View Single Post
Old 08-01-2013, 10:51 AM   #17
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B-Large View Post
Yes, because so many are going to work less to stay under some subsidy cutoff..

Keep grasping at straws, its entertaining to watch Conservatives squirm because they know this is going to work, they can't do anything to ruin it for people, and they will be the politcal losers for it.

So hooray
A place I used to work used to offered tiered health employee contribution based on the income the employee was earning. Lower-wage employees didn't have to pay as much of their health premiums. Inevitably when one would approach a cutoff tier, they would ask if they could refuse a small raise in order to stay below the cutoff.

Back to the article

Quote:
But the annual premiums for a 50-year-old Connecticut couple buying that plan would be $12,468. If their combined incomes were $62,040 or less, they would receive $6,575 in subsidies to offset the cost.

However, if their income was more than that, they would lose the subsidies, leaving them out of pocket $6,575. They then would have to earn at least $68,615 to make up for that lost subsidy, Wu said.
People all over this country will face a choice. And the window is much wider than the $6,000 difference. Would someone bust their ass for an extra $10-12k so the government can have $6 of it? Some might. Most won't.
  Reply With Quote