• July 12, 2014

Letter from woman in Ohio reveals pitfalls of Affordable Care Act

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Sunday, October 6, 2013 4:30 am

To the Editor:

Re: Un-affordable Care Act

I received the following from a friend in Ohio, a grandmother in her 60s:

“I actually made it through this morning at 8 a.m. I have a pre-existing condition (Type 1 Diabetes) and my income base was 45K-55K annually.

“I chose Tier 2 ‘Silver Plan’ and my monthly insurance premiums came out to $597 with a $13,988 yearly deductible! There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can afford this so I ‘Opt-Out’ and chose to continue along with no insurance.

“I received an email tonight at 5 p.m. informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the ‘REPERCUSSIONS PORTION’ for “non-payment” of yearly fine.

“First, your drivers license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with ‘non-payment,’ you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home.

“You can agree to give your bank information so that they can easily ‘Automatically withdraw’ your ‘penalties’ weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly! This by no means is ‘free’ or even ‘affordable.’”

This is just another step toward socialized medicine, or as the Democrats prefer to phrase it, a “single-payer system.”

They have openly stated this is where they want to take our country.

Phillip B. Moore

Killeen

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.

24 comments:

  • monchichi posted at 9:37 am on Tue, Oct 15, 2013.

    monchichi Posts: 12

    One more time:

    The letter states the woman's fine would be $4,037. However, as I said in my original post:

    "In 2014, the fine to remain uninsured is $95 per person (up to a family maximum of $285, or 1 percent of family income, whichever is greater).

    But the penalty will increase more than sevenfold in the next two years, with the fine running as much as $695 per person by 2016. The family maximum would be as high as $2,085 (or 2.5 percent of family income, whichever is greater)."

    Thus, a fine would not total $4,037. If it did, her annual income would have to be at least $160,000 in order for the fine to be over $4,000.



     
  • Alvin posted at 4:01 pm on Sat, Oct 12, 2013.

    Alvin Posts: 128


    Can you 'tell' me what is 'untrue' to the contents of this letter? Did they not 'lock out' the WW II Veterans and then 'open' the Mall to 'Others'? Have they not 'Closed' the parks so that people were not able to travel to their homes? Did he not have the border Patrol 'Stand Down' to the delight of illegal aliens? And was the article 'not correct' in the operation of the House of Representatives and the government control of all money's? You make it sound like there was 'untruth's. Pray tell, what was I in error for? I was just 'telling it like it is'.

     
  • Bubba posted at 8:27 am on Sat, Oct 12, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    there is some traffic that the basic letter in the letter above is untrue or an internet hoax.

    Make up your own mind.

     
  • Bubba posted at 8:25 am on Sat, Oct 12, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    My comments were directed to the poster who obviously fails to understand the illegal nature of this legislation. There was an element of sarcasm in my posting, and I am assuming that yours is sarcasm as well.

     
  • Bubba posted at 8:23 am on Sat, Oct 12, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    You are welcome.

    Do not again issue me directives. You seem easily confused; I am not. I see right through you, liberal.

    Have a nice day.

     
  • Alvin posted at 12:25 pm on Fri, Oct 11, 2013.

    Alvin Posts: 128

    It's not only the middle digit that they have extended to Government workers, but all of America.
    Look at how this President, along with his favorite kingpin, closed the monuments, closed the national parks which forced some people to evacuate their homes, and then opened the National mall to 'others'. He had previously declared it 'off limits' to WW II Veterans, saying it was closed and then reinforcing the barricades to make sure they did not enter. He declared the people who residences were within the confines of the National park could not enter. He declared the Border Patrol were to 'stand down' giving illegal aliens the means to 'enter this country illegally'. Now I've heard they are 'flooding over the border'.

    As to what the specific functions, if I remember correctly, it is the House that has jurisdiction over the purse strings, not the Senate nor the President. If you have the connection to Facebook, read a good article by Thomas Sewell on the functions of the three (3) branch's of Government. I suggest that you read it to really understand the functions of the 3 branches of government, then ask yourself 'what about it'.

