5:58 pm, April 20, 2014

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 19
       

  • FSA reduction from $5K to $2.5K due to Obamacare
    contrarian
    Looks like they pushed all the pain past the election (good planning huh?). For all those willing to take off their rose colored glassed they'll find lots to hate in Obamacare. I need FSA to go up to $10K and not cut in half. At least with $5K I could work with that. $2.5K barely covers a portion of my expenses. Even Dental insurance is a crock because of all the limitations, which means I've lost another element of control of my healthcare. Doctors love Obamacare because it puts THEM in charge.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • when 'insurance' is not 'insurance'
    utopia27
    @contrarian - i believe you may have the same problem i did for a number of years - attempting to take 'medical insurance' at face value as 'insurance' (ammortization of uncertain expenses over a large pool, thus regularizing and spreading risk). So if you've got on the order of $2.5k of recurring medical expenses that are predictable enough for an FSA, there's not an actual lot of 'risk' there, just known expenses that ought to be budgeted for, and that pre-tax savings helps a lot with. Turns out that's not what current 'medical insurance' is. Turns out current 'medical insurance' should actually be termed, 'medical services contract and retainer'. Financially, you would probably be much better off with a more expensive 'plan' that covers 70-80% of your expenses with a monthly premium that's also tax advantaged. And if you think of it as a 'services contract and retainer', you might also lower your blood pressure.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Dual Feds
    Big Joe
    For us married folks that both work for the fed, the health portion of FSA can be claimed by both. We're going from 10k down to 5k....so I feel your pain!!!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Blame the advocates for the wealthy, the Republicans
    Moderate
    Obama offered your friends, the Republicans, an opportunity to participate in the creation of the law. You could have told them not to touch FSA. You could have told them to raise taxes on the wealthy to cover this cost. Instead they railed against Obamacare and did everything they could to make it not happen. Therefore, you can blame the Republicans for the FSA issue.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • "...lots to hate in Obamacare"?
    FERS Fed
    You mean like health insurers no longer able to arbitrarily deny coverage due to "pre-existing conditions"? Or are you in favor of that? ..... Given the costs of cardiac or cancer care, how many Americans will that keep from going bankrupt? ..... BTW your spouse, if you have one, can also contribute $2,500 to a health care FSA, so you could still have $5K to work with.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • cost benefit
    utopia27
    I don't disagree - but have you ever tried to coordinate two of those things? oy vey. The hassle factor really needs to get computed into the cost/benefit analysis. If the wife and I each spend 2 hrs/mo on additional paperwork, that's 48 hrs (at our respective billable rates...). The benefit of the FSA is at best 28% (top marginal tax rate) of the total (you get tax exemption on the total in the FSA, which saves you the marginal tax rate). So the maximum savings from a second FSA is 2500 * 28% -> $700. Which is probably a worthwhile compensation for 48 hours. But if you only use a third of the FSA, then your savings is only about $200, which may not be a good deal for an extra 48 hours of paperwork. Bonus in Obamacare though - I believe the FSA rolls over year-to-year now, yes?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Rollover FSA?
    Moderate
    Check with FSA administrators on the rollover. It is possible, but I never heard of that. That would need a law change.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • No rollover here!
    contrarian
    Mine is used up by October now. Under Obamacare it will be gone by May. Thanks for nothing!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • See above comments on who to blame
    Moderate
    Blame the Republicans
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • down ballot
    utopia27
    Congressmen in MD and VA live and die by the federal vote. Wolf and Moran will and can be removed from office in short order if they don't support the best interests of the federal workforce. Feds are not a partisan voting block, they are an _issues_ voting block. Romney is trying (without a lot of success) to woo Northern Virginia feds by claiming Obama is seeking massive defense reductions. I think he missed the part about, 'educated, informed, engaged'. Feds within 250 miles of DC understand what sequestration is and how it came about...
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Moran never supported FSA in the first place
    contrarian
    Surprise, there are Reps who vote against our interests! I spend all of my FSA and then some. Utopia doesn't understand benefits of FSA. Pretty soon, like a wise man said, "America's chickens will come home to roost."
