Thursday, August 23, 2012

Obama Care - Still Constitutional And Still A Major Disaster: Part 2 - IRS Misadventures, Unemployment Impacts and More

Yesterday we reviewed some major and distressing new news about Obama Care. The latest unbiased and nonpartisan experts, including the Congressional Budget Office, Medicare's head actuary, etc., continue to prove our theory that Obama Care is an unfolding disaster for the nation. It will not solve the underlying causes of our high health care costs, it will gut Medicare funding and support over the next ten years, it will leave tens of millions of Americans without health care insurance coverage, and it will add to our skyrocketing national debt.

Unfortunately, we could not fit the latest bad news into one post and needed today's space to continue:

- A New York Times article that was summarized in the August 10, 2012 issue of The Week magazine stated that, partly as a result of Obama Care, the U.S. will be over 60,000 doctors short of what it will need by 2015 as a result of  millions of more Americans receiving health care insurance under the legislation. The shortfall will be more than twice as big by 2025, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

Now, to be clear, I would never want to deny health care to another human being. However, this is obviously another big shortcoming of Obama Care. Somehow, the writers of the legislation never understood that if more and more people can get easier access to health care, they will exercise that option.

Thus, the Obama Care writers never made any contingency plans on how to handle increased demand with no increase in suppliers. Simple supply and demand economic theory that is lost on on our politicians, a theory that will lead to increase costs and lower care (more demand, no increase in supply, has to lead to higher prices and costs: Economics 101).

- A CNNMoney.com article that was summarized in the July 27, 2012 issue of The Week magazine confirmed our assumption yesterday that companies will hire fewer workers and change full time workers to part time workers. They cannot afford the increased Obama Care costs and taxes that will be imposed on companies with more than 50 full time employees who do not provide full health care insurance.

It cites small business owner David Barr who successfully owns and operates two dozen fast food franchises: "[Barr] says he'd rather do that [change his full time workers to part time workers] than pay the $546,000 he says it will cost him to cover all 425 of his current employees."

Why would he downgrade over 400 employees to part time?  According to the article, "His business model isn't meant to support these costs." 

Consider the decisions of business owner Randall Tabor, who owns two Quiznos sandwich restaurants with 36 workers in Virginia Beach, Va., in a Wall Street Journal interview that was cited in the August 2, 2012 issue of Moneynews. He has rolled back earlier plans he had to triple the number of his outlets since Obamacare was passed in 2010.


Horrid legislation, make hundreds of Americans just in these two examples take a downgrade in employment or not get hired at all. As this is repeated thousands and thousands of times across the country, disposable income will also drop as will economic growth, all for a government program that will never work.

- One of the biggest issues of Obama Care is that it forces Americans to buy a service, in this case, health insurance. That was the main reason behind the Supreme Court challenge that the Court somehow viewed as legal. Obviously, many Americans found this government imposition of forcing a purchase in a supposedly free country as counter liberty.

However, according to an article in the July 20, 2012 issue of The Week magazine, despite Obama Care, the government cannot actually force a citizen to buy health insurance, contrary to what most people think. The article lays out the situation:
  • The Obama Care health care purchase mandate/tax cannot truly compel an American to buy health insurance. While it levies a tax on those who do not buy insurance, unbelievably, there is no legal mechanism to enforce the mandate.
  • The article supposes that millions of people may decide to forego paying for health insurance and save paying the health care premiums since the Federal government cannot not affect them except under one specific condition.
  • That condition is that, if in the future, the IRS owes a non-purchaser a tax refund, it can withhold the tax refund to pay the penalty for not buying health care insurance.
  • The CBO estimates that 4 million Americans will bypass the mandate to purchase insurance and save the monthly premiums because of this lack of enforcement.
  • One reason for bypassing is that even with an Obama Care subsidy, as an example, a family of four earning about $45,000 a year will find it cheaper to pay the Obama Care penalty, IF and WHEN it should ever happen, than purchasing the cheapest insurance option offered in the Obama Care insurance exchanges.
  • This will put more people back into emergency rooms for sickness and illness treatment, the exact opposite of what Obama Care is supposed to do.
  • The article illustrates this likelihood by quoting the opinions of a Texas mother who stated in the article that she would rather risk a low, potential $250 government fine sometime in the future than pay $1,800 a year for insurance today: "I could much more easily afford a dadgum penalty than be saddled month after month after month than be saddled with this kind of premium." She stated she will continue to take her family illnesses and sicknesses to an emergency room. And there is virtually nothing Obama Care can do about her attitude and actions.
  • Despite not being able to collect mandated penalties, the Obama administration recently allocated about half a billion dollars to the IRS for enforcement of this mandate that it cannot enforce. Insanity.
  • As we have observed previously, wouldn't these government resources be better spent on reducing the over $100 billion that the Federal government loses every year to criminal fraud, waste, and inefficiencies in existing Medicare and Medicaid programs? Wouldn't  that be a better option than wasting time hassling honest American citizens who are just trying to optimize their lives vs. organized crime and other criminal elements who are only trying to rob the American taxpayer?
- Lets go to an article from the July 9, 2012 issue of Business Week. The article reviews many of the same facts that were covered in The Week article cited above, including the fact that Congress prohibited the IRS from placing liens on property and assets or garnishing wages for those that do not purchase health care insurance.

However, it adds two additional pieces of information. First, the IRS will somehow have to enforce 47 additional tax provisions as a result of Obama Care. As the article points out, and we have pointed out numerous times, the IRS cannot currently collect about $385 billion that is owed to the Federal government from tax evaders every year. If it cannot enforce the current tax laws, it is difficult to believe it will
be able to efficiently and effectively enforce 47 more tax requirements.   

Second, while the IRS commissioner needs an 11% increase in the IRS budget to handle Obama Care, it has seen Congress reduce its budget in each of the past two years, shrinking its enforcement staff by 3,000. It is highly unlikely Congress will restore those cuts AND increase the IRS budget in the future, meaning that the IRS component of Obama Care is also going to be a failure and disaster.

Failure and disaster, hassling of honest Ameircans while dishonest theives steal from Medicare and Mediciad, more and more Americans lsing their current health insurance plans, doctor shortages, less employment, reduction in disposable income. Yes, Obama Care is Constitutional. However, that still does not make it a good idea.

We invite all readers of this blog to visit our new website, "The United States Of Purple," at:

http://www.unitedstatesofpurple.com/

The United States of Purple is a new grass roots approach to filling the office of President of The United States by focusing on the restoration of freedom in the United States, focusing on problem solving skills and results vs. personal political enrichment, and imposing term limits on all future Federal politicians. No more red states, no more blue states, just one United States Of America under the banner of Purple.

The United States Of Purple's website also provides you the formal opportunity to sign a petition to begin the process of implementing a Constitutional amendment to impose fixed term limits on all Federally elected politicians. Only by turning out the existing political class can we have a chance of addressing and finally resolving the major issues of or times.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at www.loathemygovernment.com. It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment/



No comments: