How are you going to pay back your education loan when O-Care is visciously destroying your hope of employment?

DON'T sign up for O-Care. Stay on your Parents policy until you are 26 as the ACA Law allows.

Use the saved money that would be wasted in supporting Socialist Mandated Insurance to pay down your College Debt.

Not enough saved, but it would help.

Shoulod Obama aplogize for making America's youth live in their parent's basements?

1

you will have to do like so many others and have several jobs at 30 hours each. Even though he pushed the start date back to 2015 anyone on the books employed as of March 2014 over 30 hours is considered 'full time' and thus either a two thousand fine or insurance.

I misspell somethimes also it gives some something to talk about when against a wall. Stay warm and take care.

Thank GOD I no longer have any. But my cousin in CA is a surgeon and he can NOT make enough to live on, much less pay his student loans. He finished school about 7 or 8 years ago, if memory serves.

I've heard of several cases like that.

.

You can either qualify for staying on your parents' plan for a few more years. OR, if you're unemployed, you'll qualify for a subsidized plan for a greatly reduced price.

How O-Care is reducing possibilities of employment is a myth. My present job situation is completely unaffected by O-Care. In fact, we're expanding.

In spite of GOP rhetoric, the economy is actually improving.

You appear to be someone who rants against something based on lobbyist-funded propaganda without ever having actually read the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or its supplemental Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, a.k.a., the Affordable Care Act (or Obama Care). You also appear to be too young (and undereducated) to remember that employer-based health care coverage was the NORM in the U.S.---and remained so until Reagan's puppeteers (he had Alzheimer's) scripted him to fire PATCO, the Air Traffic Controllers Union, and thus begin an ALL-OUT WAR on the nation's full-time workers (especially those with benefits such as health care and vested retirement plans). This is what began us on a wrong-way path to OUTSOURCING and to part-time jobs here in the U.S. with no health care coverage as the greed-driven CEOs sought to "expand profit margins" at the expense of American workers and the U.S. economy.

The HCERA portion of the Affordable Care Act reduces college debt by allowing college students to now make low-interest DIRECT LOANS through the Department of Education, thus eliminating high-interest banksters as middlemen. Preventive care must now be provided on all policies free of charge (no co-pays or hidden costs), which will benefit employers and insurers over time in more ways than one, not the least of which is a healthier workforce and less turnover. The 80/20 rule benefits both individuals who pay premiums or employers who do, because the insurers must now spend at least 80% of every premium dollar you (the consumers) pay on you, on providing actual medical care for you during the year, or else they have to REFUND THE DIFFERENCE at the end of each year---something the insurance industry's army of lobbyists has spent a lot of $$ trying to overturn (see opensecrets.org and little-sis.org to follow the bribes...er...$$).

The ACA's requirement that all handwritten hospital records now be computerized drastically cuts administrative costs (savings passed on to consumers, including businesses), and also eliminates medical errors or costly duplications of tests or procedures, enabling health care professionals to see more patients or to have more face time with existing ones.

You need to take the time to actually read the law in its entirety before you parrot the lobbyists' talking points and find yourself to be on the wrong side of history.

In your evaluation of the job market as affected by Obamacare, have you considered that 30 to 40 million newly insured individuals will generate the need for more employees at insurance companies to handle the extra work load ... Plus, there will also be a greater need for new hires throughout the entire health care industry ... That includes the pharmaceutical industry, doctors, nurses, PA's, technicians, and manufacturers of medical devices and office equipment and supplies.  And, we won't really know til the dust settles (a couple years from now) whether or not the other types of businesses that you are alluding to will actually see maintaining a reduced level of employment (or opting for the fine and risking the loss of portions of their labor force) to avoid the affects of Obamacare as a positive for their corporations.

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

@ Home School ~ The 100 million number that right-wing media must be throwing out is very highly questionable. To get an idea if I was right in thinking that, I just did a Google search and came up with this ... http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm in which we find "Both the number of unemployed persons, at 10.9 million, and the unemployment rate, at 7.0 percent, declined in November." So, 7% of the labor force is 10.9 million which makes the labor force (employed and unemployed) at around 158 million so that there are about 147 million who are working (many of whom are working for truly small businesses that have not been able to provide health insurance to their employees). So, to expect 100 million of the 147 million employed to lose their insurance would require that nearly every one of the currently insured-working to lose their healthcare ... That's absurd! ... So, the 100 million number is simply hype designed to mislead those on the political right.

       Those who will be losing their insurance plans will basically fall into two groups: i. Those whose policies won't meet the minimum ACA requirements for credible plans ... i.e. junky policies. And, ii. Those whose employers determine they'd rather pay the fine and let their employees go on the open market to purchase insurance for themselves ... In either case, those individuals have the option to go to the Exchanges to replace what has been cancelled (some with subsidies ... some with money from employers who are decent enough to return to their employees that portion of their pay that had been allotted to premium payments).

       The net affect will most likely be similar to raising the minimum wage in that there will be an initial "shock" to the economy that over time will balance itself out and become neutral, because, the ACA, like an increase in the minimum wage, will affect most everyone in the country.

       It remains to be seen if the net affect of the ACA will be "higher premiums, co-pays and deductibles". But, if you are correct in that, incorporating a Public Option into the mix would solve that problem.

       I see that you believe that Obama's goal is to overload the nation with debt as a way to usher in socialism ... Might I offer that there is a distinct difference between socialism and a social program (keeping in mind that Obamacare is NOT government run health care) ... And, are you aware that the national debt was well under control when Reagan took office? The national debt began to rise with the implementation of supply-side economics when Republicans shifted away from being fiscally responsible and toward a borrow and spend mentality ... Do you remember Cheney's "Deficits don't matter. Reagan proved that."?      It's been Republican supply-side policies and Republican control, not Democratic control, that has resulted in the deficits we've seen since 1981 which led our economy into the hole we're digging ourselves out of now. Here's a graph of the national debt as a percentage of GDP that makes that clear. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

And, scroll down to "US Federal Debt Since 1900" at

            http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_debt_c...

            "Federal debt exploded during World War II to over 120 percent of

            GDP, and then began a decline that bottomed out at 32 percent of

            GDP in 1974. Federal debt almost doubled in the 1980s, reaching

            60 percent of GDP in 1990 and peaking at 66 percent of GDP in

            1996, before declining to 56 percent in 2001. Federal debt started

            increasing again in the 2000s, reaching 70 percent of GDP in 2008.

            Then it exploded in the aftermath of the Crash of 2008, reaching

            102 percent of GDP in 2011. "

——————————————————————————————————————

@ Home School ~ It's good to see a reasoned voice on the right ... Need more of them. Can't respond. Answer 2 long. Have a good one!

Obama will allow the working tax payers to pay for the education if the person works for place like ACORN.

Gather up the local rowdy poor people, inspire them with populist demagogue speeches, and then march into the suburbs where we will redistribute the wealth with much force and rap music

Make one wonder if that isn't possibly the point; indebt the country and people as the economy is regulated away from them, basically collapsing the life of the American people.