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • As to Obamacare
    ben
    My doctor and others I've spoken to have little good to say about Obamacare. He anticipates early retirement or ending his private practice. He does volunteer work at a hospice and expects to see more there when Obamacare really kicks in. Simply setting up a federal exchange based on the federal healthcare would have been much simpler and incorporated the few good things like covering past medical conditions. FSAs are a great way of deferring income from taxes. They rollover into the first three months of the new calendar year, ie, until 31 March of the next year.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • You forgot
    Moderate
    You forgot about the subsidies of the premiums for those who cannot afford to pay for medical insurance. That is the key reason for Obamacare. How many of these people cannot afford to pay for medical insurance due to the Bush and the Republicans' Depression? You also forgot about the increase in age from 22 to 26 for children. How many of these people cannot get decent (not spectacular) jobs due to the Bush and the Republicans Depression? You forgot to mention the requirement that certain size businesses, starting in 2014, must cover their employees with a medical insurance plan (or pay a penalty). You forgot to mention that people must have medical insurance or pay a fine. This is necessary so that if they have a major cost illness or accident the medical industry does not have to cure them for the stinking medicaid reimbursement which does not cover costs. And how many of my cited people have FSA's?
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • No, I didn't!
    ben
    An analysis of the uninsured revealed over half were young and could afford insurance, but decided not to ensure until later in life. An increase in age for children could be easily covered in the proposed federal exchange. Businesses are reorganizing workers from fulltime to part time and outsourcing departments such as personnel and payroll to downsize. Many will simply go out of business. Obamacare is the progressive use of dynamite to kill a fly. The present downturn was caused by improvident government regulations, private companies response to the regulations and fueled by Fannie/Freddie's insertion of $1 trillion into the housing market. Typically, the response -- Dodd-Frank -- only burdens small to medium banks with new regulations and institutes bailouts to the large banks. And, does nothing to Fannie/Freddie. A Democrat congressman said that was "too hard." As to FSA's, I was answering the question posed on rollovers -- pay attention!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Yes you did
    Moderate
    What analysis? Created by what unbiased entity? Obamacare penalizes the lack of insurance.How would an increase in the age for children be covered by this exchange? The business reorganizing has been going on long before Obamacare. Obamacare covers larger businesses not the mom and pop ones.It must be a huge cloud of flies. 30,000,000 of them I hear. The downturn was helped along mightily be Bush and the Republicans failure to reign in abusive mortgages etc. Republicans had total control from 2001-end of 2006 with few exceptions. Therefore, what the Dems said was totally meaningless. And read what you said. The victims of the Republicans do not have FSA's. Pay attention.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Still Don't Get It!
    ben
    A number of such were made and well publicized. I'd suggest fact checker for a few -http://www.factcheck.org/2009/06/the-real-uninsured. Obviously, as the exchange would be based on the present federal healthcare system age increase would be by act of congress, just as was done for Obamacare. Obamacare covers businesses with 50 or more employees. Hit them with the extra expense and you take away much of their profits.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • You still do not get it.
    Moderate
    You are right. You do not get it. Sending me to the Annenberg Center is not exactly real. And this is before the Bush and the Republicans Depression. Your suggestion of exchanges still requires legislation for the age increase. And it still does not require the employer to cover employees. Even your Annenberg, who was very right of center, raises too many questions. Further, if you do not make them cover their employees, then these people have no health insurance? Guess you want hospitals to finance them based on medicaid. So have them go out of business.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Prediction
    Rob
    A couple of months ago I felt pretty certain Obama would win re-election. Less than 24 hours before the polls open I now believe Romney is going to win and possibly by a bigger margin than the polls suggest. The models are all over the place in terms of sampling methodology. One of them is going to be right. The latest CNN poll showing a tie is using a +11 Dem sample. I don't see how that's possible considering in 2008 the Dems had a +7 turnout. That same CNN poll shows Romney with a +22 lead among independents. If that's the case then Romney is not only going to win, but he'll probably get over 300 electoral votes.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Rob's Rose Covered Glasses
    Moderate
    Your comments are skewed based on your opinion. Statistically, the race is too close to call. See reality and not through Republican colored glasses. I am voting and want Obama to win. However, I read the polls and see it as a toss up. You should to.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }