<p>Yes. I agree with you, LF. We have to use primary sources. </p>
<p>One thing about the opinion piece. The writer did have links to original sources. He gets kudos for that.</p>
<p>Re the discussion of accidents, apparently brought on by my post.</p>
<p>I never said anything about a car accident. </p>
<p>My daughter broke her foot in her apartment while trying to put on her pants.</p>
<p>My grandson broke his leg, requiring a full cast, by tripping over a small toy on the floor.</p>
<p>That’s just the minor stuff. </p>
<p>There are people who are paraplegics because of biking accidents. You can’t get up, brush yourself off, and walk away after you’ve broken your neck. </p>
<p>And as to the “other guy’s insurance will pay for it?” for a vehicle accident? Sometimes pedestrians are injured by hit-and-run drivers, or uninsured, or under-insured drivers. I once had a case where my client, the pedestrian, had been hospitalized with major head injuries for 45 days, and was permanently disabled due to his injuries. Another law firm referred the case to me - they wouldn’t take it after finding out that the driver who hit my client had no assets and only minimal insurance - policy limits were $25,000. I accepted the case, settled it for the full policy limits in a 5 minute phone call with the insurance company lawyer, and reduced my normal contingency fee because I felt bad about taking a third of that money from the client. The only saving grace was that the client was Canadian and had returned home – so at least his government would pick up the ongoing medical costs. </p>
<p>Sometimes a driver is seriously injured in an accident, and the driver also is at fault. Nobody else’s insurance company to pay. Your “major med” on your insurance is a pittance - it won’t cover serious injuries. </p>
<p>Sometimes there are all sorts of complicating factors – such as with a multi-vehicle accident – or an insurance company that contests coverage for various reasons – and it can take years before the litigation comes to an end. Meanwhile the medical bills are piling up. </p>
<p>Anyone who thinks that they don’t have to worry about accidents because there will always be someone to sue is… er, what’s that word GP used … dimwit? I haven’t practiced law in 20 years, but before that I really can’t count the times I had a consultation with an injured client who wanted to sue someone or another over their injuries and I had to tell them that they didn’t have a case - or at least not one that I could be confident of winning. Not all injuries result from situations that are compensable. </p>
<p>“But people can also qualify for hardships for the unspecified nonreason that “you experienced another hardship in obtaining health insurance,” which only requires “documentation if possible.” And yet another waiver is available to those who say they are merely unable to afford coverage, regardless of their prior insurance.”</p>
<p>I think the WSJ is saying that if you don’t want to pay the penalty all you have to say is that you’re experiencing a hardship in obtaining insurance or you can’t afford insurance. Apparently, you don’t need any documentation to support at least the first claim. For all intents and purposes it will be very simple to avoid the mandate penalty.</p>
<p>Also, if you adjust your withholding so there is no refund, the IRS does not have a practical way of collecting the penalty. People who understand the law know the penalty is a chimera.</p>
<p>And people don’t end up needing expensive care just because of accidents. No amount of car insurance is going to cover appendicitis or pneumonia. Who am I supposed to sue in that case? </p>
<p>GP wrote:
Then they don’t understand the law. The affordability is determined as a percentage of the MAGI (AGI plus add backs for certain types of untaxed in come). IRS determines that by the information on the return. </p>
<p>The situation where the penalty could be avoided would be for people who earn too much to qualify for a subsidy – and for whom the exchange prices are too high. That is – my premium for a bronze plan is $680/month. If I earn $42K, I qualify for a subsidy, so I’d pay a penalty if I chose to go without insurance. But if my income is $48K, then I’ve earned too much for a subsidy, and the premiums would be 17% of my total income – so I could then avoid the penalty. The minimum penalty is easily documented via the exchange.</p>
<p>But that’s exemption is going to largely impact older people, as we are the ones facing the higher rates. I’m 60. I don’t know many 60 year olds who are comfortable with the idea of going without insurance. And of course, the higher the income, the higher the penalty. </p>
<p>I don’t think it’s upper income people who are generally going to want to go without insurance anyway. We’re the ones that the hospitals can actually collect from. It’s the younger people who are trying to scrape by on $30K a year and feel they have a hard time coming up with a $250/month payment who might be more willing to pass on insurance and just hope they don’t get sick.</p>
