business owner whose employees make a decent wage all I have seen so far has not been pleasant.

You don't like those healthy tax credits you get? You can use them this year. And if you don't provide your employees with insurance, nothing will change for you. You don't have to. But they will have more affordable insurance private insurance available to them on exchanges. What isn't to like about that?

Pretty simple: you keep providing insurance as you do now, and gain huge tax credits; or you do not have to provide insurance, and nothing changes for you.

What part do you fear is "not pleasant"? What specifically are you talking about?

Can I get tax credits for providing insurance to my employees?

If you have up to 25 employees, pay average annual wages below $50,000, and provide health insurance, you may qualify for a small business tax credit of up to 35% (up to 25% for non-profits) to offset the cost of your insurance. This will bring down the cost of providing insurance.

Starting in 2014, the small business tax credit goes up to 50% (up to 35% for non-profits) for qualifying businesses. This makes the cost of providing insurance even lower.

Do I have to provide health insurance to my employees?

The Affordable Care Act does not require employers to provide health insurance for their employees.

The Employer Responsibility provision of the Affordable Care Act applies businesses with more than 50 full-time workers. To learn more read the Employer Bulletin on Automatic Enrollment, Employer Responsibility, and Waiting Periods.

Extending the life of Medicare isn't written in the law, it's CBO analysis of the impact on the costs of our healthcare.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

You don't like those healthy tax credits you get? You can use them this year. And if you don't provide your employees with insurance, nothing will change for you. You don't have to. But they will have more affordable insurance private insurance available to them on exchanges. What isn't to like about that?

Pretty simple: you keep providing insurance as you do now, and gain huge tax credits; or you do not have to provide insurance, and nothing changes for you.

What part do you fear is "not pleasant"? What specifically are you talking about?


Extending the life of Medicare isn't written in the law, it's CBO analysis of the impact on the costs of our healthcare.

Because I pay my people enough to live on I am ineligible for any tax credits at all based on what I have read in the law itself so where is the benefit, perhaps I will lower their salaries?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Because I pay my people enough to live on I am ineligible for any tax credits at all based on what I have read in the law itself so where is the benefit, perhaps I will lower their salaries?

it's the Obamacare way!

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Because I pay my people enough to live on I am ineligible for any tax credits at all based on what I have read in the law itself so where is the benefit, perhaps I will lower their salaries?

Do what a lot of other small companies plan on doing. Drop their healthcare and pay the penalty. It's far cheaper and allows the individual employee be responsible for and choose his/her own healthcare policy.

Call it the Obama Backfire Move!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Do what a lot of other small companies plan on doing. Drop their healthcare and pay the penalty. It's far cheaper and allows the individual employee be responsible for and choose his/her own healthcare policy.

Call it the Obama Backfire Move!

that's exactly what many will do. why wouldn't they? which is why the under a trillion cost the CBO sent to congress (the magic number) is dead wrong. which is why they've already had to adjust the price drastically upwards, and still probably isn't high enough! they're in denial about what businesses will do! if you want them to provide the coverage thru work, it must be worth the businesses while to do so!! that's just common sense.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

that's exactly what many will do. why wouldn't they?

Because small business of 25 employees or less are exempt not required to provide insurance and pay no penalty under the ACA.

which is why the under a trillion cost the CBO sent to congress (the magic number) is dead wrong. which is why they've already had to adjust the price drastically upwards, and still probably isn't high enough!

They also adjusted the revenues drastically upward, but keep ignoring that

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Do what a lot of other small companies plan on doing. Drop their healthcare and pay the penalty.

Doubtful.

Small companies with less than 25 employees do not pay a penalty and there is no requirement they offer insurance.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Because I pay my people enough to live on I am ineligible for any tax credits at all based on what I have read in the law itself so where is the benefit, perhaps I will lower their salaries?

Why in the world would you choose to lower their salaries for no reason?

Are you saying that they are insured by you now, and you have a small business of less than 25 employees, but because their salaries are high, that is prohibiting you from getting tax credits?

The point is that there is no negative affect upon you from Obamacare. Everything goes along for you as before. There is no change.

You have no mandate to provide your employees with insurance due to your business size.

However, if you would like to start offering insurance to your employees as a benefit, you will get business tax credits and the cost will be quite significantly lower for you.

If they are insured privately now outside of work, nothing will change for them except the consumer protections preventing insurance company abuse. If they do not have insurance, they can purchase it for the first time at lesser cost on the exchanges.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Sounds like a forecast, I have read 12 in most opinion pieces but see nothing that is written in the actual law yet. Though I am only on page 677 so far. As a small business owner whose employees make a decent wage all I have seen so far has not been pleasant.

i wouldn't worry about reading any more of it til after june. of course i'm trying to read states not bothering to set up exchanges as a positive sign as well.


and what's the bolded part in reference to?

[Danzig]

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/...t_mandate.html


slate-hearing a 'trainwreck' for obamacare.

[Riot]

Robert Reich: If mandate is overturned, that's the end of private insurance companies - and they know it.

Interesting take on this:

http://robertreich.org/post/19972321637

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i wouldn't worry about reading any more of it til after june. of course i'm trying to read states not bothering to set up exchanges as a positive sign as well.


and what's the bolded part in reference to?

a 12 year extension on Medicare as opposed to 20.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

a 12 year extension on Medicare as opposed to 20.

yeah, they keep touting it helping medicare (which is interesting, since every time you mention making changes to that part of entitlements it's not in trouble ) but don't wade into the rest of the story...that the savings in medicare don't cover the increased medicaid costs. so the money that wouldn't have to go in one pocket would go in the other-but would still not be enough to fill the bigger hole.

so yeah, they beat that drum-but it's far from the whole story.