1. Obamacare costsSmall Business Majority says that that small business owners are more in favor of Obamacare than against it, especially when presented with the actual facts rather than the popular 'spin.'
In contrast, repealing Obamacare would be costly just in financial terms, according to the CBO's letter to John Boehner on the cost of repealing Obamacare:
What Is the Impact of Repealing the ACA on the Federal Budget?
Assuming that H.R. 6079 is enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2013, CBO and JCT estimate that, on balance, the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting that legislation would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period. Specifically, we estimate that H.R. 6079 would reduce direct spending by $890 billion and reduce revenues by $1 trillion between 2013 and 2022, thus adding $109 billion to federal budget deficits over that period.
What Major Components Result in the Net Increase in Deficits?
Deficits would be increased under H.R. 6079 because the net savings from eliminating the insurance coverage provisions would be more than offset by the combination of other spending increases and revenue reductions:
In addition, John Boehner isn't even straight on the true purpose of Obamacare:
"The intent of the president's health care law was to lower costs and to help create jobs. ... Instead, it is making our economy worse, driving up costs and making it harder for small businesses to hire," said House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. He cited a study by a business group that estimated that one of the bill's taxes would cost up to 249,000 jobs, and a different estimate that a second tax would "put as many as 47,100 in jeopardy."
One of President Obama's goal was to make healthcare affordable and accessible to EVERY US citizen by 2014. It accomplishes that, among many other things. It was NOT about creating jobs but is more about things like having and maintaining a HEALTHY work force and making it possible for that pursuit of happiness thing...hard to pursue happiness when you are ill and can't afford decent care.
He also sought to reform the rampant profiteering that has made health care both increasingly expensive and health care insurance coverage decreasingly effective in America. The focus on money rather than health in the health care industry might not be something a lot of people are aware of but it was appalling to me when I worked in the industry. It tragically cost people both money as well as their health, perversely enough...and not just health but often their life.
More and more people are experiencing the good things made possible through Obamacare and coming to realize that all this anti-Obamacare propaganda is just that: propaganda.
(see www.americanprogress.org... )
On A Personal Note...
Personally, I would have been THRILLED to have been made to pay $95 a year for choosing NOT to have insurance back when I first got out of nursing school and started working full time at the local hospital...instead I had no choice...if I did not take the insurance coverage my employer offered, I had to provide some sort of proof that I had coverage through another means, such as my spouse's job. I did not. So I had health insurance I did not want...did not even use but one time and that only served the purpose of meeting the deductible which pretty much covered the whole bill since I got a generous discount from the hospital as any employee...and it cost me around $200 or so every payday, which I resented greatly...I was making the most I'd ever made before at a young age but still I was in no way at ease in a financial sense during those years...and that extra $400 a month would have made a big difference. I don't know if or when the laws have changed on the issue of employer insurance coverage in the 20 years since then, but at that time, I was FORCED to pay for health coverage and it was the norm for everyone working full time.
Obamacare's 'mandate' or 'tax' is FAR MORE fair than what I experienced back then! $95 a year compared to nearly $5,000 is nothing to complain about...especially when I consider that we were not given a choice at the time.
If people were properly educated on what the law says instead of constantly being fed emotionally-inspired spin and capitalist rhetoric skewing the true purpose of the law in the first place, there would be outrage about the idea of repealing it.