Skip to main content

View Diary: Close the 30-hour Loophole (45 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Not a loophole and was intended, sorry to say (13+ / 0-)

    this issue came up when ACA was drafted and publiclly discussed.

    The drafters were naive thinking that employers would not alter their staffing policies even though the healthcare costs are high relative to employee wages.

    I agree with the remedy you propose, except I would not call it a penalty but a health insurance fee.  This is to overcome the rational objection that it does not make sense to expect an employer to provide health insurance for 8hr to 20hr/wk employees so having a penalty is unreasonable.

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:33:48 PM PDT

    •  If the linked article sating that (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lujane, kyril, Hirodog

      temp jobs grew 6 times faster than in Massachusetts after their healthcare change , I am not sure naive explains the drafters intentions.

    •  Unfortunately... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      klamothe, Hirodog

      ...the chances of fixing this glitch are exactly zero.

      Why?

      Because Republicans have zero interest in supporting any legislation that might make the ACA work better, which means that they're certainly not going to get behind a move to plug this hole.

      Instead, they'll label it as a "tax increase on job creators" and oppose and demonize it loudly.  In other words, they'll do what Republicans usually do: obstruct and lie.

      Political Compass: -6.75, -3.08

      by TexasTom on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 05:57:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Democrats in congress also (0+ / 0-)

        Have exactly zero interest in revisiting this.  They're already being humiliated by the president on entitlements.  The last thing they want to do is remind voters of how badly they screwed up the ACA.

        •  Compared with what was there before.... (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FG, TexasTom, bustacap, splashy, We Won

          ...."badly screwed up" is a better description of the critics of the ACA than the ACA itself.

          Could you have done better anywhere but in your mind? No.

          I am getting really sick of idealists who can accomplish precisely nothing criticizing the small and compromised gains made by others. Get out there and get something concrete done yourself before you judge, OK? That is, if you have either time or energy left after dealing with the real world.

          "They smash your face in, and say you were always ugly." (Solzhenitsyn)

          by sagesource on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 08:34:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No.. ACA makes things worse (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SpamNunn, Sparhawk, Hatrax, conniptionfit

            It drives up the cost for many Americans - especially the young.

            It is a giveaway to insurance companies.

            And, less people will end up being covered by insurance than before ACA.  It is a lose-lose for most Americans.

            •  You're delusional (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              We Won, Creosote

              The number of young people (young adults) getting insurance has increased thanks to the provisions that allow parents to cover their kids on their own insurance until age 26.

              And every estimate that I've seen shows tens of millions of folks gaining insurance coverage because of the ACA in coming years.

              While imperfect, the ACA is neither just a "giveaway to insurance companies" or a "government takeover of healthcare".

              Political Compass: -6.75, -3.08

              by TexasTom on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 11:00:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Nope.. sorry, you're wrong. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Hatrax, ilex, burlydee

                Young Americans over the age of 26 get screwed under ACA - especially healthy males.  Some will see their premium rise by as much as 300%.  Of course, the benefits will be much better - but these are benefits these young, healthy people do not use.

                Even HHS has recently admitted premiums for individual plans will increase, some dramatically.

                See: Sebelius: Some Could See Insurance Premiums Rise

                I don't for a minute believe the estimates that uninsured numbers will shrink.  Costs are predicted to rise - by as much as 32% in the first few years according to actuaries.

                The subsidies will simply not be enough to help workers buy insurance - especially workers who will see their hours cut so their employers can avoid ACA requirements.

                •  I do mostly (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Hatrax, Bon Temps

                  agree with your skepticism of ACA as a whole. But I think it is fair to argue that those under 26 who can stay on parents plan are one of the groups that may benefit from this plan.

                  It is going to be interesting. I was concerned to read the other day that the exchanges are nowhere near ready.

                  Also, know of a couple of companies considering dropping healthcare and paying fine. Just talk at this point, but they told me that the cost savings for them appeared to be significant.

          •  Um, hello? I AM doing something concrete (0+ / 0-)

            To get something done.  It's called protesting, and doing my damnedest to get politicians to change their behavior.  While you sit here and denigrate my efforts to get Democrats to act like Democrats.
            What I'm getting sick of is the Status Quo Caucus (tm) enabling the cowardly and corrupt.
            So, no, I WILL NOT sit down and shut up.  If you think that's the right way to go, you should try it sometime.

          •  Single Payer! (0+ / 0-)

            That is what we need.  The ACA is a hoax.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (123)
  • Community (60)
  • Elections (31)
  • Media (31)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (30)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Environment (27)
  • Law (26)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Culture (23)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Hillary Clinton (23)
  • Climate Change (21)
  • Science (21)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Economy (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Josh Duggar (18)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site