<p>You didn’t address the other way you could avoid the penalty according to the WSJ. Apparently, all you need to do is say you’re experiencing a hardship. You don’t even need documentation to buttress the excuse.</p>
<p>Friend’s H recuperating from a bike crash - no car involved. He has 3 cracks in his pelvis. Was in ER all day. On pain meds and blood thinner to prevent clotting. Has to use a walker for at least 3 weeks. Of course he has insurance so nothing to worry about when huge bill comes from hospital. </p>
<p>People who choose not to purchase insurance are idiots. No one is invincible. **** happens. </p>
<p>^This type of crash is why my h freaked out when I wanted to take up mountain bike riding as some of my friends have a riding club. I am in truth pretty klutzy and have a back condition in my facet joints… and am generally “forbidden” from chainsaws by h as well…something about my left-handed ness makes him nervous even with a hatchet or bow saw 
(We have a lot of trees on a bit of acreage…it’s not that I run around with a hatchet to no purpose. :)</p>
<p>It didn’t help that a dear friend and experienced rider had just broken his arm around the time I was thinking about taking up riding. We compromised and I got a street-mb hybrid that I use on paved trails and he got a recumbent, presumably to keep an eye on me and collect me if I run afoul of gravity ;)</p>
<p>At any rate, during my brief fascination with mb riding, I started polling my pals on the tri team and discovered a really high proportion of peril goes with the territory. I understand the love for it too, but determined I was probably not a good candidate…not because I didn’t have health insurance but because even with insurance I can’t really afford to be sidelined from work if I reinjured my back ;)</p>
<p>However, riders are a great example of the generally very healthy and often young who on the surface look like low-toll users on healthcare, but who in fact need it as much or more than the average sedentary bear :)</p>
<p>It is not helpful lecturing young people to get insurance after you double the premiums (in some cases) of the millennials in order to subsidize the insurance for many of the posters on this thread. </p>
<p>Heard a story this morning on radio that pedestrian accidents have gone down nationwide over the past three years. Does not apply to Texas based on the story.</p>
<p>“CF, I never got into biking. I don’t feel comfortable with the cars or the bike seats or the bike shorts.”</p>
<p>Me either. I’m not sure what is worse. Those shorts are pretty intimidating.</p>
<p>So many car/bicyclist accidents around here. The car always wins.</p>
<p>Yep… The car wins …</p>
<p>Yeah, the shorts are pretty bad.</p>
<p>I know this is a big concern for Fang. It came up a couple of years ago on the Aging Parents thread, in the context of when to take Mom & Dad’s car keys away. Those non-quite-competent drivers are a bit of a problem for cyclists like Fang. </p>
<p>Now that you mention it, Las Ma, while we’re thinking about actions people can take to prevent deaths of innocent people, how about marching into our parents’ house and taking the car keys, when you know the parents are unsafe drivers? Unsafe drivers kill a lot more people than mass murderers.</p>
<p>The car doesn’t always win, but we can do a couple of things to promote pedestrian and bike safety. First is to encourage more cycling, because places that have more cycling have a lower rate of car-bike accidents. And the second is to stop giving drivers who kill cyclists just a slap on the wrist and a sternly worded letter. </p>
<p>Someone I knew online was killed last year by a driver who was driving with a revoked license, revoked because of drunk driving. The driver left the scene of the accident. He was just sentenced-- to one measly year in prison, while the love of my friend’s life has to spend her remaining life without him. </p>
<p>But that’s not the worst. Drivers who weren’t drunk or didn’t leave the scene get nothing. Drivers have a free pass to mow down cyclists. Speeding, texting, not paying attention? Doesn’t matter. Killer drivers get off scot free.</p>
<p>It used to be that we winked and nodded at drunk driving. We need to stop winking and nodding at other kinds of lethal driving.</p>
<p>Popping in to say goodbye, for now. The website downgrade and – more important – CC’s steadfast refusal to even discuss improvements, has made this an un-fun place to hang out. I’ll come back if/when they ever fix it.</p>
<p>Toodles!</p>
<p>LasMa…have fun.</p>
<p>Will miss you LaMa! Hope you are not away for too long - but I hear you about the site issues and nothing getting any better and only crickets by TPTB on so many issues. </p>
<p>
Well that definitely does not apply to San Francisco! </p>
<p>
<a href=“http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-announces-17-million-plan-to-make-city-5295460.php”>http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-announces-17-million-plan-to-make-city-5295460.php</a></p>
<p>Sebelius is saying premiums are likely headed higher. Doesn’t seem that would be helpful so it must be true.</p>
<p>And, as with cyclist victims, drivers (and cyclists) who injure or kill pedestrians get a slap on the wrist and a sternly worded letter. </p>