<p>What is the problem ? What does this have to do with ACA?</p>
<p><a href=“ACA: Healthcare for those in southwest Georgia is far from 'affordable' - MedCity News”>http://medcitynews.com/2014/02/aca-healthcare-southwest-georgia-far-affordable/</a></p>
<p>The hospital is poorly run.</p>
<p>
Unless, of course, the 60 year old decided to deposit $3000 in an IRA. In which case AGI would be reduced to $44,000, and the 60-year-old would get a subsidy to bring costs down to a maximum of $348/month. Of course, being age 60, that person could withdraw money from their IRA at any time without penalty. </p>
<p>It seems to me that the problems listed in that article about Georgia are the fault of the people in power in Georgia who have resisted ACA. Why are things so much better for insurance buyers in Kentucky than in Georgia? It’s not rocket science – and the blame doesn’t fall on “Obamacare”. </p>
<p>“Of course, being age 60, that person could withdraw money from their IRA at any time without penalty.”</p>
<p>Of course, the withdrawal would be income that is added to the $47,000. What if the guy makes $60,000. Now he only pays 20% of his income for Obamacare.</p>
<p>GP, calmom is right. The guy should fund his IRA. The cost of funding his IRA and the new cost of his healthcare is less than what he would pay if he kept his income at $47,000.</p>
<p>Don’t fixate on the $47,000. Any amount above this threshold is also a problem. The middle class is getting screwed.</p>
<p>This is one of the highest cost places in the country. The costs were high before ACA. Explain to me how the costs in Albany Georgia leads to the middle class is getting screwed.</p>
<p>
No, to be precise, there isn’t a 9.5% max if the person’s Adjusted Gross Income combined with any untaxed income from dividends, social security, or foreign earnings amounts to more than 400% of the poverty level. </p>
<p>At the upper end of the subsidy-eligible range, people have more flexibility to make the kind of retirement savings that reduce AGI to create subsidy eligibility. It’s worth opening a traditional IRA and depositing $1000 in it if the taxpayer will recoup three times that much in subsidies. </p>
<p>I’m frustrated with the common use of the word “earns” because it isn’t just earnings. It’s income from any source – and a bottom line that easily allows at least $10K in income-reducing credits. </p>
<p>And if the person is really strapped for cash – that person is NOT required to buy insurance if it is not affordable. So if the problem is that there is no competition on the exchange and the local insurance market is priced too high, ACA isn’t going to require the person to get insurance. That’s simply a problem that existed before ACA and remains unsolved … but again, perhaps the story would have been very different if the state had actively encouraged participation in the exchange by both insurers and consumers. </p>
<p>GP, By the way, you arent middle class and your business depends on government rules, regulations and tax laws.</p>
<p>Why dont you help posters by telling them what they can do tax wise to cut their health premiums like calmom does instead of posting from professional right … … …?</p>
<p>dstark, is that what Obamacare has become - playing games to reduce taxable income so you can get subsidies.
Tell me how a single guy who makes $60,000 gets below the income threshold to qualify for subsidies. </p>
<p>Is the Washington Post a professional right …</p>
<p>Thanks for offering the precise version, calmom. The bottom line is someone whose modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) is above 400% of the FPL (for whatever reason) does not get subsidies, even if insurance would cost them more than 9.5% of their MAGI. They can decide not to buy insurance and face no tax penalty, but that comes with the significant drawback of not having insurance.</p>
<p>Obamacare is going to insure 30 million people and 3/4 of them are going to get sibsidies. </p>
<p>Just like your customers who buy tax subsidies … I mean tax credits. Only the Obamacare signees are not as wealthy.</p>
<p>Where are the charites? Where is the private sector? Why didnt they solve the health care problem of America?</p>
<p>
But they can also opt for the lowest price bronze or even simply buy catastrophic coverage off exchange. That may not be the equivalent of getting subsidized insurance – but the point is that the reason that they don’t qualify for subsidies is that their income is too high. There are a lot of people who would love to have that particular problem. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thank you!! I tried to get more information about this inflammatory story (Children (CHILDREN!!! POOR HELPLESS CHILDREN!!!) denied coverage under OBAMACARE), not to disprove the story, I just wanted to find more information, more detail. I could only find the same story reported on websites that I would consider far right wing fringe, no mainstream media. So is this proof of the left wing conspiracy of mainstream media? I don’t know, but it makes me a little skeptical about the entire story. </p>
<p>
Good for you … but then I assume that you aren’t going to gripe about the subsidies you aren’t getting either.</p>
<p>I’m at the ~$45K threshold. I may or may not qualify for a subsidy. I’m not going to pass up on opportunities to increase my income because of it. But I am going to plan accordingly. I don’t see it as a government “handout” – I see it as a tax credit that I may or may not qualify for depending on circumstances. I still pay taxes either way - it just impacts the way it is calculated. </p>
<p>What can we do to help people that are falling thru the cracks and business and charity are not catching them?</p>
<p>Here is one idea.</p>
<p><a href=“New York may add health insurance option for people too poor to afford Obamacare - syracuse.com”>New York may add health insurance option for people too poor to afford Obamacare - syracuse.com;
<p>NJ, yes, they did treat the kids and the few words could just as likely be interpreted that the families had only out of network coverage, were only denied in-network rates. (Some of that comes from SC statements.) One thing that bugs me is we don’t even know the time frame. How long did they wait for an insurer response? Within normal, stated guidelines? Was there interaction beyond the initial request, some conversation? Did they provide all requested information? </p>
<p>Maybe so, Maybe. But I do not put my judgment in the hands of…some tv reporter. Or much of the common media. </p>
<p>GP will find these examples, ad infinitum. Because there is a seemingly endless supply of naysayers using their rights to say what they will. I’m wondering if the time has come to stop jumping to verify and explain. </p>
<p>From the link about Albany, Ga.,</p>
<p>"Others, such as Mullins, last year renewed their expiring plans for one final year. At $2,150 a month, Mullins’ old plan is no bargain. “We’ve never had cheap rates down here,” said Hardin, his broker. “A lot of people just choose to go without coverage. They just present themselves to the emergency room.”</p>
<p>This article is worth reading - it has a profile of ACA enrollment stats nationwide:
<a href=“http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2014/02/2-maps-show-where-obamacare-and-isnt-working-and-why/8279/”>http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2014/02/2-maps-show-where-obamacare-and-isnt-working-and-why/8279/</a></p>
<p>Folks - Please remember to follow TOS. Even in NEW CC, political discussions are taboo.</p>
<p>GP - read the content before you post articles (I am worried you are bringing us naysayers a bad name!). If the premium went up from 2150 to 2345, why blame ACA? There are a lot of things you can point out but Georgia example is pretty poor.</p>