ACA Fail Fractal
Obamacare Will Sap Your Will to Work
show comments
  • Andrew Allison

    “some people can either work less and get Obamacare subsidies or work more (augment their income) and lose those subsidies” is a straw-man argument. There’s absolutely no incentive in ACA for anybody to augment their income, and the CBO now forecasts that two million less people than anticipated will get insurance this year, and that four times as many workers as anticipated will work less, earn less and, presumably, get subsidies. The incentives are utterly perverse. If this isn’t failure, what is?
    Worse yet, while getting their health insurance subsidized, those lower-paid workers will still be required to pay 100% of the first $4K of their medical expenses and between 30% and 60% of the next $2,350.
    As for the laughable CBO estimate that the risk corridor will provide $8 in revenue for the government, it appears that they didn’t grasp the implications of the fact that the vast majority of those signing up are in the 40-65 age group.

  • stanbrown
    • stanbrown

      This CBO study did not attempt to quantify the full devastation to the job market wreaked by Obamacare. It just addressed the ugly incentives that are a small part of the problems created. For a graphical look at how Obamacare has been killing jobs since the day it was passed, check the graph put up by Warren Meyer at coyoteblog.

  • Jane the Actuary

    Some years ago, my husband told me about one of his lower-paid colleagues: with three children in daycare, she hardly earned more in after-tax wages than they paid out in daycare. Why did she work? Her husband was self-employed. She was essentially working for the health insurance. This is the sort of person for whom the changed incentives of Obamacare will move that calculus towards staying home instead of working. Or maybe the decision is whether to work part- or full time, especially if your the secondary earner in the family, but your spouse’s job doesn’t provide heatlh insurance. Or you’re working with your financial planner trying to decide wehther your 401(k) is large enough that you can early-retire. Everyone’s got it all wrong in saying that this is about lazy bums living in their parents’ basements. (At the same time, the Obamacare defenders who are praising this as liberating people from wage-slavery are just as foolish, and I’m not sure if they really believe what they’re saying or just feel the need to rise to Obama and Obamacare’s defense.)

    • Jane the Actuary
    • Boritz

      It will be possible one day soon to draw a pie chart of who takes advantage (meant negatively) of this at the expense of others. There will be slices representing all of the kinds of people you describe.

    • rheddles

      This is the sort of person for whom the changed incentives of
      Obamacare will move that calculus towards staying home instead of
      working.

      So why should I have to pay taxes to allow her to stay home and subsidize her husband in a career that cannot provide health care? It seems like subsidizing people to do non-(or at least less)-productive things with their careers?

  • Boritz

    This kind of FORCED choice between health care subsidies and income/employment isn’t something we should really be celebrating. -TAI [emphasis added]

    And it is precisely this forced choice that is being celebrated as freedom by the Left pols and media. This is pretty much the way a ministry of truth talks.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.