    If you will remember, at the time following the 2008 election, all three (3) branches of the government were controlled by the Democratic party, not the Republicans. Now one (1) branch of this government is controlled by the Republican party and it just happens to be the Republican party. As to 'the merits of what is law and what is not law',' the Republican House is not refuting the fact of law, they 'just don't want to fund this law'. The President has said 'I will not negotiate'. Harry Reid has 'I will not negotiate'. Is that the way that this government is supposed to function?

     
  • monchichi posted at 10:56 am on Fri, Oct 11, 2013.

    monchichi Posts: 12

    Thank you for the tutorial on how to respond to a thread. However, I had already read your initial post, which does not indicate a solution for the issue of affordable health care. And, once again, you responded to me without addressing the SPECIFIC POINT I posted about. It's unnecessary for you to comment on my position. Stick to the issue.

    I'm confused - what exactly did I say that constituted a "personal attack?" Perhaps you should examine your own responses. You don't know me. You haven't given me an IQ test; nevertheless, you feel comfortable assessing my intelligence?

     
  • Bubba posted at 9:19 am on Fri, Oct 11, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    nice attempt at deflection and the personal attack as a form of debate. Your status as a liberal has been exposed-you're busted.

    Well, go read the Constitution-it's written in simple English prose. Then you'll be a little smarter then than you are now.

    As for solutions, they are in my first posting. Perhaps you should actually read an entire thread before you make these kinds of comments.

    Then again, you're a liberal.

     
  • Roody2 posted at 6:45 pm on Thu, Oct 10, 2013.

    Roody2 Posts: 165

    Bubba,

    You asked, "Since when is it government's business whether or not I have health insurance?"...

    ANSWER: Ever since 51percent of the population (who, by the way, probably never read the constitution) went to the poles and voted for reasons like skin color and free phones and elected a president into office with socialist ideas.

    That's when it became government's business whether or not you have health insurance!

    To answer the rest of your questions "... refer to above.

     
  • monchichi posted at 4:41 pm on Thu, Oct 10, 2013.

    monchichi Posts: 12

    Nope, I've never read the Constitution. And since I'm not a political scientist, I'm not really qualified to engage in discourse about legislative process.

    I AM, however, capable of recognizing inaccurate (or, let's be honest - false) information being passed off as "proof" of a problem....didn't see that addressed in your rhetoric. Didn't see where you offered any solutions, either.

     
  • Bubba posted at 11:39 am on Wed, Oct 9, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    from where does the government have the power to assess fines for refusal to follow illegal laws? From where does the government get the power to assess fines without due process? From where does the government get the power to give itself the power to ignore the Constitution? Since when is it government's business whether or not I have health insurance?

    Ever read the Constitution?

     
  • monchichi posted at 12:06 pm on Tue, Oct 8, 2013.

    monchichi Posts: 12

    wow....was this letter delivered straight from the future???? must be the 2025 fee schedule...those numbers don't even make sense, because the fines for no insurance are scheduled as follows:

    In 2014, the fine to remain uninsured is $95 per person (up to a family maximum of $285, or 1 percent of family income, whichever is greater).

    But the penalty will increase more than sevenfold in the next two years, with the fine running as much as $695 per person by 2016. The family maximum would be as high as $2,085 (or 2.5 percent of family income, whichever is greater).

     
  • Bubba posted at 8:25 am on Tue, Oct 8, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    listen to the roaring silence now...

     
  • Roody2 posted at 1:00 pm on Mon, Oct 7, 2013.

    Roody2 Posts: 165

    I find it interesting the same government that says “No one should lose their house because of healthcare expenses” won’t hesitate to seize your house because of tax expenses.

    One thing about it, when the democrats/liberals succeed in making us just like every other socialized country they will have inadvertently solved the immigration problem because people will stop wanting to come to America. It won’t be any different than the hell-hole they are trying to get out of!

     
  • Bubba posted at 12:17 pm on Mon, Oct 7, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    Simply, government does not have the power to tell me what to do with personal property, to wit: my income. The bill was written using the commerce clause as the foundation of legality; this did not wash at all so SCOTUS rewrote the law to make it a tax, and did so illegally. There is no provision in the Constitution that supports this legislation in any way.

