“Moving on from unfulfilling jobs, thanks to health-care law,” was the gleeful headline* on the story spoon-fed to The Washington Post by Families USA, a pro-Obamacare group that maintains a “database of people who have benefitted” from the law (a pretty easy gig, no doubt).
Polly Lower quit her job and says, “It was wonderful.” She didn’t want the job anymore, because she went from “doing payroll, which she liked, to working on her boss’s schedule, which she loathed.”
Take this job and . . .
Eddie Gonzales-Novoa left a job making $88,000 annually, because he wanted to help a cancer-surviving relative start a website for others battling the disease. Now he makes very little, but has more rewarding employment.
Well, if they can afford not to work or to make less in order to do what they want, good for them!
But, if you pay taxes (anyone?), it might not be so good for you. Under the Affordable Care Act, both Eddie and Polly are getting their health insurance subsidized by the taxpayers.
Gonzalez-Novoa’s job change is easy to sympathize with, but why should “the taxpayers” pay for the bill? Might not they have similar dreams of their own to finance?
Lower not only didn’t like her job, she was better off without one — so she receives even more in Obamacare subsidies. She told the Washington Post that she has “adjusted well” to not working.
Sadly, the Post offered no report on how well the taxpayers are adjusting to continuing to work to pay these new subsidies to others.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
* Print headline was different than online headline.
6 replies on “Startling Subsidy Success”
NO SURPRISE!! Rarely is work performed out of love for doing it. Rather people work for the pay, in order to afford what we need and, once subsistence is reached, for what we want.
The hypothesis must be that the less we want, because it is “provided” by the government or any other, the less we will work, especially with the perverse incentive of more subsidy if there is less “income”.
Has there been no lesson learned from the (failed) War on Poverty?
Planning to scale back work for a couple of years and do more “off the grid”. No sense working just to subsidize the moochers.
It makes me want to vomit anything and everything about the 2008 thru 2016 years will make me sick, unless of course a miracle happens.!
Paul wrote, “Sadly, the Post offered no report on how well the taxpayers are adjusting to continuing to work to pay these new subsidies to others.”
And sadly that says it all.
The Evil Empire is alive and well and is manifest in the person of the pretender to what presently passes for a “presidency.”
I’d be concerned for our beloved fraternal republic’s very survival but that we survived the totalitarian, Nixon, whose unconstitutional arrogation of power to the central government makes a piker of the pretender. And we survived the traitor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, whose fascist expansion of the feral-gummint, whose corruptions of the courts and whose treasons with regard his “Uncle Joe,” sentenced millions of Eastern Europeans and Soviet slaves to deprivation and death and saw to Mao and his Peking predators’ murderous invasions, colonizations, enslavements and mass-murders of hundreds of millions!
CARSON/WEST/2016!
Taking the fruits of workers’ labor out of their mouths, only to be given to those who’ve not labored (plus to pay for a bunch of bureaucrats) is simply immoral.
Conservatives need to start making that argument, rather than bowing to the idea that government can and should be used to steal to benefit individuals’ welfare, rather than the general welfare of citizens in general which is improved by government not stealing from them.
The RINOs who promise to “defend Social Security and Medicare” do so, because they want to use governemnt to steal. They get part of the loot in kickbacks.