Why Is Obamacare Raising Premiums on Young Adults?
Many Americans are worried about the cost of Obamacare, and the opening of the health-care exchanges has millions of would-be insurance buyers seeing rates they’ll pay for the first time. Several studies have shown that young adults in particular are likely to pay more under the Affordable Care Act. But why is this the case, and what impact will it have on Obamacare’s success?
In the following video with Dan Caplinger, the Fool’s director of investment planning and author of the special free report “Everything You Need to Know About Obamacare,” Motley Fool health-care bureau chief Max Macaluso asks Dan about the controversial topic of why many young adults will pay more. Dan cites one study that points to increases for young adults in all 50 states, with very large increases in some areas of the country. Among the reasons are the fact that many young adults prefer lower-cost policies that don’t provide as comprehensive coverage as Obamacare requires, essentially forcing them to upgrade to coverage that many of them don’t believe they need. Moreover, technical aspects of the Affordable Care Act also promote more even distribution of insurance premium costs across the age spectrum, potentially putting some of the overall health-care burden on young adults that they otherwise wouldn’t have to bear.
Max and Dan conclude with a discussion of the potential investing fallout from higher premiums on young adults. With President Obama and former President Clinton both pointing to the need for young adults to participate in the health-insurance exchanges for Obamacare to reach its full potential, a failure to attract enough young adults could cause problems for the program and for WellPoint (NYSE: WLP ) , which has been most aggressive in establishing exchange-based coverage options. Yet even UnitedHealth (NYSE: UNH ) and Humana (NYSE: HUM ) , which haven’t participated as much as WellPoint, could see fallout if young adults give up on seeking health insurance entirely.
TWG: And now they whine and moan about the very travesty we’ve tried warning them about. The stupid little SOB’s supporting the obama regime, all the while ridiculing us, demonizing us, assaulting us, violating our rights and spitting in our faces as we tried to warn them about this mess they so enthusiastically embrace. Just wait until they find out they’ve been embracing and advocating for their own slavery, suffering and total demise by the very hooves of those they’ve been brainwashed to idolize. Here’s your “hope and change” you stupid little smug-faced assholes. You can thank the so-called “educators” and your apathetic, uncaring parents for destroying your feeble little minds. You have embraced your own demise, and I no longer feel ANY sympathy for you. Now get to work. YOU have bills to pay. BIG bills. And may the hammers and sickles sit lightly across your scrawny little necks as you lick the hooves that feed you gruel. After what you’ve done to me, as I’ve been out here fighting for YOU, I won’t shed a single tear for you when you find yourselves on your knees. You wanted obama’s “hope & change”, HERE IS ONLY THE BEGINNING OF YOUR SUFFERING.
OK, OK….. I’m starting to like Judge Jeanine Pirro these days. She is starting to call this horrid regime out in NO uncertain terms. Too bad more “journalists” aren’t telling the truth in this way…..
While I’m sad for the American Conservatives who have to suffer this, I wouldn’t give the teeniest, tiniest, turdiest turd about the DIMS who have to suck this up. THIS is what “social justice” looks like. HA! They get what they voted for. Just wait until they see how many companies are shutting down because of the obamacare scheme. I’ve seen lists that are JAW DROPPING. Those that voted for marxism are about to see what consequences look like. BOOT MARKS ACROSS THEIR SCRAWNY LITTLE NECKS AND WHIP MARKS ACROSS THEIR BONY, BOWED BACKS. I’ll spit on their DAMNED graves. “Elections have consequences” SUCKERS.
Sandy-Ravaged New Jersey Families Face $6,933 Tax Hike in Fiscal Cliff Stalemate
(CNSNews.com) – Families in Hurricane Sandy-ravaged New Jersey will face the highest tax increase as a percentage of their income – 6.82% or about $6,933 more in taxes — if Congress does not reach an agreement on the fiscal cliff tax issues during the lame-duck session, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation.
In its study of how the fiscal cliff would affect typical families in each state, the Tax Foundation reports that if the numerous tax provisions that are due to expire on Dec. 31 are not changed, a four-person family in New Jersey with a median income of $101,682 will see its taxes go up at a rate 6.82 percent of its income, which translates into about $6,933.
The tax issues in question are the expiration of the Bush tax rates, which also include the elimination of the 10 percent tax bracket and the reduced deduction for married filers; ending the 2 percent cut to employee-side Social Security taxes; and the Alternative Minimum Tax.
Maryland was ranked second by the Tax Foundation because a four-person family there, with a median income of $106,707, would see its taxes go up 6.74 percent as a percentage of income, or about $7,194.
Connecticut, ranked third, would see taxes for a family of four go up by 6.62 percent, or $6,653.
All five states with the top tax increases are “blue states,” which President Obama won in the 2012 presidential election. But so are four out of the bottom five states with the exception of Kansas.
Top Five Tax Increases Tax Increases as % of Income
#1 – New Jersey $6,933 6.82%
#2 – Maryland $7,194 6.74%
#3 – Connecticut $6,653 6.62%
#4 – Massachusetts $6,632 6.53%
#5 – New Hampshire $5,660 5.81%
Forty states would see tax increases between $3,000 and $3,999. Six states would see an increase between $4,000 and $4,999 and three would see increases between $6,000 and $6,999.
New Hampshire would be the only state to see a tax increase between $5,000 and $5,999 and Maryland would be the only state to see a tax increase over $7,000.
Bottom Five Tax Increases Tax Increases as % of Income
#50 – Washington $3,362 4.12%
#49 – Hawaii $3,453 4.16%
#48 – Colorado $3,646 4.29%
#47 – Kansas $3,227 4.31%
#46 – Illinois $3,417 4.32%
The potential for tax increases on millions of U.S. taxpayers is still possible, the Tax Foundation explains, and would be especially devastating for lower-income families because of the changes to the child tax credit; the elimination of the 10 percent bracket, which would go back to 15 percent; and the reduced standard deduction for married filers — all of which are provisions in the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts.
Governors and other state officials, across the states, are deciding whether their state will establish a Health Insurance Exchange. The Department of Health and Human Services has given States until Friday November 16, 2012 to decide. We have been following this issue closely and here’s the status of the states as best as we can tell.
States NOT establishing a State Exchange (17):
Undecided States (15):
States plan to establish a State Exchange (18):
Created from information Kaiser Health News’ Exchange map>/a> and reports from PoliticoPro Health and other news sources.
FL: We have not removed Florida yet despite comments made by Gov. Scott that seem to indicate he may change his mind. PoliticoPro reports that the CATO Institute and Freedom Works received multiple assurances that Gov. Scott hasn’t changed his position “one iota.”)
NH: New Hampshire’s new governor may attempt to move towards establishing an exchange but we have left it in the “No state Exchange” category based on past legislation signed by the governor that blocked the Exchange. See http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/new-hampshires-democratic-governor-signs-gop-bill-blocking-obamacare-exchange/ .
MO: Missourians passed a referendum this month that prohibits its governor [who supports a state exchange] from acting unilaterally
WV: West Virginia is expected to announce 11/15/2012 that it will NOT establish a state exchange;
MONTANA VOTERS PASSED THE FOLLOWING INITIATIVES IN THE 2012 GENERAL ELECTION!!!
LR-122 ( SB 418 )
Subject: Referendum to prohibit the state or federal government from mandating the purchase of health insurance or imposing penalties for decisions related to purchasing health insurance.
Subject: Referendum on SB 423, a bill which repeals I-148 and enacts a new medical marijuana program.
Subject: Charge Montana elected and appointed officials, state and federal, with implementing a policy that corporations are not human beings with constitutional rights.
MONTANANS ALSO MAINTAINED CONTROL OF OUR HOUSE AND SENATE. ROMNEY WON THE STATEWIDE VOTE.