No, of course not. The mainstream media is permanently asleep and in the pocket of those would destroy America.
Anyway, I read this today and laughed out loud:
One part of Obamacare that has become newly controversial applies to its taxation of employer-provided health insurance policies that offer extremely valuable benefits. Dubbed the Cadillac tax, this rule doesn’t take effect until 2018, but when it does, the impact could be draconian. <source>
The phrase “…has become newly controversial” is downright hilarious given that the so-called Cadillac Tax was and still is a seek-and-destroy government weapon designed to force employers to eliminate especially good healthcare plans for employees.
Do you need to read that again, Liberals?
Obama intentionally wants to destroy generous plans, and the Cadillac Tax is the way Obamacare does it.
How does it work?
How the Cadillac tax works
The way Obamacare will impose the Cadillac tax is deceptively simple. Under the law, if an individual health-insurance policy costs more than $10,200, the employer has to pay a 40% excise tax for any amount above that $10,200 threshold.
Are there additional adverse consequences, on top of taking away really good plans from working Americans who have benefitted greatly from them? Of course there are (emphasis added)…
Moreover, one big problem with the threshold figures is that they’re the same for people of all ages. That doesn’t match up with the economics of health insurance, where policies for older workers cost far more than policies with identical benefits for younger workers.
As a result, older workers are more likely to trigger the Cadillac tax for their employers over time, giving employers yet another incentive to favor a younger workforce even as more workers approaching retirement age seek to extend their careers.
Sound good? Did you vote for mr. Obama twice? once? You happy with the job the man is doing? You getting ready to get F’ed on your healthcare plan?
But why is the Cadillac Tax described in a news story as “newly” controversial? Hasn’t it always been controversial?
Apparently not, but better late than never.