From the article:
Some married couples would pay thousands of dollars more for the same health insurance coverage as unmarried people living together, under the health insurance overhaul plan pending in Congress.I guess if you are going to trash the Constitution then you may as well launch another attack on our society as well. I guess the results of this will be used to justify forcing working people to pay for abortions for irresponsible people.
Here is a bit more:
The built-in "marriage penalty" in both House and Senate healthcare bills has received scant attention. But for scores of low-income and middle-income couples, it could mean a hike of $2,000 or more in annual insurance premiums the moment they say "I do."
The disparity comes about in part because subsidies for purchasing health insurance under the plan from congressional Democrats are pegged to federal poverty guidelines. That has the effect of limiting subsidies for married couples with a combined income, compared to if the individuals are single.
I LOL at this:
People who get their health insurance through an employer wouldn't be affected.The only people who won't be bent over a chair by this are government officials and employees and people who don't have jobs. The people who don't have jobs right now will be bent over a chair when they get one.
You'd have to be an idiot to think that this sorry attempt by the government to drive private health insurance companies out of business won't affect people.
The article goes on into the details of how people who make more money will have to pay more for insurance and married people will have to pay more than unmarried couples.
If I make $25k per year and go back to school and get a job making $50k per year why should I pay more for the same insurance? Who thought up that brilliant plan? The same criminals that thought up the "progressive" income tax no doubt.
I also don't see how you can possibly justify charging married couples more for insurance than unmarried couples. I suggest the government should have to do an impact study on this and find out the health care costs of married couples compared to unmarried couples. They should not be able to hide data on things like abortions, STDs, and injuries due to drinking and taking drugs. I'll bet that married couples on the whole cost less as far as health care expenses than unmarried couples.
I realize that the purpose of all this nonsense is not to provide healthcare for anyone or improve healthcare for anyone. The purpose of this is to increase the power and size of the federal government. This current bill will simply make private healthcare more expensive and less profitable and drive companies out of business. That will be used to justify more government control and more taxes and the cycle will continue until we have full socialized medicine.
Back to the article:
In any progressive system of taxes or benefits, there are trade-offs between how well-targeted a subsidy is and how equitable it is, said Stacy Dickert-Conlin, an economics professor at Michigan State University.
"You might like to have it be progressive, equitable and marriage-neutral. But you have to decide what your goals are, because you can't accomplish all three," she said.
Why are we even discussing this nonsense? The Constitution does not authorize the government to do any of this.
Where did my country go? I'd like to know.