Obama care is quite a controversial issue. Just like normal issues discussed in every argument, there must be pros and cons and what matters is what has more weight. The affordable care act is the among the most discussed and it’s also very impactful affecting the rich, middle class as well as the poor. Before coming to a conclusion, it’s good that we look in details of the pros and cons of this act.
The act allows young adults of 26 years and below to be under their parents’ plan. Also, a large number of adults will qualify for free or reduced insurance charges which will protect them in an emergency
Despite retaining a free market, the act will also the healthcare system to grow and give better services to everyone.
Large firms with more than 50 full-time employees will enjoy the benefits of being able to provide medical coverage to its workers. This is stated in the employment mandate. Thus employees do not have to seek insurance cover from other organizations (Brill, 2015).
Tax credits are to be given to small organizations with less than 25 full-time employees. This credits will be up to 50% of their employees’ health insurance premium costs.
The Act does not exclude children. Up to 9 million children will be covered under the CHIP system (Turner, 2011).
This act will ensure that many uninsured citizens are able to obtain treatment and care for better health through their employers, the Health insurance marketplace as well as Medicaid expansion. This is quite advantageous to majorly the poor or low-income earners (Marcovici, 2013).
The emphasis of coverage on the young is vague since they are mostly healthy than the old. To add the young already enjoy other benefits under the ACA in terms of medical services and this means that the act is not needed (Marcovici, 2013).
It might be true that this system is to generate profits but Americans have the highest healthcare costs compared to other countries. Thus chances of the profit being achieved are minimal.
The Obamacare has led to the conversion of full-time to a part-time employer with an aim of avoiding to be insurance givers. Similarly, some low-income earners have fully avoided taking insurance cover in the name of being covered by their employers since the other insurance firms are too expensive for them.
The employer-based insurance coverage eliminates cost assistance by the employers to the low wage employees which are disadvantageous and to counter this, the employers will avoid marketplace insurance.
Coverage of children using CHIP system uses Federal and State funding thus depriving states of money to use in other developmental activities (Brill, 2015).
The act will result in increased taxes majorly the middle class and the rich which will provide the funds needed to ensure the huge number of citizens.
From the above points, it’s clear to see that the Act majorly favors middle and the poor. It’s very stringent to businesses and will tend to give them a hard knock and as a result, all this will be passed onto the employees. I can basically say that the act should be done away with since despite there being the above advantages and others not mentioned, in the long run, every citizen will get a pinch especially the huge population of the poor and middle-class earners.
America is self-destructing: Wealth, greed, and ideology trump common cause and social justice. (2013). Place of publication not identified: Authorhouse.
Marcovici, M. (2013). The Obamacare Case: Where will the new Healthcare system lead to ?. Norderstedt: Books on Demand.
Turner, G.-M. (2011). Why Obamacare is wrong for America: How the new health care law drives up costs, puts government in charge of your decisions, and threatens your constitutional rights. New York: Broadside.