IRS breaks law to implement Obamacare

Since the Affordable Care Act was implemented, there have been many “complications” to implementing the law. One of the most recent was the majority of states choosing to not run a state-based health care exchange. On December 18, however, Cato’s Michael Cannon picked out another one:

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act imposes a $2,000-per-worker charge on employers only if one of their employees receives a “premium assistance tax credit,” and the act authorizes those credits only if states create their own exchanges.

If a state opts instead for a federal exchange, as more than 30 states have, the IRS has zero authority to penalize employers there. “As even some health law supporters concede,” Kaiser Health News reports, “the claim that Congress denied to the federal exchanges the power to distribute tax credits and subsidies seems correct as a literal reading of the most relevant provisions.”

Yet the IRS is attempting to issue those tax credits — and penalize employers — where it has no authority to do so. Oklahoma’s attorney general has filed suit to protect its employers from this illegal tax.

The elderly will be the group that gets it in the gonads. The Liar-in-Chief stole $750B from Medicare to finance his Obamacare. Doctors were already refusing to take new Medicare patients before this heist occurred. Now the practice will become the norm for doctors.

Bernanke has also kicked we elderly in the gonads as well. He has destroyed the value of our IRAs and savings accounts by reducing the interest rate to the point that we have to almost pay the bank to hold our money. We saved during our working years so that we could live a decent self-respecting life during our retirement years, but thanks to Bernanke, it appears that we were fools. We should have lived like the grasshoppers instead of the ants. The government punishes ants and rewards grasshoppers. Obamacare continues the tradition.

I could have told you 10 years ago that the elderly were going to get screwed in this country and this is just the begin, Its going to get a lot worse, because the basic economics of retirement is entirely depended upon family & offspring. Two things that Government policy have largely crippled & destroyed over the last 70 years.

Its quite simple so I’ll explain:

Because Your generation had so few children both as individual families and as a whole population your looking at a situation of there being too few working young to support the retiring old. Result is Higher than expected prices and in the case of Government Ponzi schemes like Social security and medicare fewer than required tax dollars to pay them prices.

In both cases your essentially competing for a smaller pool of future (human)resources. A pool that by definition no larger than the number of it your offspring, both collectively and individuality.

Before the advent of Social Security and Medicare this was largely just an individual matter as retirement plans were more or less helping to raise your grand children. In the process in stilling in them time tested values their working parents did not have time to teach. This is why God & nature allow people to live beyond their child rearing age.

With the advent of Social Security and the economic invention of the nuclear family this family practice fell apart and only a generation later (the 1960’s) it became evident that our family couture was falling apart. Call it propagation of error. The children not raced by their grand parnented not only started adopting more and more self-destructive values but were increasingly failing in raising their own families, and the generation that followed was even worse.

This is just the demographic side of what has been happening to America sense FDR.

The economics are even more simple because they merely concern the numbers of working young vs retiring old which have been dropping due to the same growing aforementioned failure in each generation. Resulting in fewer folk to produce the goods & services everyone need in retirement vs the number of people who need it.

The market compensates with higher prices, to ration demands while the Government cuts down resources to pay in an effort to redistribute to those who have been least productive(in children and otherwise) of all. Thus you have the missed window effect where it takes x amount of dollars to support the production of a given good or service and most people have been reduced to y amount of dollars becase the government does not like the fact that a lot of people don’t have x at all.

The result being not only high prices but high unemployment because people can’t provide what is needed for what can be paided.

* Wasn’t it all a lot simpler when your children where your direct source of retirement? It was certantly a lot healthier and just for all involved! *

In summery:

The truth is in nature as in economics your children ARE your retirement! When Washington collectivized the family retirement system with Social Security they not only destroyed the family crashed our demographic growth rate. Historically people understood that their children were their retirement and for that reason they had more than just a few of them.

Social Security allowed American (and everyone else around the world following FDR’s UN mandate) to rely upon the “fruits” of others. This of course like any in any socialist economic model drove people to take the easy rout and produce fewer, figuring the next guy would pick up the slack. Same old socialist production story, except you didn’t realized it applied to children too!

Sorry for that rant, let me try this more concisely:

Retirement is living off the resources produced by future generations.
This means for retirement to work at all people in the future must produce more raw resources than they need to survive.

So lets say on average each person produces a surplus of 30%.

In the original retirement scheme this 30% would go directly to that person’s retired parents, who would in turn provide aid in the raising of their grandchildren, meaning you would have to have at least 3 kids for each parent. (6 children).

How many people have that many kids today? The actual American reproduction rate today is just 2.3 kids per woman. That is just a little over 1/3rd of what is required to support each couple in retirement.

You can only make up the difference by either living on less(as you will be forced to with inflation, and other forms of government thief) or working longer(which you may be unable to).

Now go read my big post if you want to know more about the problem.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.