another ACA stupidity coming to light

[sammy the sage]

so offering my best help overtime...which of course is time and half...in past they've jumped on it...now they ARE DECLINING...

Why, you might ask....

Because their insurance premiums will go UP more than the benefits gained from the extra work....

an no...not going to force them to work...just sucks having to hire part time extra UNTRAINED for a demanding season job....

Brilliant...just brilliant the ACA is.... :faint: :rolleyes: :bang:

[mostpost]

so offering my best help overtime...which of course is time and half...in past they've jumped on it...now they ARE DECLINING...

Why, you might ask....

Because their insurance premiums will go UP more than the benefits gained from the extra work....

an no...not going to force them to work...just sucks having to hire part time extra UNTRAINED for a demanding season job....

Brilliant...just brilliant the ACA is.... :faint: :rolleyes: :bang:
Why are you lying to us. Or if I am being kind, I would ask, why are your workers lying to you.

The Kaiser Foundation has a calculator which determines what your subsidy is for various levels of income.
I don't know what your employees are making, but the ratios should be the same. For our purposes let's say they are making $40,000 a year. That would be $19.25 an hour.

According to our calculator a person making $40,000 a year gets a subsidy of $545 a month and pays $161 a month for his premium. Now let's assume that you are asking them to work an additional twenty hours a week for ten weeks-you said it was seasonal. $19.25 time 1.5 equal $28.85 times 200 hours (twenty hours a week times ten weeks) equals $5,770.00 in additional pay. So your employees are now earning $45770.00 per year

The Kaiser calculator tells us that a person earning $45,770.00 a year gets a subsidy of $479 a month and pays $227 a month.

Simply put, all of this means that your workers will be paying an extra $792 per year in health care premiums while earning an extra $5770.00. Even after taking out for taxes and FICA etc. that is a deal I would take every time.

The above figures assume a family of four with two children

[Clocker]

Once again, our in-house expert knows more about what a poster is doing and thinking than that person does. What would we do without him to keep us all straight? :rolleyes:

And if perchance someone actually involved with the situation has some facts wrong, it is because they are lying, not because they misunderstood the 20,000 pages of rules and regulation of ObamaCare.

[tucker6]

Mostie,

Wouldn't your post have been better received if you had started it off by saying that due to the complexity of the ACA, you and your employees may be misinformed on this issue and here is why? Even on the rare occasion like this where you actually bring something to this forum, you screw it up by assaulting the OP. I bet you have no friends.

[sammy the sage]

Mostpost...
The Kaiser Foundation has a calculator....that SO-CALLED calculator is WAY-F-OFF here in Fla...

those figures WOULD BE different in EVERY state...subsidy's ARE different...premiums ARE different...

Employee's figure they're NOT getting TRUE time & half...they're getting taxed at a MIN. of 11% or more EXTRA just for ACA...

guess that PROVES the Supreme's original ruling...was a GIANT tax increase...

as far as me being a liar...rdgaswyt or wgara or gfy or dgaffwyt or wfyb or wefuys....

[boxcar]

as far as me being a liar...rdgaswyt or wgara or gfy or dgaffwyt or wfyb or wefuys....

What language would that be?

[mostpost]

Once again, our in-house expert knows more about what a poster is doing and thinking than that person does. What would we do without him to keep us all straight?
I may not know what a poster is thinking or doing. But I do know how to find the correct information and the correct information tells me that this particular poster is 100% wrong.

And if perchance someone actually involved with the situation has some facts wrong, it is because they are lying, not because they misunderstood the 20,000 pages of rules and regulation of ObamaCare.
You don't have to understand 20,000 pages. You merely have to know their is a calculator to use. Anyone who looked into the situation would know that what sammy the sage was telling us was wrong.

Mostie,

Wouldn't your post have been better received if you had started it off by saying that due to the complexity of the ACA, you and your employees may be misinformed on this issue and here is why? Even on the rare occasion like this where you actually bring something to this forum, you screw it up by assaulting the OP. I bet you have no friends.
You would lose that bet. I have many friends, none of whom lie to me.

Yes, I could have phrased my answer as you suggest, but then I would not be saying what I believe. Which is that Sammy the Sage is more interested in putting down Obamacare than in the truth.

[mostpost]

Mostpost...
The Kaiser Foundation has a calculator....that SO-CALLED calculator is WAY-F-OFF here in Fla...

those figures WOULD BE different in EVERY state...subsidy's ARE different...premiums ARE different...

Employee's figure they're NOT getting TRUE time & half...they're getting taxed at a MIN. of 11% or more EXTRA just for ACA...

guess that PROVES the Supreme's original ruling...was a GIANT tax increase...

as far as me being a liar...rdgaswyt or wgara or gfy or dgaffwyt or wfyb or wefuys....
I originally used the calculator for the US as a whole, but upon reading your complaint I went back and redid my calculations using Florida. Since you live in central Florida I used an Ocala zip code. Identical results. In my original post I acknowledge that income taxes and FICA and medicare will reduce take home pay. Even with that, the extra money earned far outstrips any increase in premiums.

The Supremes said that the penalty for not having insurance is a tax. Your employees have insurance, therefore they will not be paying that penalty, or tax if you prefer. There are taxes and penalties which fund Obamacare. Income tax is not one of them.

As for your last comment. "Klaatu barada Niktu."

[mostpost]

Even if the income of Sammy the Sage's employees doubled from $40,000 to $80,000 a year; the out of pocket cost of their premiums would only increase by $5,716 a year (or 14% of the salary increase).

[Clocker]

What language would that be?

Fookyounese.

[Clocker]

Yes, I could have phrased my answer as you suggest, but then I would not be saying what I believe. Which is that Sammy the Sage is more interested in putting down Obamacare than in the truth.

Ah, more mind-reading.

How does he do it folks? :D

[reckless]

Why are you lying to us. Or if I am being kind, I would ask, why are your workers lying to you.

The Kaiser Foundation has a calculator which determines what your subsidy is for various levels of income.
I don't know what your employees are making, but the ratios should be the same. For our purposes let's say they are making $40,000 a year. That would be $19.25 an hour.

According to our calculator a person making $40,000 a year gets a subsidy of $545 a month and pays $161 a month for his premium. Now let's assume that you are asking them to work an additional twenty hours a week for ten weeks-you said it was seasonal. $19.25 time 1.5 equal $28.85 times 200 hours (twenty hours a week times ten weeks) equals $5,770.00 in additional pay. So your employees are now earning $45770.00 per year

The Kaiser calculator tells us that a person earning $45,770.00 a year gets a subsidy of $479 a month and pays $227 a month.

Simply put, all of this means that your workers will be paying an extra $792 per year in health care premiums while earning an extra $5770.00. Even after taking out for taxes and FICA etc. that is a deal I would take every time.

The above figures assume a family of four with two children

Once again, our in-house expert knows more about what a poster is doing and thinking than that person does. What would we do without him to keep us all straight? :rolleyes:

And if perchance someone actually involved with the situation has some facts wrong, it is because they are lying, not because they misunderstood the 20,000 pages of rules and regulation of ObamaCare.

Thanks again, Clocker, for trying to explain away our good friend, mostpost.

But, allow me to take a whack at it:

An educated person knows quite well that a tomato is a fruit,
but a smart person knows that you don't put tomatoes in fruit salad.

[classhandicapper]

Employee's figure they're NOT getting TRUE time & half...they're getting taxed at a MIN. of 11% or more EXTRA just for ACA...



This could be a relevant point.

Many people and most businesses do not think in terms of whether they will make money or not. They think in terms of a cost/benefit analysis or return on investment.

So some people might say to themselves, "I am willing to work extra hours for X amount of dollars, but after the increased premium/extra taxes I no longer think it's a good tradeoff to give up time for family, friends, hobbies or whatever for this lower amount".

[HUSKER55]

every employee knows how his paycheck works. If they didn't they would need a union to protect them for a modest fee.

[Dave Schwartz]

According to our calculator a person making $40,000 a year gets a subsidy of $545 a month and pays $161 a month for his premium.

That would not be accurate here in NV. When I looked at the premium choices last November, the base was more than twice that.

A $50k per year earner would be paying around $350 for base coverage, and almost $700 for the best coverage.


(Note: I looked at $50k only.)

[reckless]

Aren't subsidies scheduled to stop this year (or next at the latest)?

What would this 'benefit' mean to those now on ObamaCare, cost wise?

[davew]

Aren't subsidies scheduled to stop this year (or next at the latest)?

What would this 'benefit' mean to those now on ObamaCare, cost wise?


Insurance companies do not like risk -
all rates will go up for everyone - including subsidized people insured

to guarantee the insurance companies profit - but it will be on the new president...

[sammy the sage]

Even if the income of Sammy the Sage's employees doubled from $40,000 to $80,000 a year; the out of pocket cost of their premiums would only increase by $5,716 a year (or 14% of the salary increase).

Wish I could double their pay...that said...

what your SO-CALLED calculations FAIL to take into account...the 25% raise in premiums...whether they get more money OR not...that's JUST staying the same...it's come to THE point working LESS is more...

just LIKE single women POPPING extra babies...but I digress...

Funny you should use the phrase you did...I was told in my high school year book I couldn't SAVE the world...just worry about yourself...have HAD many run-in's here and elsewhere and face-to-face about big picture philosophy & problems....and you know what...I ain't saving the world... :bang: ...but I sure can SEE the problems...

Tell me MP...why doesn't one feed THE wild animals... :rolleyes:

[Tom]

Good rule of thumb - mostie says it, it is wrong.
He is what is called a shill.

[Clocker]

Aren't subsidies scheduled to stop this year (or next at the latest)?

What would this 'benefit' mean to those now on ObamaCare, cost wise?

