Wrong Direction Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 So here I am, still uncovered, still unregistered, and an attempt was made on my identity through it. Yay. ~Bang I don't love this law, but if coverage is available and affordable to you, you should get it. Remember that the enrollment deadline was for coverage effective January 1. If you miss that deadline, you should still enroll. Your coverage would be effective February 1. If you miss that deadline, you should still enroll. Your coverage would be effective March 1. I don't remember when this open enrollment officially ends, but you have at least until February 15. Next, give up on the damn website. Identify the plan you want and call them directly to enroll. That's probably the easiest way to do things. Either way, don't give up on getting yourself covered just because a bunch of feds can't make computers work. You basically described what Obamacare does. I think you're missing the distinction between what the ACA does and a much easier way to do the same thing (direct subsidies) w/o taking over the market and creating a ton of mandates. To KAO...R's have supported things like block grants for chronically ill people for years. Medicaid was an R idea, though it needs major reform. They do support care for the needy...just without taking over the whole healthcare system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 (edited) You basically described what Obamacare does. No Obamacare now regulates what type of insurance people can have, requires stuff like birth control, sets up exchanges etc. Under my scenario, it's a lot less costly and you wouldn't have people getting policies cancelled. Edited December 31, 2013 by chipwhich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Obama could have made this a whole lot simpler. Pass a law to remove pre existing condition clause and provide subsidies for the poor. There was some pretty competitively priced insurance already available. In your simple scenario - can insurance companies have different premium rates for medicinal history or no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 In your simple scenario - can insurance companies have different premium rates for medicinal history or no? Not sure I understand your question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I don't love this law, but if coverage is available and affordable to you, you should get it. To KAO...R's have supported things like block grants for chronically ill people for years. Medicaid was an R idea, though it needs major reform. They do support care for the needy...just without taking over the whole healthcare system. Well, tell me it's not more reflective of fiscally conservative policy to mandate that the healthy (young people who are not likely to make a lot of claims) underwrite the cost for the rest of us? That's how insurance is supposed to work, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 as to post #1719, if your taxes are paid correctly through the year, you're rewarded with nothing except being a responsible taxpayer. No refund, you only gave up your share, and are not angry that you loaned the fed your money for no interest. No bill, you still only gave up your share. They can't take it from you later if they've had it all along. Keep thinking that Well, tell me it's not more reflective of fiscally conservative policy to mandate that the healthy (young people who are not likely to make a lot of claims) underwrite the cost for the rest of us? That's how insurance is supposed to work, no? They do with Medicaid. You're supposed to have a job your whole life and pay taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 (edited) Not sure I understand your question.You laid out a simple plan that was "Pass a law to remove pre existing condition clause and provide subsidies for the poor. "It didn't make clear on pre-existing conditions if it was: A - Insurance companies cannot exclude pre-existing conditions BUT they can charge different rates depending on your medical history and underwriting. Or B - Insurance companies cannot exclude pre-existing conditions AND rates are the same regardless of medical history. Is your simple plan A or B? Edited January 1, 2014 by Duckus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 (edited) I have had no health insurance for about 20 years. October 1 I went down to our local library where the state of MD had set up sign-up stations, and signed up. My wife also signed up. Same day they call us and tell us that we need one more piece of info from my wife, so we took it back down to them. We were told in a few weeks we'd get a package that would explain our options and we could choose a plan. 3 weeks later they call up and need the same piece of info from my wife that we drove back down to give them. Nothing.. nothing... nothing... 3 weeks ago I get a call on a Sunday morning from someone saying they were from the MD exchange, and they needed my income info, tax returns, etc. IO said they already had it, and she said there must be some error, she just needed a small piece of info, and ifi could just give it to her.. blah blah blah. red flag went up, I said no, i won't just give it to her over the phone. Oh well you can fax it to me, she says, let me give you the number. I said NO, why don't you send me an official letter thru the mail and I'll send it to you then. Click. She's gone. Anyway, i am STILL not registered. i went down the DAY they said do it, and they have YET to get me in the system. We find this out 2 days before the deadline, and of course, the website does not accept the password they give us over our frantic "WTF IS GOING ON" phone call does not work, and after 3 tries the website security kicked in and locked us out. apparently THAT works. So here I am, still uncovered, still unregistered, and an attempt was made on my identity through it. Yay. ~Bang You do know that you don't have to get insurance if you don't want it and there is a method where you don't pay the fine either. The only method for the IRS to collect that particular "fine/tax" is through deducting it from a tax refund, if there is no refund due there is no other way for the IRS to collect or even penalize you. Just maximize your exemptions to ensure you owe at the end of the year and pay the IRS minus the fine what you owe them. Edited January 1, 2014 by nonniey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 B - Insurance companies cannot exclude pre-existing conditions AND rates are the same regardless of medical history. Is your simple plan A or B? B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 And people are blaming Obama for this decision. Uhh, yeah. How is this not a result of Obamacare? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 you can also request a waiver if the premium is (I think) 8% of your income. the owing a fine to the IRS and not paying it would make me nervous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 you can also request a waiver if the premium is (I think) 8% of your income. the owing a fine to the IRS and not paying it would make me nervous. Apparently the limitations on what the IRS can do is specifically written into the ACA. They can only collect through Tax refunds and are prohibited from using any other tools (ie liens, court proceedings etc.