Two thirds of Obamacare recipients have to repay subsidies


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Finding out what’s in it: Two thirds of taxpayers have had to repay a significant portion of the subsidies they received through Obamacare this year when it came time to do their taxes.

And it ain’t gonna get better, only worse.

But don’t worry, it is really the Republicans’ fault for not writing or voting or even conceiving of this Democratic Party law. The Democrats are perfectly innocent of any blame at all for writing it, forcing it through (against the wishes of a majority of the population), and doing so without even reading the damn bill in the first place. If we vote for more Democrats and more laws like this, things have just got to get better!

Share

7 comments

  • Edward

    Robert, I think the link is broken. Is this the article?
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/27/66-pct-obamacare-customers-paid-back-subsidies-irs/

    It seems that anyone who managed to save the promised $2,500 in insurance premiums — through government subsidies — has had that savings reduced by almost a third of that ($729).

    How many people on these subsidy exchanges are really able to afford this “affordable” healthcare system?

    It makes me wonder, too, how many people who managed to keep their doctors now have to give them back.

    Promises made, promises broken.

    Healthcare system made, healthcare system broken, healthcare system broken as it was made then sold to us anyway. Would you continue to buy from *that* company? Congress needs some serious quality control in its legislative process. They are looking more and more like the Russian space program (or is the comparison too insulting to the Russian space program?).

    No wonder Obamacare is mandated; no one would buy it, otherwise. What a fiasco.

  • The link as created works for me. What error message do you get when you click on it?

  • Desmond Murphy

    Another way to spin the same story is that 2/3 of tax prayers earned more than they expected last year, but sure, why not be negative as usual?

  • PeterF

    I’ll drink to that!

    Happy days are here again
    The skies above are clear again
    So lets sing a song of cheer again
    Happy days are here again!

  • Keith

    Maybe a significant number of those “tax payers” lied to get the subsidies and didn’t expect to get caught.

  • Edward

    The link is working for me today. I guess it was a temporary problem with my browser, or something.

    To answer the question, it was an error notice from the Washington Times website telling me that the page did not exist.

  • Edward

    Well, Desmond, this situation may seem like a positive to you, but unpredictability makes planning for the future difficult. These millions of people had expectations that they were wealthier than they were, and those who owed money to the IRS, rather than those who did not receive as much in refunds, would have been surprised that they now needed to come up with money to cover expenses that they thought were already paid. Either way, these people have less spending money that they expected.

    Since these people were getting their insurance through exchanges, they are the poorer people among us (unless they work for Congress, which voted to allow themselves and their highly paid staffs to get 75% subsidies, because even *they* have trouble affording the mandated insurance*). These are the people for whom $700 would make a real difference.

    That sounds like a negative to me.

    * If these highly paid people are unable to afford health insurance, what chance do the rest of us have?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *