jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 1, 2015 18:34:38 GMT -5
Exactly what I've been saying since day one...but leave to a political party made up of lawyers to not understand the meaning of "affordable"
www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/obamacare-is-actually-not-so-affordable-unless-youre-broke/ar-AAf0EKn
Obamacare is actually not so affordable -- unless you're broke
It's time for the Affordable Care Act to join a long list of oxymorons. Why? Because rather like "military intelligence," "cat proof," "government organization," and "simple calculus," the law better known as Obamacare turns out to be an inherent contradiction. For a sizeable part of the population, anyway.
The ACA is just not affordable to a big chunk of those it was most meant to serve: The previously uninsured. In fact, many are worse off than before, according to a new study. That fact could also unravel part of the program's foundation, which could be a problem for healthcare insurers.
"Many of the non-poor formerly uninsured are estimated to be worse off," than without insurance, according to a September-dated working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research titled "The Price of Responsibility: The Impact Of Health Reform On Non-Poor Uninsured."
...The group of people whom the authors highlight are the non-poor, or those ineligible for Medicaid but who maybe eligible for various subsidies for premiums or cost-sharing, depending on their income level. It turns out that the more someone earns the worse off they'll be. (further proof that Dems hurt more than help the middle class)
"At higher income levels, small or zero subsidies and currently modest penalties will not be enough to affect the large welfare losses that the middle class uninsured experience were they to buy coverage," the report says. Those in good health were "consistently worse off from purchasing coverage regardless of the assumptions made," according to estimates calculated by the researchers.
Is this the fault of healthcare insurers like Aetna, United Healthcare, Cigna, or Anthem ? Not really. It's just the way the law is designed. Will it mess up their actuarial calculations? Probably so, because an important demographic of healthy people may simply not buy coverage.
"Most uninsured will lose and, according to our estimates, will prefer to remain uninsured at the current penalty levels for violating the individual mandate," the report continues.
What happens if the healthy don't sign up? Either the insurance companies stand to take a loss because overall claims are larger than the revenue from premiums and subsidies, or they raise premiums, making it even more unlikely that the healthy will sign on. (This is what I've been saying will eventually happen - the more premiums increase, the more people will drop their insurance, until the ACA implodes from its own shitty foundation. It was never meant to help, it was always designed to fail.)
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 1, 2015 18:54:05 GMT -5
yeah, decent coverage is expensive. i pay over $1,000/month for mine.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 1, 2015 18:59:46 GMT -5
Yeah, and I had decent AND affordable coverage before the ACA...then after the ACA my premiums doubled and my deductible nearly tripled. Now it is completely unaffordable...
|
|
Artemis Windsong
Senior Associate
The love in me salutes the love in you. M. Williamson
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:32:12 GMT -5
Posts: 12,318
Today's Mood: Twinkling
Location: Wishing Star
Favorite Drink: Fresh, clean cold bottled water.
|
Post by Artemis Windsong on Oct 1, 2015 19:04:20 GMT -5
My DH has ACA. It paid nearly everything on a recent skin issue. It is affordable because our monthly income is low. There is a lot to be said about being on Medicare with supplements. He pays less than I do. Health care and the freaking insurance companies are running/ruining this country.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,901
|
Post by happyhoix on Oct 2, 2015 14:57:45 GMT -5
I'm confused. I thought Obamacare was supposed to help provide insurance for the POOR and for the WORKING POOR. I thought we all agreed that the NON-POOR ought to pay for their own damn insurance, or work for a company that paid for their insurance.
Is Obamacare supposed to give cheap insurance to non-poor people to? I don't think we can afford that....
