Oops: Slightly Over Half Of Counties In Federal Exchange Lack Affordable Obamacare Plans

Sticker shock

(USA Today) More than half of the counties in 34 states using the federal health insurance exchange lack even a bronze plan that’s affordable — by the government’s own definition — for 40-year-old couples who make just a little too much for financial assistance, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

Many of these counties are in rural, less populous areas that already had limited choice and pricey plans, but many others are heavily populated, such as Bergen County, N.J., and Philadelphia and Milwaukee counties.

More than a third don’t offer an affordable plan in the four tiers of coverage known as bronze, silver, gold or platinum for people buying individual plans who are 50 or older and ineligible for subsidies.

This goes to those making just over the 400% of the poverty line, which would be $47,780 for an individual or $61,496 for a couple, who are ineligible for any sort of subsidy. USA Today looked at the premiums for all plans to see if they broke through the 8% of income level, which, according to Los Federales, is the affordability threshold.

The number of people who earn close to the subsidy cutoff and are priced out of affordable coverage may be a small slice of the estimated 4.4 million people buying their own insurance and ineligible for subsidies. But the analysis clearly shows how the sticker shock hitting many in the middle class, including the self-employed and early retirees, isn’t just a perception problem. The lack of counties with affordable plans means many middle-class people will either opt out of insurance or pay too much to buy it.

Isn’t it funny how everything always seems to be a “small slice”? Yet, a small slice here, a small slice there, pretty soon the entire country is killed by a 1000 paper cuts.

“The ACA was not designed to reduce costs or, the law’s name notwithstanding, to make health insurance coverage affordable for the vast majority of Americans,” says health care consultant Kip Piper, a former government and insurance industry official. “The law uses taxpayer dollars to lower costs for the low-income uninsured but it also increases costs overall and shifts costs within the marketplace.”

Essentially, redistributing money. And, let’s face it, even if these folks obtain health insurance, they still won’t be able to afford the deductibles. Someone making $20K, $30K, etc, won’t be able to pitch out $6k or so.

Although premiums are unaffordable in many places now, protections in the law will prevent the massive jumps in premiums that characterized the individual insurance market before the ACA, she says.

Individual policies before had only the “optics of affordability and no dependability,” Pollitz says. “What good is protection if it doesn’t work when you need it?”

What good are plans that one cannot afford right off the bat, and have deductibles that are a massive chunk of people’s income? That’s the reality of Obamacare.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Oops: Slightly Over Half Of Counties In Federal Exchange Lack Affordable Obamacare Plans »

If All You See…

…is horrible warmth induced snow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moe Lane, with a post on Obama extending Obamacare deadlines.

Folks with Christmas posts

Again, Merry Christmas, and if I’ve missed anyone, let me know.

Read: If All You See… »

Bummer: Over Half Of US States See Snow Cover For Christmas

Ending the 25 Days Of Climate Christmas on a bright note

(IBD) Those humming the words to “White Christmas” got their wish big-time as snow covered more than half the lower 48 states as of mid-December, putting snowless winters on the pile of failed climate predictions.

More than half of the continental U.S. had snow cover as of Dec. 15, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the most in 11 years. That exposes as worthless the predictions of the climate scammers of snowless winters as far as the eye can see. In 2006, by comparison, snow covered just 12% of these states.

There are many reasons for this, but climate change is not one of them, even though the warm-mongers cite high temperatures in Alaska and claim record snow cover merely reflects the fact that warmer air can carry more moisture.

This is written by the editorial board of the Investor’s Business Daily, which then notes

As we have pointed out many times, there is no weather condition that climate-change true believers do not cite as proof of climate change. If it is too dry, too wet, too warm or too cold, it is all due to climate change.

This reminds me of a post by Steven Goddard yesterday, in which a Warmist argued that 30 days is climate, but 60 days is just weather…since the 60 days didn’t support the notion of “climate change”.

We recall the prediction in 2000 by Dr. David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, that winter snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” and claiming, “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

Rare snow in Cairo and Jerusalem. Lots of winter storms, including lots of snow, in Britain, France, and Europe. Rare summer snow in Australia. Must be climate change due to Warmists refusing to give up their own fossil fueled habits.

But, if you really, really want some Warmist madness, here’s Soros funded climate monkey Joe Romm whining about The Ghost Of Climate Change Yet To Come. Some cra-cra Leftists who want their union to fight against climate change. A wacko at the HuffPo, who Blames the Tea Party for climate change. And the Governor of the Caymans just had to include a brief whine about “climate change” in her Christmas message (up-twinkles for her actually wishing people a Merry Christmas, though).

