Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Who Will Do The Driving?


For decades, as both children and adults, the Baby Boomers drove our economy:
Almost exactly nine months after World War II ended, “the cry of the baby was heard across the land,” as historian Landon Jones later described the trend. More babies were born in 1946 than ever before: 3.4 million, 20 percent more than in 1945. This was the beginning of the so-called “baby boom.” In 1947, another 3.8 million babies were born; 3.9 million were born in 1952; and more than 4 million were born every year from 1954 until 1964, when the boom finally tapered off. By then, there were 76.4 million “baby boomers” in the United States. They made up almost 40 percent of the nation’s population....
Consider the situation today.

Except for purchasing needs for health care, Boomers are no longer driving the economy.

Their children, for the most part, are out of the house and on their own.

Boomers are no longer buying homes — except for downsizing.

Boomers are no longer buying various luxury purchases in previous amounts.

Furthermore, Boomers, their children, and even many of their grandchildren face the prospect of reduced disposable wealth and reduced disposable income as our nation struggles with the matter of rising health-insurance premiums, energy costs, and taxes.

Disposable income drives our economy.

What happens to various industries when disposable income in significantly reduced?

Less dining out.

Fewer vacations.

Fewer vehicle purchases.

Fewer purchases in general.

So far, ObamaCare impacts most severely the individual market for health insurance:
In the average state, Obamacare will increase underlying premiums by 41 percent.
The various arguments in favor of ObamaCare fly in the face of logic:
Obamacare’s supporters argue that these rate increases aren’t important, because many people will be protected from them by federal subsidies. Those subsidies aren’t free—they’re paid for by taxpayers–and so it is irresponsible for people to argue that subsidies somehow make irrelevant the underlying cost of health insurance.
Right now, I know many people with employer-based insurance, and they are sighing with relief — a false sense of relief and a variant of "First They Came." The reality and one of the elephants in the room: ObamaCare impact will not forever bypass those with employer-based health insurance:
"If you're one of the 80 percent of Americans who is insured or covered through an employer plan or through Medicare or Medicaid, or the Veterans' Administration, there is no change for you except for an increase in benefits that everyone receives as a result of the Affordable Care Act," White House spokesman Jay Carney said Tuesday.

Yet in the years to come, some workers with employer-provided benefits will see their benefits scaled back because of an Obamacare tax. That portion of the law -- known as the "Cadillac tax" -- isn't set to take effect until 2018, but it's already influencing the benefits packages that employers offer.

"Every employer plan since the passage of the health care law has been working to make sure their health care cost trends keep their plans under the 'Cadillac tax,'" Steve Wojcik of the National Business Group on Health, a nonprofit that represents large employers, told CBSNews.com.

[...]

In 2018, the rule will impose a 40 percent excise tax on employee benefits exceeding $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families. In 2013, the average employer-sponsored for individuals cost $5,884 and the average family plan cost $16,351.
In less than five years, our nation will see reduced disposable income across the board!

Who will then be driving the economy?


Additional reading from Jim of Asylum Watch: I Can’t See A Light At The End Of The Tunnel. Worth your time.

12 comments:

  1. I really do think this regime has reached the impeachable stage. Now we Learn that they fudge the unemployment numbers, a fact we had all ready figured out. There is no end to it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's OK, the communists in the White House have a plan.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Those that can make to the top 15% income level will live an incredibly good life, For everyone else, life will be a struggle, at best.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, sir, but hasn't that ALWAYS been the case?

      "In general the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to the other."

      ~ Voltaire (1694-1778)

      Notice, please, Voltaire doesn't tell us WHICH class will be on the receiving end. We know, however, that when "Progressives" are in charge it will be the GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS and BUREAUCRATS who reap the rewards at the expense of "The PEOPLE," naturally.

      How STUPID can we get?

      Just wait and see. It won't be fun, but it's bound to be interesting, if you have the stomach for it.

      Delete
  4. Well, if there is a tax on luxury policies (okay, I know the definition is fluid) then so long as that money is providing insurance for classes lacking it currently then IF (big if) we can hold down costs (it can be done) there will be increased disposable income rather than the money going into equity bubbles.

    It's a win.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Apparently the Edsel is still with us; we call it Obama Care.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Have you yet heard the rumors
    That tell us the Boomers
    Are speeding their way toward a bust?

    Our system has tumors
    That give us ill humors,
    Since no one's in charge we dare trust!


    ~ FreeThinke (11/19/13 - revised)

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective