General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Need a good response to this Freeper poster on the ACA [View all]DireStrike
(6,452 posts)As near as I can figure. If that is true then they have wasted their time writing penalties into the law for no reason.
If that is not true, there are lots of people who will see less of their paycheck due to ACA. These people are:
-Those whose plans have been cancelled due to lack of maternity or other newly required types of coverage. Nobody will argue that the plan is better, but it will cost more.
-Young people like myself who are uninsured and who will now be subsidizing those who use healthcare more. I plan to pay the penalty (maybe I should just ignore it?) because the plans I can afford don't actually cover me for anything (except protection against complete bankruptcy) due to copays and deductibles.
-People in the new ACA donut hole - who should have been eligible for expanded medicaid but their state opted out. The ACA requires that these people become insured even though there is no way they can afford it. But then again, the penalties are a figment of my imagination so the ACA doesn't actually require anything.
-People who are employed by right-wing nutbags who will use any excuse to steal from their employees. Not ACA's fault.
-People who are employed by large corporations who will use any excuse to steal from their employees, downgrade them from full time, etc. Can be argued that this is partially due to the ACA, since these effects were foreseeable.
In summary, few of these categories are serious problems with the ACA (just points 2 and 3.) Nobody will lose their job directly due to the ACA. Someone who loses their insurance due to the ACA might have to pay more for a similar plan. But there are indeed losers.