Comments about ‘Obamacare marriage penalty puts pressure on couples buying insurance’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Nov. 7 2013 2:40 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Saratoga Springs, UT


Nobody has avoided your question. I am not sure you understand what subsidies are or where they come from or what it means to defund OCare.

First, everyone was happy with their health plans before or at least it sure seems that way. By every outlet and cry of how much people are realizing they hate OCare.

Second, there was no need for subsidies, OCare is forcing people in need of subsidies because rates are higher. Without Ocare, there is no need for subsidies, because rates are affordable.

Third, so to defund Obamacare would not have mattered for subsidies, it would have been better because it would have just killed itself at that point and gone away.

Fourth, you and all lefties just want the rich, or working to subsidize the poor. And don't say the middle class gets help also. You and I both know that the middle class is on its way out, if not gone already. There is no middle class, there is the rich and the poor. This is what Obama has done, removed the MClass. This is what he wanted all along to create the need for Govt. control. Thus OC

Shelley, ID

Perfid, I completely agree with you. Once again, the middle class, incentive to do well, and achievement are being punished. By virtue, (or the lack of it) of forward information about this healthcare bill (which really is not about healthcare at all, but more government control), the whole thing needs to be shelved.

SomewhereIn, UT

@ pragmatistferlife

Really? So, you are saying that a class of people being coerced to pay for others' healthcare (insurance premiums and actual care) is moral? Subsidies, afterall, are not paid for out of thin air.

Utah Businessman
Sandy, UT

Some interesting numbers:
2000-2010 Costs compared with late 1960's

Food 5-10 times
Transportation 5-10 times
Housing 5-10 times
Utilities 5-10 times
Salaries and wages 5-10 times
Health care, specifically a 24-hour hospital stay 100-500 times!!!!!!

Why this HUGE difference with essentially all our other living expenses? Here are some "secondary" reasons that are often mentioned:
1.High-tech "computerized" equipment (this one is really interesting considering that a present-day PC that is infinitely more sophisticated costs 1/10 of what a "decent" computer cost in 1970)
2. Frivolous (and non-frivolous) lawsuits
3. Hospitals are forced to treat everyone--can't turn anyone away
4. Greedy insurance companies
5. Greedy drug companies

However--if you leave your house unlocked, unoccupied and unwatched for 20 years, what is the cause of the resulting damage? Rats, vagabonds, weather, thieves? Yes, BUT the ROOT CAUSE is your negligence.

Same thing with health care costs--40+ years ago we abandoned the principles of personal responsibility and accountability, as we left our health care costs almost entirely to our employer and the insurance companies. Result--stratospheric costs.

Now--politicians and bureaucrats--DISASTER!

SomewhereIn, UT

@The Taxman
Los Angeles, CA

"This piece belongs on the opinion page. It is misleading, contains no context, and provides very little information."

Surely you are referring to the ACA, aka ObamaCare, right?

Bluffdale, UT


OK, let me try to break this down as simple as possible.

1 - Obamacare helps the lower middle class with subsidies for health insurance
2- Since 2009 most Americans are now lower middle-class
3- The poor do not get Obamacare subsidies, they will stay on the Medicaid program
4 - Retail insurance payers will pay for the subsidies with higher insurance costs expected to be as much as 100% per year increase for the next four years or 25% of their income - this is also called a penalty, the cost of Obamacare

Retail Payers to subsidize the lower middle class:

Single payer $45,000
Couple payers $65,000
Couple one child $80,000
Couple 2 children $95,000
Couple 3 children $110,000
Couple 4 children $125,000

Obamacare cuts right through the middleclass with penalties that make too much or the self-employed. Don't be too successful in America. Don't hire full time employees in your small business. Don't hire more than 49 people in your small business.

Cedar Hills, UT

I just bought a new car and it sort of reminded of what is going on with Obamacare right now for families. Families want to purchase a simple Ford Focus ($17k) that gets good gas mileage, inexpensive to buy and maintain. No bells and whistles ...just a reliable car to go from point A to point B. Barack says NO - that Ford Focus is JUNK. You can't buy it. You 'get' to upgrade to either a Cadillac ESCALADE ($50k) OR a BMW X5 ($50k). Those are your choices. Yes we in the Obama administration have determined that all car choices now must include on-line navigation, heated seats, etc... But our family doesn't want or need on-line navigation and heated seats and all the other luxuries. Well you just aren't smart enough to purchase a reliable car so the government will make the choice for you. As for the 50k price...well some people will get government subsidies and reduce that cost to 25k while others will just get the Escalade for free thanks to your generous tax increases. Now - what are you complaining about - just go buy the Escalade or the BMW!!! So simple..right?

Kaysville, UT

@ atl134 and pragmatistferlife

Given that those of us against Obamacare subsidies are forced to submit by law, we can certainly have moral opinions about how the subsidy is distributed, particularly since we are forced to pay for those subsidies by law (through taxes).

This is how I understand your points: You claim that since I didn't want my money taken for the subsidies, I can't make any argument about how my taken money is used. That's like saying a bank can have no opinion about how the money that is stolen from it should be used, because the bank didn't want the money to be stolen.

I think it's very reasonable to assume that, given the money is already stolen, the distribution of the money is still in the deep interest of the original owner.

Utah Businessman
Sandy, UT

@ wwookie

"Obamacare is working for a lot of the milions of poor people. You don't like poor people and you probably are racist if you don't support obamacare."

Wow!! Are your serious? Please see my earlier post regarding the cost of health care. The best thing we could have done is continued to take personal responsibility for our health care costs, just as most of us do with our other living expenses. That would have kept costs at reasonable levels so that even low-income people could afford good health care. Unfortunately, we long ago left that "good place".

A few days ago, on this forum, I was told that Personal Responsibility is completely irrelevant in the health care discussion, unless I want my child to die because I do not have $400,000 to pay for her lung transplant. The fact is that the costs would not be anywhere near as high as they are if we have not abandoned personal responsibility regarding health care.

Saratoga Springs, UT


I loved the example. So true! I hope it is alright if I plagiarize that one and share your example with family and friends. That was great!

Durham, NC

Let me see if I get this right. The poster family for this debate is one that makes 4x the bar - which is 60k a year - meaning their household income is in excess of $240,000 a year. And they are thinking of getting divorced because they can't afford health insurance.

I am sorry.... but if this is true..... they have to be some of the most sorry excuses for adults out there. If you can not make your budget work, even living in NYC, with an income higher than 240k.... they have some serious other issues besides the fact they cant buy "affordable" health insurance.

The DN just keeps banging this drum. Daily. Not that there isn't problems. But they do so at the exclusion of even bigger stories such as a possible meeting of minds between the west and Iran. That alone will impact the price of energy futures greater and American daily expense far greater than this sorry excuse for a couple who earn as much as they do.... and can't afford insurance.

The DN seems to have a one track mind here. Other stuff is going on.... report on it.

Cedar Hills, UT


go for it!

Logan, UT

No fan of Obamacare here, but I feel that I must point out that it's not a "penalty" to not subsidize. Why should someone get preferential treatment just because they have a certain relationship status? That goes for child tax credits and such too.


Obamacare IS a tax. The sooner people realize their taxes have just been raised the sooner we can come to some sort of agreement to END the tax.

People may (or may not)receive healthcare from the government. Its' now up to the feds to decide which conditions get treated and which do not.

Try not to get sick!

sandy, ut


Is god going to come down and ban Obamacare? If not, then why would we ask him to help?

Obamacare does absolutely hammer the married middle class. Example: I have insurance through my work, $100 a month. My wife and my child would cost $350 a month for insurance because they take both of our incomes into account - even though I already have insurance and pay for it - it makes not sense to include my income as I already pay for it. If we weren't married, but living together with a kid the cost would be less then half that. Go figure. Plus - how can they determine what amount is affordable to each couple. Even 2 couples who earn the same amount of money may have vastly different bills. That is why it is ludacris to penalize people for choosing not to have the coverage - if I want to not have health insurance how can that be illegal. It is rediculous.

Bountiful, UT

We shouldn't subsidize. Medicaid is good coverage for the poor CITIZENS (though there is abuse and will be even more now) and better than most who pay for insurance through employers with premiums, copays, deductibles and limitations. But even with the limitations, which are to be expected, I'll take the freedom of not being forced into this debacle. Offer an alternative for those who want it only.

The subsidies are teasers to make people think this is "affordable" when in fact it is not. Everyone paying taxes is paying the difference and many of us are working hard to make ends meet ourselves but don't qualify for free stuff. We shouldn't subsidize people who were happy with their own private policies but who are now being forced onto the exchanges with promises of a free lunch. Dictating what kind of insurance they need is tyrannical government. Everyone recognizes the need for healthcare reform but doing something even if it's wrong (VERY wrong) is a bad idea.

Some prefer different healthcare - Eastern, alternative, preventive/nutrition-based (we call it freedom). They may only need catastrophic but Obama knows best so we're to shut up.

Tom in CA
Vallejo, CA

Obamacare equals CHAOS. But what would you expect from someone with the credentials of a community organizer? And the people around him have IQ's of just below plant life.

These aren't smart people running this country.

salt lake city, utah

eman and NT, it wasn't my point it was alt's point. Secondly subsidies are coming from the medical device tax, and the small increase in taxes on those making over 200K a year. I bet none of this effects you. Keep trying though even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in while.

Orem, UT


Your car analogy was pretty close. The real problem is that you are being forced to pay the $50K that an Escalade or BMW is worth, but when you get the car, you find out it is a $25K Camry. (BTW: I own a Camry. Good car, but I wouldn't pay $50K for it)

That is what all these outrageous insurance premiums and high deductables are all about - getting young, healthy, working people to pay WAY more for their insurance than it is actually worth (or what they really need). That way, insurance companies can afford (with taxpayer subsidies) to insure millions of sick people who have little or no money.

Obamacare is just a huge wealth transfer program. PERIOD.

Highland, UT


"My defense that none of you responded to is that you all wanted to defund Obamacare which would've made all the subsidies 0 leaving EVERYONE worse off regardless of whether they are married or single, so any complaints you have are those of hypocrites."

How am I going to be "worse off" if there is no subsidy? I'm one of the ones paying the subsidy out to others. If the subisidy doesn't exist, and obama care doesn't exist, I'm better off. So "everyone" would not be worse off, it is just you have chosen who you htink should be worse off, people like me that make more money than most, and that is ok with you. Gotta take from me for your purposes huh?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments