How about Obamacare subsidies based on my rent and other necessities?

[SwimExpert]

What good does it do to have a subsidy based on one's income? Income really doesn't say much about your wealth or your ability to pay for health insurance. Income is actually quite relative to the matter. Let's change Obamacare so that you get a bigger subsidy the more expensive your rent is. For example, I live in a town that has quite a high cost of living. The town is on the water, and that has attracted many commuter residents who work an hour or more away in much higher paying wage markets and are throwing desperate money to live as far from their work environment as possible, without needing to take a jet into the office every day. The result has been quite damaging for residents who work locally, being something akin to living in an NYC type rent market in an Alabama wage market. I don't even understand how some of these people in this town can survive. Liberals want a $10 minimum wage. Around here, that would leave you with less than $100 a month after paying your rent for a one bedroom apartment. The only other resort is to settle for the certified slums, and even those are still fairly expensive.

Forcing people to buy expensive health insurance, and trying claim it's magically 'affordable' because they're given an income based subsidy, is just another form of obtusely crafted government meddling that hurts the people it's allegedly supposed to help. And there's really no good way to go about forcing it on people without causing it. Insurance premiums are rising at extreme rates, and more and more insurers are withdrawing from participation. We should eliminate Obamacare as soon as possible, before anyone else gets evicted from their homes.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How about no subsidies at all. I'll be responsible for my health care and my family's and you be responsible for yours. Now that's a novel concept.

 

[SwimExpert]

How about no subsidies at all. I'll be responsible for my health care and my family's and you be responsible for yours. Now that's a novel concept.

How about you read further than the subject line so you don't look like a fucking idiot. I just said we should get rid of the whole damn thing. Read, faggot, read. Fucking idiot.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How about no subsidies at all. I'll be responsible for my health care and my family's and you be responsible for yours. Now that's a novel concept.

How about you read further than the subject line so you don't look like a fucking idiot. I just said we should get rid of the whole damn thing. Read, faggot, read. Fucking idiot.

Why do you think I didn't read it, tard? I was agreeing with you.

You ought to seek help for your anger problem. It's not healthy. Then again, you're an old white guy. You all seem to be very angry and bitter these days.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

How about no subsidies at all. I'll be responsible for my health care and my family's and you be responsible for yours. Now that's a novel concept.

That's crazy talk.

 

[SwimExpert]

How about no subsidies at all. I'll be responsible for my health care and my family's and you be responsible for yours. Now that's a novel concept.

How about you read further than the subject line so you don't look like a fucking idiot. I just said we should get rid of the whole damn thing. Read, faggot, read. Fucking idiot.

Why do you think I didn't read it, tard? I was agreeing with you.

You ought to seek help for your anger problem. It's not healthy. Then again, you're an old white guy. You all seem to be very angry and bitter these days.

^^^^This post^^^^ is what happens when you make an ass out of yourself, and then make an even bigger ass trying to recover. Just go away quietly. Otherwise you're just digging a bigger hole for yourself.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How about no subsidies at all. I'll be responsible for my health care and my family's and you be responsible for yours. Now that's a novel concept.

That's crazy talk.

NOOOOO!! READ THE ARTICLE!!!! REEEEEEEEAAAAAAAD!!!!!

 

[Al Azar]

Almost all government programs are based on income, not lifestyle. The one exception is, ironically, income tax. For some reason, it isn't how much make that's the most significant factor, but how you spend it or save it.

Makes no sense.

 

[SwimExpert]

Almost all government programs are based on income, not lifestyle.

So, not being homeless is merely a lifestyle choice? And you seem to have missed the part where I explained that income is quite relative to need.

 

[Al Azar]

If you're not living within your means, you obviously need to either increase your income or cut your expenses.

Did somebody tell you life would be easier for your generation?

 

[Arianrhod]

Almost all government programs are based on income, not lifestyle.

So, not being homeless is merely a lifestyle choice? And you seem to have missed the part where I explained that income is quite relative to need.

Isn't this the "argument" you lot make when you claim poor families all have plasma TVs?

 

[Two Thumbs]

What good does it do to have a subsidy based on one's income? Income really doesn't say much about your wealth or your ability to pay for health insurance. Income is actually quite relative to the matter. Let's change Obamacare so that you get a bigger subsidy the more expensive your rent is. For example, I live in a town that has quite a high cost of living. The town is on the water, and that has attracted many commuter residents who work an hour or more away in much higher paying wage markets and are throwing desperate money to live as far from their work environment as possible, without needing to take a jet into the office every day. The result has been quite damaging for residents who work locally, being something akin to living in an NYC type rent market in an Alabama wage market. I don't even understand how some of these people in this town can survive. Liberals want a $10 minimum wage. Around here, that would leave you with less than $100 a month after paying your rent for a one bedroom apartment. The only other resort is to settle for the certified slums, and even those are still fairly expensive.

Forcing people to buy expensive health insurance, and trying claim it's magically 'affordable' because they're given an income based subsidy, is just another form of obtusely crafted government meddling that hurts the people it's allegedly supposed to help. And there's really no good way to go about forcing it on people without causing it. Insurance premiums are rising at extreme rates, and more and more insurers are withdrawing from participation. We should eliminate Obamacare as soon as possible, before anyone else gets evicted from their homes.

