Another predictable (and predicted) consequence of Obamacare, part gazillion

Leftists seem to be filled with compassion for all, so they're always touting ways they can give people money and other "free" benefits.  Problem is, someone has to pay for the "free" stuff politicians give away.

Rahm Emanuel (now mayor of Chicago) was Obama's first chief of staff.  Rahm's brother Zeke was an  adviser to Obama for health care.

Historically, most working Americans have gotten their health insurance from their company.  Zeke has predicted that ten years from now less than 20 percent of Americans who now get health insurance this way will still get that benefit.

Moreover, he claims “It's going to actually be better for people. They'll have more choice."

Yeah?  Like those who had individual health insurance plans that Obamacare forced companies to cancel--by the explicit, intentional wording in that "law"?  That kind of "more choice?"

But let's continue:  The reason Zeke and analysts predict most Americans who now get health insurance from their employer won't get it in the future is that the penalty imposed by the "law" for not offering insurance -- $2,000 per worker-- is far less than the cost of providing it ($15,000 per year to insure a family of four). 

Not only will companies save a huge amount of money from the direct difference noted above, dropping health-insurance also relieves companies of a lot of uncertainty, as well as having to employ people to administer the insurance programs in-house.

So employers could pay the law's fine and still come out way ahead.  They could even pay workers a few thousand more to let them buy health care on the government "exchange."

The only losers in all this would be the federal deficit and taxpayers, since a few million workers going onto ObamaCare would almost certainly qualify for subsidies, vastly increasing the cost of the program.

In response Team Obama has warned employers that they won't tolerate employers dropping health insurance.

WHOA!  I don't see any provision in Obammycare that bars companies from paying the $2000 fine that's right there in the "law" and shifting their employees onto the government "exchange."  How can Team Obama prosecute a company that happily pays the statutory fine?

Oh, silly me:  I forgot that in the New U.S., "laws" mean only what Emperor Barack says they mean.  So there ya go.

Of course right after the abomination of a law was passed, independent analysts warned that companies would pay the fine since it would save 'em a ton of money.  So you might well wonder why--if this was such an obvious conclusion--Democrats in congress didn't make the fine a lot higher, like $10,000 per employee per year.  Or else scrub the penalty number and include a provision demanding that companies continue to give their employees heath insurance.

Because if they'd been candid about what was going to happen, companies would tell Democrats "If you pass this piece of shit our company will never give a dime to any Democrat politician again."  And that would have sunk the bill.

Obvious solution:  Pass a law that says X and then the Emperor simply tells his minions to ignore anything that he doesn't like, or to start enforcing things that aren't actually in the law.

And here we are.

Now the percentage of Americans who either own a company or run one is way under one percent, so most of you couldn't care less about the "solution" seized by Team Obama and the Democrats.  Ain't your problem, eh?

Wake. The. Fuck. Up.