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 2, 2015 15:05:23 GMT -5
Yeah, and I had decent AND affordable coverage before the ACA...then after the ACA my premiums doubled and my deductible nearly tripled. Now it is completely unaffordable... weird. my rates went down.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 2, 2015 15:06:17 GMT -5
My DH has ACA. It paid nearly everything on a recent skin issue. It is affordable because our monthly income is low. There is a lot to be said about being on Medicare with supplements. He pays less than I do. Health care and the freaking insurance companies are running/ruining this country. we could fix that. but when this was tried, you know what happened.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,901
|
Post by happyhoix on Oct 2, 2015 15:09:42 GMT -5
Yeah, and I had decent AND affordable coverage before the ACA...then after the ACA my premiums doubled and my deductible nearly tripled. Now it is completely unaffordable... weird. my rates went down. ACA required a certain minimum standard policy that insurance companies had to provide. If you had a bare bones policy that didn't meet the ACA minimum standard, your premium went up.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,510
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 2, 2015 16:49:02 GMT -5
I'm confused. I thought Obamacare was supposed to help provide insurance for the POOR and for the WORKING POOR. I thought we all agreed that the NON-POOR ought to pay for their own damn insurance, or work for a company that paid for their insurance. Is Obamacare supposed to give cheap insurance to non-poor people to? I don't think we can afford that.... I go on Medicare next spring. At the end of May, 2004, I took a buyout from my employer which included receiving a non-reduced full pension and medical benefits. Normally, a worker with my employer has to wait until at least the age of 55 to retire to receive retirement benefits, including medical benefits and pension (reduced pension amount for retiring early and if they meet the time with company requirement). I did not go back to work after I retired in 2004. Because my monthly medical benefits premiums were increasing each and every year beginning in June, 2004, I looked into the ACA last year to see if it would be worth it to drop my employer sponsored medical benefits and pick up something from the ACA. After comparing the medical benefits I was currently receiving though my employer to comparable benefits through the ACA, I found there was only a difference of a dollar or two in monthly premiums. I stayed with my ex-employer's medical benefits program.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 2:47:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2015 16:55:45 GMT -5
Health insurance in General is Not affordable.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 2, 2015 18:43:00 GMT -5
I'm confused. I thought Obamacare was supposed to help provide insurance for the POOR and for the WORKING POOR. I thought we all agreed that the NON-POOR ought to pay for their own damn insurance, or work for a company that paid for their insurance. Is Obamacare supposed to give cheap insurance to non-poor people to? I don't think we can afford that.... What constitutes non-poor in my area is $38k a year. So what you are saying is that someone making $38k a year should easily be able to cover a $250/month premium (at least) and fork over another $6k in deductible? That equates to $9k a year on a $38k GROSS salary (which is closer to $30,000 after the government takes its cut).
$9k of $30k take home pay...this is what the Dems called "affordable" health care.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Oct 2, 2015 19:16:47 GMT -5
I'm confused. I thought Obamacare was supposed to help provide insurance for the POOR and for the WORKING POOR. I thought we all agreed that the NON-POOR ought to pay for their own damn insurance, or work for a company that paid for their insurance. Is Obamacare supposed to give cheap insurance to non-poor people to? I don't think we can afford that.... What constitutes non-poor in my area is $38k a year. So what you are saying is that someone making $38k a year should easily be able to cover a $250/month premium (at least) and fork over another $6k in deductible? That equates to $9k a year on a $38k GROSS salary (which is closer to $30,000 after the government takes its cut).
$9k of $30k take home pay...this is what the Dems called "affordable" health care.
Yet they think nothing of having a $150 cell phone plan. Very few people pay out $9K/year for medical treatment. Hell, I paid out $13K +/year for my medical care (did not include premiums on this, these were just my deductible) on a salary that was about 25% more. It wasn't easy, but I did it. But for the most part, people need healthcare to check their blood pressure, get mammograms, go in for pap smears/colonoscopies, etc. All of this is 'well person' care is paid out with a copay. Very few people wind up with the $750K in medical treatment that I received.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 2, 2015 20:11:03 GMT -5
What constitutes non-poor in my area is $38k a year. So what you are saying is that someone making $38k a year should easily be able to cover a $250/month premium (at least) and fork over another $6k in deductible? That equates to $9k a year on a $38k GROSS salary (which is closer to $30,000 after the government takes its cut).
$9k of $30k take home pay...this is what the Dems called "affordable" health care.