Not the subsidies to low income policy holders. Those go on forever. The "risk corridors", a program to protect insurance companies from loss if their premiums do not cover their benefit payouts, will expire next year. Some cynical people who didn't drink their Kool Aid refer to this as a bail out program, but the Obama fan boys know that is just political propaganda of the right wingers. :rolleyes:

The ObamaCare deniers on the right also speculate that without the risk corridors, insurance companies will increase rates for 2017 to make sure that they are profitable. Obama fan boys know that is just a dirty right wing trick designed to scare voters in the 2016 election

[mostpost]

Wish I could double their pay...that said...
I never suggested you need to double your employees pay. I was merely pointing out how doing so would effect the subsidies they receive.

what your SO-CALLED calculations FAIL to take into account...the 25% raise in premiums...whether they get more money OR not...that's JUST staying the same...it's come to THE point working LESS is more...
You originally said that it was the potential increase in pay due to the overtime, that was the cause of the premium increase. Now you are saying that there will be a 25% raise in the premiums even if the pay stays the same.

just LIKE single women POPPING extra babies...but I digress...
I will assume you misspoke.

Funny you should use the phrase you did...I was told in my high school year book I couldn't SAVE the world...just worry about yourself...have HAD many run-in's here and elsewhere and face-to-face about big picture philosophy & problems....and you know what...I ain't saving the world... :bang: ...but I sure can SEE the problems...

Tell me MP...why doesn't one feed THE wild animals... :rolleyes:
Not sure what phrase I used. Right, you can't save the world. That does not mean you should only worry about yourself.

We don't feed the wild animals because then they would lose the ability to feed themselves. Two things though. People aren't animals, wild or otherwise. And if wild animals found themselves in a situation where they temporarily could not feed themselves, should we help them or let them die?

[sammy the sage]

Not sure what phrase I used. Right, you can't save the world. That does not mean you should only worry about yourself.

We don't feed the wild animals because then they would lose the ability to feed themselves. Two things though. People aren't animals, wild or otherwise. And if wild animals found themselves in a situation where they temporarily could not feed themselves, should we help them or let them die?

Absolutely positive that I've DONE MORE for other people than MOST posting here...and no ain't gonna post pages of what...it's better left unsaid...

People ARE animals...and behave just like them...when CONDITIONED....PERIOD...oh boy...now MP will get defended from.....wait for it...an un or is it Holy alliance...

that should be another thread or topic all together....

Liars figure and figures lie...and something about "you can keep.....

anyways am done...w/this....common sense has left the building...I might as well leave this thread...

[tucker6]

Absolutely positive that I've DONE MORE for other people than MOST posting here...and no ain't gonna post pages of what...it's better left unsaid...

People ARE animals...and behave just like them...when CONDITIONED....PERIOD...oh boy...now MP will get defended from.....wait for it...an un or is it Holy alliance...

that should be another thread or topic all together....

Liars figure and figures lie...and something about "you can keep.....

anyways am done...w/this....common sense has left the building...I might as well leave this thread...
only one person in this thread is without a good understanding of the human psyche, and he calls people liars. If he only knew how many times when I read his posts I'm going 'WOW' with an eye roll. You are absolutely right in saying that people are animals. To deny that basic fact means all subsequent arguments on built on a crumbling foundation.

[sammy the sage]

now even big corporations having the SAME problems...imagine THAT....

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-06/an-unintended-consequence-of-wal-mart-pay-raise-unhappy-workers?cmpid=yhoo

[mostpost]

now even big corporations having the SAME problems...imagine THAT....

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-06/an-unintended-consequence-of-wal-mart-pay-raise-unhappy-workers?cmpid=yhoo
This thread, which you started, is about your employees refusing to work overtime because doing so would decrease the subsidies they receive for health insurance under the ACA, and end up costing them more than the extra money they would have made. A theory which I proved conclusively wrong-but we won't go into that.

The story you linked above was about people complaining because other people were getting more money. Not the same thing at all.

[classhandicapper]

This thread, which you started, is about your employees refusing to work overtime because doing so would decrease the subsidies they receive for health insurance under the ACA, and end up costing them more than the extra money they would have made. A theory which I proved conclusively wrong-but we won't go into that.



You conveniently ignored an important point.

Making more money is NOT the only input into an employee's thinking

I don't know what you do for a living, but let's say I offered you more hours.

Would you take it?

There is a tradeoff between hours worked and making more money. So it would depend on how much you need the money and how much you value your time. Most people in need would take the hours.

Now suppose making more money is offset by a reduction of other benefits to some degree so that each additional hour worked translates into less dollars per hour than the actual pay. You'd still be making more money overall, but fewer dollars per hour.

The value calculation changes.

If you desperately need the extra money, you might do the extra hours anyway.

If you could use the extra money, but your time is also important to you, you might decide to refuse the overtime.

He's flat out telling you that some of his employees are refusing the OT because there are offsetting costs related to ACA. That's all you need to know. The exact amounts and tradeoffs will be different for different people.