Obamacare...(new title): GOP DEATH PLAN: Don-Ryan's Express

[chipwhich]

Apparently you haven't followed my posts.  It's been law for 3...COUNT THEM...if you can, 3 years.

Shut up with your silly posts about my serious posts.  Apparently your health record is perfect, and it's been no problem for you to be covered.  Not everyone is you. 

Let's go back to your way...let's see cancer, that sends you over your lifetime limit in less than 8 months.  Been there?  I know people who died because their limit was exhausted.  They COULD HAVE lived to see this day.  I pray that they're blessing my POTUS from above, because he's done what the Rs wanted...an individual mandate.  Look it up. 

 

Obamacare hasn't been servicing the nation for 3 years.

Like I said, call me in a year

 

Once the exchanges get in full swing, and the actual health of the population is known, the rates for people and the participation of the providers will be better known.  You don't have Obamacare.  That starts now.

[zoony]

My quality option costs quite a bit. I'm a 47-year old, almost lifetime smoker. A yeast infection was considered a pre-existing condition. I'm covered now, however not cheaply. Just happy to be covered at all.BTW, went to doc yesterday. $25, was in & out in 20 minutes, blood drawing & all.Love my OBAMACARE.

I actually hope that with obamacare we can start documenting people in society who knowingly put themselves at extreme risk, I.e. smoking

There should be repercussions IMO

[skinsmarydu]

Posted this in another thread. Our experience so far:

We got our bcbs letter yesterday. Our monthly payment (family of 5) is going up 40%. I own my own business, wife is a prn physical therapist. Three kids so we need more then just catastrophic care but not the super gold premium plan. Dont qualify for any subsidies. Not super excited to be paying $4200 more per year.

The person in your family with the most serious conditions need the subsidy...go there for that person(s).  Stick with what you have for others.  BCBS raised me, with only my yearly GYN checkup (just because I turned 40 at the time) by more than $100/month.  Had to drop it and go without for years.  I've been covered for 2 yrs w/hubby's Humana, because pre-existing conditions are no longer punitive.

Working great.  Went to Dr. yesterday...bloodwork included.  $25.  Life is beautiful. 

Just got the call...bloodwork all good.  No extra lab costs.

 

Like I said, LOVE MY OBAMACARE.

Edited October 2, 2013 by skinsmarydu

[Bliz]

Posted this in another thread. Our experience so far:

We got our bcbs letter yesterday. Our monthly payment (family of 5) is going up 40%. I own my own business, wife is a prn physical therapist. Three kids so we need more then just catastrophic care but not the super gold premium plan. Dont qualify for any subsidies. Not super excited to be paying $4200 more per year.

 

Have you gone on the exchange today to see what is available to you now?  I'd be very interested to hear how the rates compare.

Obamacare hasn't been servicing the nation for 3 years.

Like I said, call me in a year

 

Once the exchanges get in full swing, and the actual health of the population is known, the rates for people and the participation of the providers will be better known.  You don't have Obamacare.  That starts now.

 

It's semantics.  Portions of the law have been in effect for 3 years.  Kids up to 26, no co-pays for certain essential services,  etc.  But I'd tend to side with you on this one.  Some carriers are reducing costs for renewals right now in anticipation of competition.  Some aren't. 

 

But it would be smart for everyone to go on the Exchange and see what their options are for coverage/cost.  Can't know unless you check.  Even for people like me covered by an employer.  With my employer contribution there is no way that, on its own, it would be cheaper for me to go on the Exchange.  But I'll look anyway.  Why wouldn't I?  Maybe I can convince my employer to give me $600/month (they're paying $900 currently) as an incentive not to be on their plan, use that money to subsidize a purchase through the Exchange, and come out ahead in the long run.

[skinsmarydu]

Oh, and by the way, don't **** about freedom.  That's who we are, where the states surrounding our beloved team were, my grandparents on both sides were tobacco farmers. 

How do you figure my dad got out of the fields barefoot and into NASA or DOD?  It's called "educating yourself".  I'd encourage it.

[twa]

I actually hope that with obamacare we can start documenting people in society who knowingly put themselves at extreme risk, I.e. smoking

There should be repercussions IMO

you will be happy to know smokers in Texas can be charged 50% more( in addition to the sin taxes on the exchanges.

)

Durn extorting,terrorist hugging hostage takers  one and all.  ....I have half a mind to quit subsidizing all the CHIP kids 

[Elessar78]

Odd

The Times Falsely Claims That Obamacare Cuts N.Y. Health Premiums By 50 Percent

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353639/times-falsely-claims-obamacare-cuts-ny-health-premiums-50-percent-avik-roy

In 2010, average per-person monthly premiums in the New York individual market were not “$1,000 or more,” but $357. Even less expensive plans can be found today on ehealthinsurance.com.

Yes, no one has EVER denied that cheaper plans exist. Can we finally get that out of the way?

 

But who can get these cheaper plans on ehealthinsurance.com? Can a person with a pre-existing condition? Can he even get the bargain bottom price that you are quoting?

 

The answer is no. 

[daveakl]

The person in your family with the most serious conditions need the subsidy...go there for that person(s).  Stick with what you have for others.  BCBS raised me, with only my yearly GYN checkup (just because I turned 40 at the time) by more than $100/month.  Had to drop it and go without for years.  I've been covered for 2 yrs w/hubby's Humana, because pre-existing conditions are no longer punitive.

Working great.  Went to Dr. yesterday...bloodwork included.  $25.  Life is beautiful. 

Just got the call...bloodwork all good.  No extra lab costs.

 

Like I said, LOVE MY OBAMACARE.

 

Not sure I follow what you are talking about.  It's myself (35), wife (37), 5yo, 3yo, 2yo, baby coming in January.

 

Our BCBS is not through work since we both are self employed.  Costs prior to Obamacare were $800ish per month, now they will be $1150 per month for the same plan.  We make to much to qualify for any of the gov't subsidies or tax credits towards health care so we either need to lower our plan (and increase our premium) or suck it up and eliminate $4200 in spending per year.  None of our kids are unhealthy, my wife and I both qualified for the lowest tier on our life insurance (i.e. we are considered to be in above excellent health. lol)

Have you gone on the exchange today to see what is available to you now?  I'd be very interested to hear how the rates compare.

My wife is actually beside me doing that now.  Since she is in the medical field she handles all things associated with health care

[twa]

Elessar.....the answer is yes, they will of course exclude claims related to the condition.

 

with a wife that has had numerous major health issues I am thrilled with pre-existing being covered ..EVENTUALLY(2014 for adults right?)

 

we did not need the baggage of ACA for that though

Edited October 2, 2013 by twa

[Elessar78]

As an employer, I can tell you that I am paying the price for healthcare for my employees.  My healthcare prices went through the roof.

 

Hopefully one day I can just pay my employee the ehealthinsurance.com price and pocket the rest.  May Obamacare will payoff for me somehow.

Why can't you pass the cost onto your customer? 

 

Any part of you feel that the rise in cost wasn't necessarily market-based? A last-ditch effort by insurance companies to extract money out of their customers before the fear and hysteria evaporated? 

[daveakl]

Quick update, the Health Insurance Marketplace says:

 

Health Insurance Marketplace: Please wait

We have a lot of visitors on our site right now and we're working to make your experience here better. Please wait here until we send you to the login page. Thanks for your patience!

[twa]

Quick update, the Health Insurance Marketplace says:

 

Health Insurance Marketplace: Please wait

We have a lot of visitors on our site right now and we're working to make your experience here better. Please wait here until we send you to the login page. Thanks for your patience!

same thing here

[Wrong Direction]

Why can't you pass the cost onto your customer? 

 

Any part of you feel that the rise in cost wasn't necessarily market-based? A last-ditch effort by insurance companies to extract money out of their customers before the fear and hysteria evaporated? 

 

I heard a very different perspective today, one which nobody's really talking about.

 

The coverage under the ACA is projected to cost almost $2 trillion over the next ten years by the CBO.

The Medicare cuts, which most don't think will be enacted in full, total $750 billion.

 

The guy I spoke with said it's really simple...you get low premiums because of huge subsidies. But we don't have money for huge subsidies. The people who will join are those who get the biggest subsidies. The middle class will join at much lesser rates. Once they join, satisfaction won't be high because of the high deductibles. 

 

In the end, the poor people who are heavily subsidized and very sick people will join and stick with the plan. This doesn't bode well for future costs.