Yet they think nothing of having a $150 cell phone plan. Very few people pay out $9K/year for medical treatment. Hell, I paid out $13K +/year for my medical care (did not include premiums on this, these were just my deductible) on a salary that was about 25% more. It wasn't easy, but I did it. But for the most part, people need healthcare to check their blood pressure, get mammograms, go in for pap smears/colonoscopies, etc. All of this is 'well person' care is paid out with a copay. Very few people wind up with the $750K in medical treatment that I received. i tell this story very often. my uncle was a real welfare hater. when he was in his 80's, he had a quadruple bypass surgery using Medicare. the hospital bill was $360k. he had a stroke shortly afterwards (many speculate that the surgery was a contributing factor) and was confined to a wheelchair, and died two years later. we have the stupidest medical system in the world, imo. poor life choices, poor surgical choices, and poor end of life choices. and it is costing the taxpayers billions.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 2, 2015 22:00:52 GMT -5
What constitutes non-poor in my area is $38k a year. So what you are saying is that someone making $38k a year should easily be able to cover a $250/month premium (at least) and fork over another $6k in deductible? That equates to $9k a year on a $38k GROSS salary (which is closer to $30,000 after the government takes its cut).
$9k of $30k take home pay...this is what the Dems called "affordable" health care.
Yet they think nothing of having a $150 cell phone plan. Very few people pay out $9K/year for medical treatment. Hell, I paid out $13K +/year for my medical care (did not include premiums on this, these were just my deductible) on a salary that was about 25% more. It wasn't easy, but I did it. But for the most part, people need healthcare to check their blood pressure, get mammograms, go in for pap smears/colonoscopies, etc. All of this is 'well person' care is paid out with a copay. Very few people wind up with the $750K in medical treatment that I received. They may very well think a lot of having a $150/month cell phone bill. What if they can't afford that $150 cell phone bill? Where would you expect them to come up with the $150 plus another $100 per month for the insurance bill? Not everyone carries around an iphone with unlimited text and whatever the hell else comes with that thing (although it can seem like everyone has one).
And checkups may be covered, but what if during that checkup the doctor orders a blood test and an x-ray (pretty common)? A person might be a little ticked off to find out their "free" check up ends up costing them $400 for the lab work and $100 for the x-ray.
I'm all for people being personally responsible for themselves. But when the government increases the cost of insurance three-fold, gives tax credits to help the poor so they can afford this bloated insurance, and then forces everyone else to pay full price, that is pure bullshit. Either everyone gets an affordable (subsidized) price, or make everyone pay full price...maybe if the poor were forced to pay the full amount, the jerkoff Dems would have worked on making healthcare more affordable for everyone? Because they've proven they don't give too shits about the middle class with this asinine Obamacare piece of shit legislation.
The party of the middle class my f'ing ass...
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 2, 2015 22:03:45 GMT -5
Yet they think nothing of having a $150 cell phone plan. Very few people pay out $9K/year for medical treatment. Hell, I paid out $13K +/year for my medical care (did not include premiums on this, these were just my deductible) on a salary that was about 25% more. It wasn't easy, but I did it. But for the most part, people need healthcare to check their blood pressure, get mammograms, go in for pap smears/colonoscopies, etc. All of this is 'well person' care is paid out with a copay. Very few people wind up with the $750K in medical treatment that I received. i tell this story very often. my uncle was a real welfare hater. when he was in his 80's, he had a quadruple bypass surgery using Medicare. the hospital bill was $360k. he had a stroke shortly afterwards (many speculate that the surgery was a contributing factor) and was confined to a wheelchair, and died two years later. we have the stupidest medical system in the world, imo. poor life choices, poor surgical choices, and poor end of life choices. and it is costing the taxpayers billions. Well fine, then just drop Medicare...all problems solved. You get old, you get sick, you die. Billions of dollars saved.
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Oct 2, 2015 23:24:26 GMT -5
Yet they think nothing of having a $150 cell phone plan. Very few people pay out $9K/year for medical treatment. Hell, I paid out $13K +/year for my medical care (did not include premiums on this, these were just my deductible) on a salary that was about 25% more. It wasn't easy, but I did it. But for the most part, people need healthcare to check their blood pressure, get mammograms, go in for pap smears/colonoscopies, etc. All of this is 'well person' care is paid out with a copay. Very few people wind up with the $750K in medical treatment that I received. They may very well think a lot of having a $150/month cell phone bill. What if they can't afford that $150 cell phone bill? Where would you expect them to come up with the $150 plus another $100 per month for the insurance bill? Not everyone carries around an iphone with unlimited text and whatever the hell else comes with that thing (although it can seem like everyone has one).