Read: Bummer: Over Half Of US States See Snow Cover For Christmas »

Yes, Virginia, There Is A Santa Claus

Every Christmas, after the presents are opened and breakfast is being made, I read this first in the paper (ye olde parental units get an actual paper, and they live in NJ). It is a Christmas classic that has always touched my soul. While some people outside of the Tri-State area have heard of it, rarely do papers outside of the NY-NJ-Conn area see it in print, and it always surprises me when I run across someone who has not ever heard the first line. I humbly bring it to you, and hope it touches you as much as it touches me:

Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus

Editorial Page, New York Sun, 1897

We take pleasure in answering thus prominently the communication below, expressing at the same time our great gratification that its faithful author is numbered among the friends of The Sun:

I am 8 years old. Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus. Papa says, “If you see it in The Sun, it’s so.” Please tell me the truth, is there a Santa Claus?
Virginia O’Hanlon

Virginia, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a sceptical age. They do not believe except what they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men’s or children’s, are little. In this great universe of ours, man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.

He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus! It would be as dreary as if there were no Virginias. There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The external light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished.

Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe in fairies. You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas eve to catch Santa Claus, but even if you did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that’s no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

You tear apart the baby’s rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived could tear apart. Only faith, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, Virginia, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No Santa Claus? Thank God he lives and lives forever. A thousand years from now, Virginia, nay 10 times 10,000 years from now, he will continue to make glad the heart of childhood.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!!!!

And a Merry Christmas from deep down in my heart to all my friends and visitors out there.

If you would like to know the background on the letter, you can go to the 2004 posting of this.

Merry Christmas, Everyone!

Read: Yes, Virginia, There Is A Santa Claus »

“Isn’t there anyone who knows what Christmas is all about?”

Luke 2: 8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field , keeping watch over their flock by night. 9 And, lo , the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid . 10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold , I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. 11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. 12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes , lying in a manger. 13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying , 14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Read: “Isn’t there anyone who knows what Christmas is all about?” »

If All You See…

…is a Christmas Holiday Winter Festival tree that could be made extinct by climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Proof Positive, with a post on the phony budget deal.

Read: If All You See… »

Nancy Pelosi On Obamacare: “It’s going to be a glorious thing”

Someone’s obviously been hitting the Bacardi 151 eggnog a bit early. Either that or she’s been hitting the mescaline again (via Hot Air)

(CNS News) House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says December has been a “great month” for Obamacare sign-ups, and she said things will only get betteras more people enroll.

“It’s worth the trouble. It’s going to be a glorious thing,” Pelosi told a conference call on Monday.

“It’s about life, a healthier life, liberty, the freedom to pursue our happiness. It honors the vows of our founders. A person can follow his or her passion and not be chained by a policy, so they could start a business, be self-employed, change jobs. It’s a very, very exciting thing. And it’s about wellness and prevention. It’s about the health of America, not just the health care for Americans.

“So we’re very proud of it, and our enthusiasm for it … strengthens our determination to make sure it works.”

Read: Nancy Pelosi On Obamacare: “It’s going to be a glorious thing” »

Here’s A Handy Dandy Warmist Survival Guide For Christmas Climate Change Discussions

We’re almost to Climate Christmas, folks, just today and tomorrow

Survival Guide For Climate Change Debates

When extended family gets together over the holidays, dinner conversations can sometimes be awkward — such as when your uncle from South Carolina talks politics with your niece from the Bay Area. When thorny questions about climate change arise over your Christmas ham, we’ve got you covered!

Mostly because Warmists/Liberals need talking points, being sheeple and unable to think for themselves.

1. Is carbon dioxide actually bad for you?

No. Carbon dioxide is what we humans (and all animals) breathe out. It is essential for plant life. But carbon dioxide has been in a specific concentration in our atmosphere — within the range of 170 to 300 parts per million — for 800,000 years. Suddenly, in the brief couple hundred years since the industrial revolution, that concentration has shot up. This is largely due to our burning fossil fuels for energy. Our atmosphere now contains 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide. Although carbon dioxide itself is not bad for us, too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere leads to global warming — and that, my friends, is most certainly bad for all of us.

So, it’s not bad for us (kudos to writer Molly Rauch for constantly calling it carbon dioxide, rather than the unscientific “carbon”), but because it might get warm it’s bad for us. Despite Mankind, and life, typically doing better in warmth than cold. And roughly 90% of the last million years was a glacial period. How would life do as glaciers roll down from the Arctic?