 

Ultimately, this bill might fit the "better than nothing" mantra of many, but it will require real changes to be sustainable in a budget environment where most of our spending is already unsustainable. I sure wish we had good, honest brokers on both sides of the political aisle who were willing and eager to make those changes.

[twa]

never fear the death panels will weed out the costly

[TheGoodBits]

never fear the death panels will weed out the costly

Obamacare provides weed too!?!? Sweeeettttt.

[Elessar78]

I heard a very different perspective today, one which nobody's really talking about.

 

The coverage under the ACA is projected to cost almost $2 trillion over the next ten years by the CBO.

The Medicare cuts, which most don't think will be enacted in full, total $750 billion.

 

The guy I spoke with said it's really simple...you get low premiums because of huge subsidies. But we don't have money for huge subsidies. The people who will join are those who get the biggest subsidies. The middle class will join at much lesser rates. Once they join, satisfaction won't be high because of the high deductibles. 

 

In the end, the poor people who are heavily subsidized and very sick people will join and stick with the plan. This doesn't bode well for future costs.

 

Ultimately, this bill might fit the "better than nothing" mantra of many, but it will require real changes to be sustainable in a budget environment where most of our spending is already unsustainable. I sure wish we had good, honest brokers on both sides of the political aisle who were willing and eager to make those changes.

Why would the middle class join if, like most of the middle class, they currently receive health insurance through their employer either at lower rates  than ACA or, rare cases, fully funded by the employer (like mine used to be)?

 

This is an issue of access—those that cannot get access will get access  to medical care. When you cannot get any medical coverage, high deductibles are still more attractive. 

 

I dunno, the more I read about this the more interesting it is because it's like shopping for other types of insurance (car, homeowners)—the higher my deductible the less I pay monthly. Seems like good, free market mechanisms to me (which shouldn't be surprising since the basic tenets of ACA are very similar to The Heritage Foundation's, a conservative think tank, proposal of an individual mandate in the 1990s.)

 

Sure, small business owners have a legit gripe—what business wants to lose even more of their profits to overhead? But it's a democracy and this is what the people want. I have issues with wasteful military spending and on bloated government contractors but it's the way things are in this  country we live in.  

[chipwhich]

I heard a very different perspective today, one which nobody's really talking about.

 

The coverage under the ACA is projected to cost almost $2 trillion over the next ten years by the CBO.

The Medicare cuts, which most don't think will be enacted in full, total $750 billion.

 

The guy I spoke with said it's really simple...you get low premiums because of huge subsidies. But we don't have money for huge subsidies. The people who will join are those who get the biggest subsidies. The middle class will join at much lesser rates. Once they join, satisfaction won't be high because of the high deductibles. 

 

In the end, the poor people who are heavily subsidized and very sick people will join and stick with the plan. This doesn't bode well for future costs.

 

Ultimately, this bill might fit the "better than nothing" mantra of many, but it will require real changes to be sustainable in a budget environment where most of our spending is already unsustainable. I sure wish we had good, honest brokers on both sides of the political aisle who were willing and eager to make those changes.

 

Sounds shockingly like exactly what I have been posting.

 

It's here to stay and I haven't been posting to say shut it down.  More so to let people know what they are getting.  High out of pocket costs with basically catastrophe insurance.  For the people who can't afford the out of pocket costs and the premiums it does nothing but further burden their living expenses.

It's not universal healthcare.

Why would the middle class join if, like most of the middle class, they currently receive health insurance through their employer either at lower rates  than ACA or, rare cases, fully funded by the employer (like mine used to be)?

 

Sure, small business owners have a legit gripe—what business wants to lose even more of their profits to overhead? But it's a democracy and this is what the people want. I have issues with wasteful military spending and on bloated government contractors but it's the way things are in this  country we live in.  

 

Here is a secret for you, employer health insurance isn't cheaper.  It's more expensive but the company subsidizes the cost.

As far as small business owners, what gripe, just drop the employees into the exchange and let them have the lesser insurance.  No fuss no muss.

[Slateman]

Maybe someone can help me, but what are the limitations to plans under the ACA? Like with normal insurance, some doctors won't take it, or to see a specialist you have to be referred by your primary care physician. Does ACA have anything like this?