And checkups may be covered, but what if during that checkup the doctor orders a blood test and an x-ray (pretty common)? A person might be a little ticked off to find out their "free" check up ends up costing them $400 for the lab work and $100 for the x-ray.
I'm all for people being personally responsible for themselves. But when the government increases the cost of insurance three-fold, gives tax credits to help the poor so they can afford this bloated insurance, and then forces everyone else to pay full price, that is pure bullshit. Either everyone gets an affordable (subsidized) price, or make everyone pay full price...maybe if the poor were forced to pay the full amount, the jerkoff Dems would have worked on making healthcare more affordable for everyone? Because they've proven they don't give too shits about the middle class with this asinine Obamacare piece of shit legislation.
The party of the middle class my f'ing ass...
The government increases the cost of insurance
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Oct 2, 2015 23:40:55 GMT -5
Single payer! Thank you very much! I'll be in town all week!
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Oct 3, 2015 8:10:22 GMT -5
I still think the reason the law was written the way it was with the intention that it would fail. It would make insurance so expensive that people would start to complain that the government needs to intervene, and eventually lead more to a single payer system. They system we had wasn't as bad as some people like to make it out to be (although it definitely has it's problems) and a single-payers system isn't a "free" healthcare system with unlimited access that others try to make it out to be. Some people complain about the insurance companies having limits on care, while seemingly ignoring (or maybe being ok) with the government needing to do the same thing in a single-payer system. I'm not even sure a true single-payer system actually exist (or works because if it did a secondary system wouldn't seem to pop up pretty regularly in those countries with "single-payer"). I'm not opposed to government-sponsored insurance, but I do think the system we had/have could have been tweaked better if people weren't so infatuated with this misguided idea of a single-payer system being either evil or this healthcare utopia (because neither is accurate).
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Oct 3, 2015 8:24:06 GMT -5
The system we had was horrible, no matter what any of us tought! Sure, if you were some fancy chair in the corporate world or you made woodles of money, going to the doctor was not a problem but think about those that are making $25-30K a year and support 2-3 kids and have part time jobs with no benefits whatsoever.
Or God forbid you had a preexisting condition or even worse needed some major surgery. You could've as well say goodbye to anything you ever had. Because hospitals and lawyers would come gunning for it!
Is there a posibility that this ACA was written in such a manner that would ensure a massive complaint? Maybe, but that is proof that people actually started seeing the light on the issue of health care.
It is as they say: it will get worse before it gets better! Some call that life, I call that "public learning curve"
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 3, 2015 8:37:49 GMT -5
They may very well think a lot of having a $150/month cell phone bill. What if they can't afford that $150 cell phone bill? Where would you expect them to come up with the $150 plus another $100 per month for the insurance bill? Not everyone carries around an iphone with unlimited text and whatever the hell else comes with that thing (although it can seem like everyone has one).
And checkups may be covered, but what if during that checkup the doctor orders a blood test and an x-ray (pretty common)? A person might be a little ticked off to find out their "free" check up ends up costing them $400 for the lab work and $100 for the x-ray.
I'm all for people being personally responsible for themselves. But when the government increases the cost of insurance three-fold, gives tax credits to help the poor so they can afford this bloated insurance, and then forces everyone else to pay full price, that is pure bullshit. Either everyone gets an affordable (subsidized) price, or make everyone pay full price...maybe if the poor were forced to pay the full amount, the jerkoff Dems would have worked on making healthcare more affordable for everyone? Because they've proven they don't give too shits about the middle class with this asinine Obamacare piece of shit legislation.
The party of the middle class my f'ing ass...
The government increases the cost of insurance Yes they did...maybe you missed this part of the article:
"Is this the fault of healthcare insurers like Aetna, United Healthcare, Cigna, or Anthem ? Not really. It's just the way the law is designed. "
What caused the rates to increase so much? The law. Who wrote the law? Government.
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Oct 3, 2015 8:39:29 GMT -5
The system we had was horrible, no matter what any of us tought! Sure, if you were some fancy chair in the corporate world or you made woodles of money, going to the doctor was not a problem but think about those that are making $25-30K a year and support 2-3 kids and have part time jobs with no benefits whatsoever. Medicaid and other public subsidies helped families specifically in these types of systems (even before the change). As far as pre-existing conditions...that was one of the issues, along with raising premiums on people that got sick (and some other thing). So not, it wasn't as horrible as some people like to think "no matter what any of us thought!" Or God forbid you had a preexisting condition or even worse needed some major surgery. And when you add in pre-existing conditions being covered, premiums go up for everybody. So nobody should be shocked by them going up and if this is what you wanted, then don't complain about them going up.You could've as well say goodbye to anything you ever had. Because hospitals and lawyers would come gunning for it! There's too much to get into on this one, and that is much too simplified (but yes there were cases of that being an issue).Is there a posibility that this ACA was written in such a manner that would ensure a massive complaint? Maybe, but that is proof that people actually started seeing the light on the issue of health care. It is as they say: it will get worse before it gets better! Some call that life, I call that "public learning curve" Then you haven't been paying attention to public programs because once they start, it's pretty difficult to stop them no matter how bad they are; especially if people have to pay to be eligible to them (it's like a temporary government tax that becomes permanent). Call it what you want, but the bill is a bad bill with some good ideas mixed into it. They could have used the Medicare Supplement program as a guide to offer good consumer protections without adding in all the other issues associated with this particular bill.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 3, 2015 8:43:05 GMT -5
You mean Obamacare is expensive for those who aren't subsidized? My health insurance is not subsidized.
The health insurance my company carries went DOWN after the ACA was passed, for the first and only time ever. This year we had a mild rate increase, but it was only about 3%. I've been told that this was because of increased competition. Thank you Obamacare! *
Regardless, I still pay almost $1,000.00 / mo. for my wife and I. A single employee pays about $400.00/ mo. We have a relatively old age average in our "group". It is expensive. Healthcare is expensive.
* I do think that "Obamacare" was the result of what was possible to do politically to start us on the road to care for all in the USA. It is far from perfect, a first step only. Eventually we will hopefully combine all of our independent systems into one more cost effective system for all- no VA, no Medicare, no PP, no Medicaid. Healthcare. Our premiums here went way up...try 100% up. And what is your deductible on the insurance? The deductibles increased almost 200%.
The cheapest insurance (bronze-type) in our area is $250/month and is going to go up to about $295/month next year. Thats an 18% increase. You can rent a decent (no-frills) apartment in the area for $375-400/month. It won't be long before thecost of insurance greatly overtakes the cost of rent in this area.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 3, 2015 8:46:48 GMT -5
You've had several people here state that insurance rates actually went down or were stabilized for the most part, and that theplans that went up were bare bones policies that did not offer basic coverage. For instance I once had a plan that was useless if you got cancer. Sure, the insurance was cheaper, but would you want it? Yes they went down in HCOL areas but shot WAY up in LCOL areas - you know, areas where people couldn't quite afford to pay what constitutes a second rent/mortgage payment.
And the poor were once again subsidized while the middle class once again got f'ed over.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Oct 3, 2015 8:49:36 GMT -5
Single payer! Thank you very much! I'll be in town all week! Yeah! Medicare for everyone right? The system that currently pisses away $84 BILLION dollars of taxpayer money on waste, fraud, and abuse EVERY YEAR. Let's get more people on that so we can blow 100's of billions of dollars on it! Hurray for government waste! More, more, more waste! YAY!!!
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 3, 2015 8:51:48 GMT -5
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Oct 3, 2015 9:04:22 GMT -5
"Cheap insurance" or lower premiums with high deductible is just a minimal requirement by the new law. In its own is a contradiction. I wouldn't even call that insurance. Before ACA there was something similar that we generally called disaster insurance.
For how much money we as a nation, private and government bundled, spend on staying healthy, we could have universal health care for everybody. Problem is that in such a case we would get rid of Health Insurance carriers, a useless middle man. If one needs to go see a doctor, then one goes to see a doctor after ofcourse setting up an appointment. I lived in places where health care was universal and had no problems nor seen any. By removing the middle man, the risk is that we will remove many jobs, many of them being of high pay. We, as a nation, like dealing with the midle man for some unknown reason. Yet, when we have to pay the dues we start complaining about the price. Remove the midle man and you have lower prices, allow regulation on pharmaceutical companies and their product, etc Health coverage is a much much more complicated issue that high/low premiums and such. It is more related to everyone's mentality of "right to choice" and as much as we hate to admit it, related to "I'm better than this guy next to me because I drive a better car and I make more money. So why do we get to see the sme doctor and he is in front of me? I should be first!"
