On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:44:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 4/10/2016 5:23 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2016-04-10 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> That was the idea, but it did not work out that way. A few people
>>> benefited, many did not. Many low income people are forced to either pay
>>> a premium they cannot afford or pay a penalty for having no insurance.
>>> Varies by state, but if you have no income you are usually covered by
>>> Medicaid.
>>>
>>> The plan was based on incorrect suppositions. They assumed that the
>>> healthy 20 and 30 year olds would sign up, pay premiums, subsidize
>>> others. They found it was cheaper to pay a $400 penalty than to buy
>>> $6000 insurance.
>>>
>>> In another thread I mentioned situations like my son. He needs a knee
>>> operation that under the old plan would have been a $500 copay but is
>>> now $6000. He is paying the same premium, less coverage. Many people
>>> have run into that.
>>
>> That same operation here..... no copay.... no charge.
>>
>
>But at what cost? Aside from Huffington Post no one has said what they
>are actually paying for coverage.

As I said, I would have to keep track of all my taxable expenditures
per year to arrive at that.