[Wrong Direction]

Why would the middle class join if, like most of the middle class, they currently receive health insurance through their employer either at lower rates  than ACA or, rare cases, fully funded by the employer (like mine used to be)?

 

This is an issue of access—those that cannot get access will get access  to medical care. When you cannot get any medical coverage, high deductibles are still more attractive. 

 

I dunno, the more I read about this the more interesting it is because it's like shopping for other types of insurance (car, homeowners)—the higher my deductible the less I pay monthly. Seems like good, free market mechanisms to me (which shouldn't be surprising since the basic tenets of ACA are very similar to The Heritage Foundation's, a conservative think tank, proposal of an individual mandate in the 1990s.)

 

Sure, small business owners have a legit gripe—what business wants to lose even more of their profits to overhead? But it's a democracy and this is what the people want. I have issues with wasteful military spending and on bloated government contractors but it's the way things are in this  country we live in.  

 

There's no easy solution to our nation's healthcare problem. I want to be clear on that. You don't attempt to insure 7-30 million people in a revenue neutral environment, and that's our biggest conundrum.

 

1. ObamaCare is a very significant coster. This is not a revenue neutral bill, not even close. 

2. Before the ACA, we were already facing massive deficits.

3. We have to have health reform, but we can't afford to do it wrong.

4. We have to have entitlement reform, but we don't have the political will to change it from what we have now.

 

I really think Republicans are positioning themselves badly right now and it's a shame because I think the opportunity to either get this president to make meaningful improvements or the opportunity to make him look small is there. Either would be better than what they're doing now. Their message is about a broken bill, without acknowledgement of what's broken about the bill and a substantive alternative. 

Maybe someone can help me, but what are the limitations to plans under the ACA? Like with normal insurance, some doctors won't take it, or to see a specialist you have to be referred by your primary care physician. Does ACA have anything like this?

 

Yes. Provider networks are more limited under the ACA than most private insurance. 

[Slateman]

So, in reality, there's no reason for anyone who has private health insurance to switch, unless they're cheap ****s.

 

What are "exchanges?"

[Wrong Direction]

So, in reality, there's no reason for anyone who has private health insurance to switch, unless they're cheap ****s.

 

What are "exchanges?"

 

There's real reason for employers to drop their plans, or families of employees, though. It's could be less costly to simply convert the premium cost to salary and stop running your own plans.

 

Exchanges are simply a place you can go to compare and enroll in plans. To the consumer, they're websites. To the politician, they're legislative constructs with a bunch of rules going into what the consumer sees on a website.

Edited October 2, 2013 by Wrong Direction

[Slateman]

Does a company only have to offer insurance to avoid the 2k penalty or does the employee have to use it?

[chipwhich]

There's no easy solution to our nation's healthcare problem. I want to be clear on that. You don't attempt to insure 7-30 million people in a revenue neutral environment, and that's our biggest conundrum.

 

1. ObamaCare is a very significant coster. This is not a revenue neutral bill, not even close. 

2. Before the ACA, we were already facing massive deficits.

3. We have to have health reform, but we can't afford to do it wrong.

4. We have to have entitlement reform, but we don't have the political will to change it from what we have now.

 

I really think Republicans are positioning themselves badly right now and it's a shame because I think the opportunity to either get this president to make meaningful improvements or the opportunity to make him look small is there. Either would be better than what they're doing now. Their message is about a broken bill, without acknowledgement of what's broken about the bill and a substantive alternative.

 

Excellent post.

[Wrong Direction]

Does a company only have to offer insurance to avoid the 2k penalty or does the employee have to use it?

 

chipwich would be better to answer that, though I'm not exactly sure what you're asking. I suspect a company has to offer insurance of some kind. i don't know of any who go through the cost of offering a product that employees don't use.

 

From the employee's perspective, if they don't use their employer's insurance, it's like giving back salary. They likely wouldn't get salary as a replacement for the insurance the employer subsidized inaurance they're not using.

[chipwhich]

Does a company only have to offer insurance to avoid the 2k penalty or does the employee have to use it?

 

I will admit I haven't studied the details, and it's based on a couple of things like the number of employees, overall company revenue, and profit.

It would be cheaper to drop all employees insurance and simply pay the penalty.