When we will make our peace with and understand that "all men are created equal!" we will have single payer. In the mean time, as it was already said, ACA lowered our premiums and as far as I'm concerned it is t least a decent if not good approach to health care.
Like any issue of national importance, this was approached like war: sacrifice few for the well being of the many! Who doesn't like it could choose a different path/nation where he/she has advantage because of their beliefs in personal superiority.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Oct 3, 2015 10:06:36 GMT -5
Is there anything in ACA that controls Medical or drug Cost? The more they raise prices the more they make Guaranteed payment by the Insurance Co.
The Insurance Co. are guaranteed a 20% profit.
The more money that goes through the insurance Co, the more they make,
You are now required by law to have insurance,
Do you see a problem here?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 3, 2015 10:32:30 GMT -5
i tell this story very often. my uncle was a real welfare hater. when he was in his 80's, he had a quadruple bypass surgery using Medicare. the hospital bill was $360k. he had a stroke shortly afterwards (many speculate that the surgery was a contributing factor) and was confined to a wheelchair, and died two years later. we have the stupidest medical system in the world, imo. poor life choices, poor surgical choices, and poor end of life choices. and it is costing the taxpayers billions. Well fine, then just drop Medicare...all problems solved. You get old, you get sick, you die. Billions of dollars saved. is that how you see the world? OFF/ON? that must be very relaxing. i don't see it that way.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 3, 2015 10:38:55 GMT -5
The system we had was horrible, no matter what any of us tought! Sure, if you were some fancy chair in the corporate world or you made woodles of money, going to the doctor was not a problem but think about those that are making $25-30K a year and support 2-3 kids and have part time jobs with no benefits whatsoever. Or God forbid you had a preexisting condition or even worse needed some major surgery. You could've as well say goodbye to anything you ever had. Because hospitals and lawyers would come gunning for it! Is there a posibility that this ACA was written in such a manner that would ensure a massive complaint? Maybe, but that is proof that people actually started seeing the light on the issue of health care. It is as they say: it will get worse before it gets better! Some call that life, I call that "public learning curve" think about this. health insurance is about $1,000/month for a small family, without subsidies (either employer or government provided). apartment rents are ALSO about $1,000/month for a small family (except in markets like MINE, where they are twice that). now you have $2,000/month. if you assume that food, transportation, heat, electricity, etc would be AT LEAST $1,000/month, you are now at $3,000/month. that is $36k/year. NET. gross will have to be 10-12% higher to cover taxes. there are 2080 hours in a year. that is $20/hr for a single parent, or $10/hr for a two parent household. what is FMW? we are giving a mixed message to people. we are telling them the shame of being on welfare, but we are not really creating an avenue for EVERY US CITIZEN to stay off it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 3, 2015 10:40:43 GMT -5
You mean Obamacare is expensive for those who aren't subsidized? My health insurance is not subsidized.
The health insurance my company carries went DOWN after the ACA was passed, for the first and only time ever. This year we had a mild rate increase, but it was only about 3%. I've been told that this was because of increased competition. Thank you Obamacare! *
Regardless, I still pay almost $1,000.00 / mo. for my wife and I. A single employee pays about $400.00/ mo. We have a relatively old age average in our "group". It is expensive. Healthcare is expensive.
* I do think that "Obamacare" was the result of what was possible to do politically to start us on the road to care for all in the USA. It is far from perfect, a first step only. Eventually we will hopefully combine all of our independent systems into one more cost effective system for all- no VA, no Medicare, no PP, no Medicaid. Healthcare. Our premiums here went way up...try 100% up. And what is your deductible on the insurance? The deductibles increased almost 200%.
The cheapest insurance (bronze-type) in our area is $250/month and is going to go up to about $295/month next year. Thats an 18% increase. You can rent a decent (no-frills) apartment in the area for $375-400/month. It won't be long before thecost of insurance greatly overtakes the cost of rent in this area.
$250!!!! OMFG!!!!! that is less than 1/4 what i pay!!!!! $400 for an APT ?? that is 1/3 of what they go for here!!!! wow. you are so incredibly lucky bro. i envy you muchly.
|
|