2. How can carbon dioxide be called “pollution” if we breathe it out every day?

Pollution is a process that makes any aspect of our environment — our land, air, water, or homes — dirty, unsafe or unsuitable. Scientists are united in their understanding that our unprecedented and ever-rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide are already causing life-threatening changes to our climate. Carbon dioxide emissions are making our planet unsafe for us and, most importantly, our children.

Good thing rising CO2 levels have essentially done away with warming over the last 17 years. Because an increase of 1.4F over 160 years is “life threatening”.

3. What is President Obama’s Climate Plan and will it actually help?

Nope, stopping there, you’re welcome to head over to the HuffPost if you want, and see the answer to #3 and the others. If you, dear Climate Realist, want to answer the Warmists during our Christmas gatherings, simply ask the Warmists if they plan on giving up fossil fuels themselves, and make their own lives carbon neutral. The typical answer will be along the lines of “it’s not about me, it’s about all of us”, along with other deflections as to why they refuse to practice what they preach.

PS: Do you know what Obama’s plan is? Jacking up the cost of living for Everyone Else while taking long fossil fueled flights to Hawaii. This is the man with the highest carbon footprint in the world.

Read: Here’s A Handy Dandy Warmist Survival Guide For Christmas Climate Change Discussions »

Army Officer: Don’t Say Christmas

The political Left has spent a long time infiltrating and taking control of many segments of the nation, such as education, government bureaucracies, Hollywood, and unions. Now they’re working heavily to take over the military and work their Progressive magic. And saying Christmas? Brother, that’s just wrong. Here’s Todd Starnes reporting

(Fox News) Two weeks ago, a routine meeting was held at the Mississippi base with various leaders of the 158th Infantry Brigade. During the meeting, they discussed an upcoming Christmas football tournament. The equal opportunity officer immediately objected to the usage of the word “Christmas.”

“Our equal opportunity representative stopped the briefing and told us that we can’t say Christmas,” the soldier told me. “Almost the entire room blew up. Everybody was frustrated. The equal opportunity rep told our commander that not everyone celebrates Christmas and we couldn’t say Christmas celebration. It had to be holiday celebration.”

The soldier said there was a brief, but heated discussion about political correctness. At one point, the equal opportunity representative tried to deflect the criticism by pointing out it was the Army’s rules – not hers.

“She said an individual can say Christmas, but as an organization in the Army you can’t say Christmas,” the soldier told me.

There is no actual rule that forbids saying the word “Christmas”, but hardcore liberals are very upset over the use of the word, especially in Government (though these same hardcores are thrilled to get a paid day off or holiday pay if they have to work for Christmas, plus all the presents). This is these Progressive (fascist) morons pushing their “separation between church and state”, a fictional constitutional decree deriving from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, which the moron left equates as The Law.

Furthermore, the mention of religion in public makes Progressives uncomfortable, and anything that makes them uncomfortable Must Be Banned. Finally, progressives want the State to be the religious deity, not Jesus or any other religious icon.

Mass. State Rep Alan Silvia , a Democrat no less, has a few thoughts on the issue of people being offended or made uncomfortable about the mention of Christmas

I have never been very good at being politically correct. Ask my friends. So I will continue to wish people Merry Christmas and when I do it won’t be out of disrespect to others beliefs or to offend people; it will be because it is one of the many freedoms we have that brave men and women generously sacrificed to preserve. And shame on anyone who attempts to take that freedom away.

Good for you, Alan, good for you.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Army Officer: Don’t Say Christmas »

Team Obama Really Doesn’t Want A Judge Ruling On Constitutionality Of NSA Spying Programs

Team Obama asserts that the need for intelligence overrides that pesky Constitutional thingy

(Venture Beat) The White House filed papers late Friday to stop a federal judge from deciding whether the warrantless surveillance operations were legal or not.

The government said that, despite leaks by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, full disclosure of the surveillance data would put government secrets at risk. Divulging these secrets in a court would cause “extremely grave damage to the national security of the United States,” wrote James Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, in the filing.

The government can use its state secrets privilege to block information from being used in a court, and the Justice Department has asked the federal judge, Jeffrey S. White of the Northern District of California, to dismiss the case without ruling on whether the programs violated the First or Fourth Amendments of the Constitution. White had earlier ordered the government to evaluate how the disclosurs by Snowden had affected its earlier assertions of state secrets.

There you go: government secrets are more important than the Rights of US citizens. Yes, there is a need for secret programs. But they should be in accordance with our Constitution, and these NSA programs are simply sweeping up information on US citizens without warrants and without knowing what is being done with the information.

Read: Team Obama Really Doesn’t Want A Judge Ruling On Constitutionality Of NSA Spying Programs »

Pirate's Cove