Gay Patriot Header Image

Obamacare makes health care less affordable

Just learned nder the so-called Affordable Care Act, the cost of my monthly premium (that I pay for myself) is about to increase another 52%, meaning that it will have doubled in cost since President Obama signed tthat unpopular legislation.

I expect to write a strongly-worded letter to my soon-to-be Congressman Adam Schiff and to Senator Feinstein and Mrs. Boxer and expect them to express concern for my situation and then proceed to do absolutely nothing.

This is what happens when government meddles.

Oh, and Mr. Obama, Mrs. Feinstein, Ma’am Boxer, Mr. Schiff, this means that I now have less money to give to charitable causes.



  1. I can’t wait until the fools who thought this was a good idea get their bill. Should make for some great comedy.

    Comment by Lobogris — December 19, 2012 @ 12:54 pm - December 19, 2012

  2. Oh, and Mr. Obama, Mrs. Feinstein, Ma’am Boxer, Mr. Schiff, this means that I now have less money to give to charitable causes.

    Well, they like that part, because charity gives government a bad name.

    But, to your point: you have less to spend elsewhere in the economy. So much for Obama’s policies helping the economy… even in Keynesian/demand-side terms.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 19, 2012 @ 1:00 pm - December 19, 2012

  3. Isn’t that amazing?

    Before, Levi, concern-troll mike, and the rest of the Obama cultists shrieked that the reason our premiums were so high was that there were so many “freeloaders” who were using expensive health care and not paying for it.

    Now, all those “freeloaders” are supposedly going to be paying in — and the premium cost now doubles.

    Translation: The cost of providing everyone coverage all the time is higher than the cost of just paying for coverage when people need it.

    This is Insurance 101. But we have to remember that Obama and his supporters are such imbeciles when it comes to insurance that they were demanding collision coverage when they were only paying for liability.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 19, 2012 @ 1:14 pm - December 19, 2012

  4. You’d almost think it was designed to drive us to one payer and cause thousands of job losses, wouldn’t you…

    Comment by The_Livewire — December 19, 2012 @ 1:50 pm - December 19, 2012

  5. If you want them to pay attention, you have to phrase it so they’ll understand – i.e. “this means I’ll now have less money to make political donations.” Of course, if they think you’re conservative, that won’t bother them at all.

    Comment by georgiarealist — December 19, 2012 @ 2:14 pm - December 19, 2012

  6. This monstrosity was designed to fail so that the democrats could usher in their single payer, government run system.

    Our insurance also went up (it wasn’t 52% but it was a pretty big chunk).

    My daughter’s university provided insurance for students (which requires the sue of the student healthcare clinic for primary care during school) almost doubled from $1,000 a year to $1,800 a year. This is insurance for a cohort that is generally very healthy and rarely needs medical care (my college age daughter hasn’t seen a doctor for anything other than a physical in almost 3 years).

    And this is why more businesses will begin to reduce employees to part time. It will save the company money even if it ends up hurting employees more. Obama’s legacy will be high unemployment and lots of part time jobs for everyone.

    Comment by Just Me — December 19, 2012 @ 4:59 pm - December 19, 2012

  7. Hah, try being a self-employed single-male here in NJ…individual health insurance isn’t even available at any cost.

    … And most health-care providers will not accept new patients covered by Medicare, NJ-Medicaid, or even the Military’s Tri-Care.

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — December 19, 2012 @ 5:25 pm - December 19, 2012

  8. As a 43-year old self-employed male with a pre-existing condition, I was able to purchase insurance a year ago for the first time in my adult life under obamacare. Before that, I could not buy health insurance at any price. It’s people like me who Republicans allow to fall through the cracks and that angers those who end up hating all Republicans for not caring. I don’t want my healthcare subsidized by anyone, I don’t want gov’t run healthcare and I certainly don’t want a single-payer system, but we are not dealing with tennis outfits here. This is health care, life and death (at least in my case). You can scream free-markets/capitalism at me all day long and I’ll agree, but when it comes to healthcare, there’s got to be something more to offer. Under a purely free market system I would be dead. And when you require ins. co’s to cover pre-existing conditions, you start the snowball effect that leads to the mandate that everyone must buy ins., that leads to the gov’t having to subsidize the poor, etc. etc. etc. I haven’t heard anyone come up with a plan that is based on free markets and covers the poor and pre-existing conditions.

    Comment by Eddie Swaim — December 19, 2012 @ 11:38 pm - December 19, 2012

  9. Awesome. So instead of just making a law that says if you have a pre-existing condition, you can’t be denied insurance…millions of people are about to get royally screwed. Gee, thanks for that. I feel so much better now.

    Comment by Lobogris — December 20, 2012 @ 12:18 am - December 20, 2012

  10. ‘Eddie’s” little cut and paste diatribe flies in the facts of reality of course. Pre-existing conditions can be covered, the policy is just more expensive.

    (Standard disclaimer applies, as always)

    Comment by The_Livewire — December 20, 2012 @ 7:58 am - December 20, 2012

  11. Eddie, your comment “Under a purely free market system I would be dead.” is without foundation. We don’t have a “purely free market system” NOW, so for you to take your situation and draw that conclusion is unsupportable.

    Your second error is that Obamacare is a workable solution because it covers you. If that was ALL it did, I might agree. But it will screw up the health care system so badly that your “insurance” might not be worth much.

    There were and are many proposals out there to address health care and insurance issues – they’re NOT the same thing – but thanks to our idiot leftie media, you likely never heard any of them.

    Comment by alanstorm — December 20, 2012 @ 8:02 am - December 20, 2012

  12. Eddie,

    You have posted a “don’t hit the girl” type of argument. As I understand what you claim, you have a condition that prevents you from being insured and you can not pay the costs of your condition. Is that essentially correct?

    No, it must not be. Not if you could not buy insurance “at any price.”

    I am left wondering why Obamacare makes you healthier and less risk prone from your preexisting condition. Strike that. Your condition.

    Your car insurance and your fire insurance are both money down the toilet if you don’t wreck your car or torch your house. What has Obamacare brought to the table that a trip to any emergency room didn’t cover?

    Comment by heliotrope — December 20, 2012 @ 9:00 am - December 20, 2012

  13. Not being able to donate as much to charity is a feature – not a bug. You see, if charities can’t do it, then people will go to the gubment…

    Comment by Ziggy — December 20, 2012 @ 9:18 pm - December 20, 2012

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.