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) B Sounds perfect. No pre-existing conditions exclusions and no outrageous rates for the sick. But...how does that work again? The mandate was created specifically for this reason. It provides new customers (healthy and/or young people) for insurance companies to off-set the costs of covering pre-existing conditions and reasonable rates for the sick. How do you propose selling your plan to insurance companies? The math doesn't work. Edited January 2, 2014 by Duckus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) Sounds perfect. No pre-existing conditions exclusions and no outrageous rates for the sick. But...how does that work again? The mandate was created specifically for this reason. It provides new customers (healthy and/or young people) for insurance companies to off-set the costs of covering pre-existing conditions and reasonable rates for the sick. How do you propose selling your plan to insurance companies? The math doesn't work. You are arguing my point lol. How do the exchanges improve this? The math doesn't work. My point is Obama could have saved a lot of money doing it my way when the math just doesn't work. His way we have to pay for birth control even if we are 60 LOL. Edited January 2, 2014 by chipwhich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Apparently the limitations on what the IRS can do is specifically written into the ACA. They can only collect through Tax refunds and are prohibited from using any other tools (ie liens, court proceedings etc.). how long till that is interpreted differently or changed? pretty sure it wasn't a tax till it became one somehow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 His way we have to pay for birth control even if we are 60 LOL. How much do you figure the birth control mandate adds to the price of the policy for a 60 year old? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 How much do you figure the birth control mandate adds to the price of the policy for a 60 year old? are we including court costs for the SCOTUS hearings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) You are arguing my point lol. How do the exchanges improve this? The math doesn't work. My point is Obama could have saved a lot of money doing it my way when the math just doesn't work. His way we have to pay for birth control even if we are 60 LOL. I am lost. Does "your way" include an individual mandate? All you said was your way would have been no pre-existing condition exclusions, no premium rates based on medical history, and expansion of Medicaid. All wonderful, wonderful things that I 100% support. But you can't just do those alone. Without an individual mandate you are basically giving the "FREE CANDY MACHINE!" 5th grade class president speech. How got to give me a little bit more - how do you pull off those enormous changes without a mandate system? Edited January 2, 2014 by Duckus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 How much do you figure the birth control mandate adds to the price of the policy for a 60 year old? Considering it has to be added to EVERY health plan sold, a lot of $$$$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) Considering it has to be added to EVERY health plan sold, a lot of $$$$. How much, you figure, birth control costs add to the price of the average policy, for every 60 year old? I mean, it is the example you chose to post, to illustrate how much Obamacare is driving up the price of insurance, and all. But, if you'd really rather move your own goalposts to discussing how much the total cost of birth control for all 60 year olds, adds to the total cost of insurance for all 60 year olds, please, feel free to give us your estimate for that number, instead. Edited January 2, 2014 by Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I am lost. Does "your way" include an individual mandate? All you said was your way would have been no pre-existing condition exclusions, no premium rates based on medical history, and ex pansion of Medicaid. All wonderful, wonderful things that I 100% support. But you can't just do those alone. Without an individual mandate you are basically giving the "FREE CANDY MACHINE!" 5th grade class president speech. How got to give me a little bit more - how do you pull off those enormous changes without a mandate system? ay yay yay You miss the whole point.... There really is no "mandate" in Obamacare, you can decide to play or not play or be fined. We can throw that mandate in my plan to. Kk? Now we have an individual mandate. You better sign up or else. How much, you figure, birth control costs add to the price of the average policy, for every 60 year old? I mean, it is the example you chose to post, to illustrate how much Obamacare is driving up the price of insurance, and all. But, if you'd really rather move your own goalposts to discussing how much the total cost of birth control for all 60 year olds adds to the total cost of insurance for all 60 year olds, please, feel free to give us your estimate for that number, instead. I don't know the exact dollar figure but I buy insurance for my company every year. What we have currently in private insurance is like a cafeteria plan, you pick the options you need, pick the copays, pick the deductibles and are priced accordingly. Every required item from Obamacare raises the cost of my cafeteria plan. You can try and play semantics with me, but I am right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) I don't know the exact dollar figure but I buy insurance for my company every year. I didn't ask for the exact dollar figure. I asked for your opinion. For the specific example which you chose to throw out. I'll willingly give you my estimate. It's zero. Oh, probably not exactly zero. But it's in the ballpark. Every required item from Obamacare raises the cost of my cafeteria plan. And raises the coverage. By an identical amount. (See, that's why it raises the costs. Because it raises the coverage.) (See, providing coverage that nobody uses, doesn't cost anything. If the law were to mandate, say, that all plans must fully pay for vasectomies for every biological female in America, that wouldn't increase prices any.) Funny, how you constantly mention one, and, near as I can tell, have never once so much as admitted that the other is also true. You can try and play semantics with me, but I am right. Curious how often the word "semantics" comes out, every time I point out the problem with your examples. Usually, right after the second or third attempt to move your own goalposts hasn't worked. Apparently, "semantics" is "asking someone to actually support the things that they've actually said". Terrible, the way some people are, that way. Edited January 2, 2014 by Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) Are we going by the unaffordable to a well off college Fluke kind or the Walmart kind? http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pelosi-fluke-s-3000-contraception-testimony-factual-despite-9-month-birth-control-pills $1,000 a year vs $120 is gonna be some rate variance Edited January 2, 2014 by twa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 And raises the coverage. By an identical amount. ???? You mean by forcing me to buy the birth control option, I get higher coverage meaning I also get birth control with my health care. What????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 ???? You mean by forcing me to buy the birth control option, I get higher coverage meaning I also get birth control with my health care. What????? Still waiting for you to support your claim. I'll be happy to respond to your third set of goalposts, after we deal with the first set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now