What good does it do to have a subsidy based on one's income? Income really doesn't say much about your wealth or your ability to pay for health insurance. Income is actually quite relative to the matter. Let's change Obamacare so that you get a bigger subsidy the more expensive your rent is. For example, I live in a town that has quite a high cost of living. The town is on the water, and that has attracted many commuter residents who work an hour or more away in much higher paying wage markets and are throwing desperate money to live as far from their work environment as possible, without needing to take a jet into the office every day. The result has been quite damaging for residents who work locally, being something akin to living in an NYC type rent market in an Alabama wage market. I don't even understand how some of these people in this town can survive. Liberals want a $10 minimum wage. Around here, that would leave you with less than $100 a month after paying your rent for a one bedroom apartment. The only other resort is to settle for the certified slums, and even those are still fairly expensive.

Forcing people to buy expensive health insurance, and trying claim it's magically 'affordable' because they're given an income based subsidy, is just another form of obtusely crafted government meddling that hurts the people it's allegedly supposed to help. And there's really no good way to go about forcing it on people without causing it. Insurance premiums are rising at extreme rates, and more and more insurers are withdrawing from participation. We should eliminate Obamacare as soon as possible, before anyone else gets evicted from their homes.

Blank Title - Home

Sign Up My Nigga!

Knowing that once you do, you are a member of the pimpest, most fly as fuck party on the planet!

 

[SwimExpert]

Almost all government programs are based on income, not lifestyle.

So, not being homeless is merely a lifestyle choice? And you seem to have missed the part where I explained that income is quite relative to need.

Isn't this the "argument" you lot make when you claim poor families all have plasma TVs?

Broad brush fail.

 

[SwimExpert]

If you're not living within your means, you obviously need to either increase your income or cut your expenses.

Did somebody tell you life would be easier for your generation?

. <--- This is the point.
o <--- This is your head.


Any questions?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Pour regular coffee in this and it immediately becomes awesome coffee

 

[g5000]

What good does it do to have a subsidy based on one's income? Income really doesn't say much about your wealth or your ability to pay for health insurance. Income is actually quite relative to the matter. Let's change Obamacare so that you get a bigger subsidy the more expensive your rent is. For example, I live in a town that has quite a high cost of living. The town is on the water, and that has attracted many commuter residents who work an hour or more away in much higher paying wage markets and are throwing desperate money to live as far from their work environment as possible, without needing to take a jet into the office every day. The result has been quite damaging for residents who work locally, being something akin to living in an NYC type rent market in an Alabama wage market. I don't even understand how some of these people in this town can survive. Liberals want a $10 minimum wage. Around here, that would leave you with less than $100 a month after paying your rent for a one bedroom apartment. The only other resort is to settle for the certified slums, and even those are still fairly expensive.

Forcing people to buy expensive health insurance, and trying claim it's magically 'affordable' because they're given an income based subsidy, is just another form of obtusely crafted government meddling that hurts the people it's allegedly supposed to help. And there's really no good way to go about forcing it on people without causing it. Insurance premiums are rising at extreme rates, and more and more insurers are withdrawing from participation. We should eliminate Obamacare as soon as possible, before anyone else gets evicted from their homes.

I've actually been thinking about this problem recently, except in a different context.

The context I have been thinking of is the Fair Tax prebate.

For those who don't know what that is, a brief explanation. The Fair Tax is basically a federal sales tax which would replace the federal income tax. So far, so good.

However, sales taxes are regressive. Everyone has to spend a certain amount of money (remember this part) on necessities. A sales tax adds a higher cost to necessities and that hurts the poor more than the rich because a poor person is paying a larger percentage of their income on necessities than a rich person is.

The prebate is intended to offset this. The prebate is a check every person receives which should cover the Fair Tax on necessities. Regardless of your income, you receive the same size prebate. To a rich person, the prebate is lunch money. To a poor person, it is a significant part of their income.

Now we come to the same problem mentioned in the OP.

The cost of necessities, and therefore the amount of tax on those necessities, varies from place to place. So how does one determine on the federal level what the prebate amount for every American should be?

I have thought of a solution to this problem, but the cure may be worse than the disease...

 

[Al Azar]

Shouldn't managing the local tax burden be done at the local level without dragging the federal government into it?

 

[Arianrhod]

Almost all government programs are based on income, not lifestyle.

So, not being homeless is merely a lifestyle choice? And you seem to have missed the part where I explained that income is quite relative to need.

Isn't this the "argument" you lot make when you claim poor families all have plasma TVs?

Broad brush fail.

I agree. But y'all keep repeating it.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

How about no subsidies at all. I'll be responsible for my health care and my family's and you be responsible for yours. Now that's a novel concept.

How about you read further than the subject line so you don't look like a fucking idiot. I just said we should get rid of the whole damn thing. Read, faggot, read. Fucking idiot.

Why do you think I didn't read it, tard? I was agreeing with you.

You ought to seek help for your anger problem. It's not healthy. Then again, you're an old white guy. You all seem to be very angry and bitter these days.

why are old white guys angry and bitter these days? depends.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Shouldn't managing the local tax burden be done at the local level without dragging the federal government into it?

As much as possible....yes.