    All of those who put this law in place must be impeached and removed from government, and then jailed.

    The so-called "citizens" that supported the politicians that have perpetrated this crime should be ashamed of themselves, if they had any real conscience at all.

     
  • Bubba posted at 12:12 pm on Mon, Oct 7, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    I've already told you repeatedly to stop posting at me.

    Typically, liberals just can't act civilly or obey simple instructions.

    Stop responding to my posts; stop trying to stalk me and harass me.

    Stop it.

     
  • Bubba posted at 12:09 pm on Mon, Oct 7, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    Let's see, $597/month is $7164/year; plus $13,998/year in other payments.....so that's $21,162/year for insurance, or just a little less than half of her total annual income.

    So, no, one does not have to wonder where her money goes.

     
  • Eliza posted at 8:46 am on Mon, Oct 7, 2013.

    Eliza Posts: 624

    @ Barbie--- I agree with you in the letter writers situation.

    None of the idiots who are willing to be led by the nose to possibly medical ruin even question, other rights along with being forced to buy something by federal government which is the states duty alone, but the possible repercussions such as the below which could put a private citizens money, or even rightful benefits, on hold in case of a mistake by the government agency handling this new government program.

    ie ;
    “I received an email tonight at 5 p.m. informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the ‘REPERCUSSIONS PORTION’ for “non-payment” of yearly fine.
    “First, your drivers license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with ‘non-payment,’ you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home.

     
  • Eliza posted at 9:28 pm on Sun, Oct 6, 2013.

    Eliza Posts: 624

    Agree Bubba---

    Healthcare is suppose to be handled inside the individual states.
    Even a fool (which these fools prove themselves more each day ) would have to wonder -
    If the U.S. Gov. could have controlled healthcare and have wrote such a screwed up deal for individuals as Obamacare has turned out to be,
    Why hasn't anyone in Washington (in over 200 years) ever thought to do it before, God knows there have been just as many crooked people in our government before as there is now. Those people have been wheeler dealers too just like those who made up this Obamacare plan.

    Its Because by the Constitution, its suppose to be left to the states.

     
  • Mamma Griz posted at 2:41 pm on Sun, Oct 6, 2013.

    Mamma Griz Posts: 235

    Bubba:: That is YOUR opinion. And did you know that the ACA is modeled after the republican't Heritage Foundation or whatever it is that Jim Demint jumped ship for-- and after ROMNEYCARE?

     
  • Mamma Griz posted at 2:36 pm on Sun, Oct 6, 2013.

    Mamma Griz Posts: 235

    Tom:: It isn't hard to guess who pays her medical bills now-- or where she would go for a hangnail. That's what ERs are for, don't you know? Pardon the sarcasm, but I just couldn't help it. I'd feel sorry for her except I wonder just where her money goes.

     
  • tomintexas posted at 10:41 am on Sun, Oct 6, 2013.

    tomintexas Posts: 33

    One has to wonder who pays this lady's medical bills now?

     
  • barbie500 posted at 8:05 am on Sun, Oct 6, 2013.

    barbie500 Posts: 128

    I guess if I were her I would just pay the fine, in a few years she will be on medicare, it would be cheaper. But with an income of $45,000 a year she should be able to afford insurance now. I know a couple who has insurance now and don't pay a fraction of that. I think a lot of the problem is that some people can afford insurance and don't get it because they would rather spend their money elsewhere. Real life is really funny and I don't mean Ha Ha. Some ones house had a fire, their insurance covered everything, clean-up, hotel, storage, and repairs. The Red Cross gave them a $500 credit card and told them to use it right away because if it wasn't used by a certain time, what was left would be taken back. People have fund raiser to help people who are ill and then the money is given to a family member to take her and her husband on a vacation. What is wrong with people now? We used to be hard working honest people and look what we have become.

     
  • Bubba posted at 7:56 am on Sun, Oct 6, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 653

    "obamacare" is unconstitutional.