3 ms·
But my point is that they could have achieved most of it without those specific policies. For instance, we now have a situation where instead of working 40 hour
by missedthecue 5y ago
But my point is that they could have achieved most of it without those specific policies. For instance, we now have a situation where instead of working 40 hours per week without health insurance, people in many occupations can only get 29 hours scheduled. So not only did it utterly fail in its goal of getting more people signed up for insurance, but it actively made the lives of those people worse by stunting their earning power unless they try to piece two part jobs into one week with all the chaos that involves.
It's just awful incentive alignment and I see it time and time again in government policies that were developed with good intentions in mind.
- syops 5y agoYou should do some research on the topic. Far more people are insured now than before the ACA.
- missedthecue 5y agoBecause the ACA made it illegal to not have insurance, not because Walmart and McDonalds are now insuring all 3 million of their employees.
- syops 5y agoDo you really think no one got insurance through their employer as a result of the mandate? Certainly there were large numbers of people who had their hours reduced as a result of the employer mandate. There were a lot of policy hacks used to increase the number of insured people. Collectively they worked. The employer mandate was not a panacea as a result of the reduction of hours. However, those people who had their hours reduced weren't getting insurance before ACA anyway.