I laughed hard when I saw that the New York Times is having an entire marketing campaign based around truth- that you have to go to respected journalists in order to find real news.
If it's not untrue, it's certainly misleading.
They say how most people get their insurance from the government or their jobs and premiums aren't going up fast for those people. Um, okay but first if they're going up at all, I'm affected. If I pay $150 a month and now I pay $160 a month...it affects me. And if the employer used to pay $850 a month and now pays $870 a month...well it still affects me as there's less of a raise available to me...and less profitability for the employer which could lead him to lay off...
But that's not even the most egregious statement in the article (which is saying something as it's a very short article)
Rather it talks about those who get subsidies, and thus are insulated from the increases.
Um...the subsidies come from SOMEWHERE- (Zjabs of course is nice enough to pony up). So in theory, if they pay ANY money in taxes (which you can and still get subsidies), they are affected (at least in the long run) as that's less money available to spend elsewhere which either 1)lowers their quality of life in theory- as well as that of the rest of us or 2) causes taxes to be raised at a future date which then costs them more directly or indirectly.
There's no such thing as a free lunch. Health care premiums go up, it costs me money one way or the other. And to print such a misleading article when one is trumpeting how truthful they are....
-Zjabs (Rochester's Official Columnist)
© 2017 Zjabs - 3/12/17