ObamaCare cost expectation drops 7%

[muon2]

I know people that would rather pay the fine than go through the crap that is filing through the site. We can't force people to buy anything. Why should it be required if people don't want it?

Essentially the Supreme Court ruled that you can force someone to buy something.

More accurately they ruled that if you buy certain things you can have your taxes reduced, and they found that the penalty system for the ACA was structured as a tax.

If the structure remains as a tax, I'd rather just see the employer mandate go away and with it classification rules that will be worked around whether it is 30 or 40 hours. Removing any direct employer requirement would likely aid global competitiveness. Employers could still choose to offer to pay premiums as a benefit of employment. A payroll deduction can be used to collect the premiums for those with a paycheck, much as Medicare is already collected. The exchanges can still be used to select plans and options and determine what subsidies are available.

[muon2]

I know people that would rather pay the fine than go through the crap that is filing through the site. We can't force people to buy anything. Why should it be required if people don't want it?

Essentially the Supreme Court ruled that you can force someone to buy something.

More accurately they ruled that if you buy certain things you can have your taxes reduced, and they found that the penalty system for the ACA was structured as a tax.

If the structure remains as a tax, I'd rather just see the employer mandate go away and with it classification rules that will be worked around whether it is 30 or 40 hours. Removing any direct employer requirement would likely aid global competitiveness. Employers could still choose to offer to pay premiums as a benefit of employment. A payroll deduction can be used to collect the premiums for those with a paycheck, much as Medicare is already collected. The exchanges can still be used to select plans and options and determine what subsidies are available.

That would cost the government way too much money. Millions of people would see their employers drop their coverage and they would all come over to the marketplace, where most would qualify for a subsidy.

Not necessarily too much money. What I described is similar Sen Wyden's plan for universal coverage from 2007-08. The analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that the financial challenges could be addressed. The point is that there is little rationale for tying health care to an employer, and doing so is inconsistent with most of the industrialized world.