"Obamacare"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-12-2013, 09:42 PM
RE: "Obamacare"
(23-12-2013 09:23 PM)Alla Wrote:  Obamacare is:
if you like your doctor you can NOT keep your doctor. Period.

Keeping all my Docs. They're all in Aetna's PPO network so no problemo.

(23-12-2013 09:23 PM)Alla Wrote:  Obamacare is Unaffordable Care Act

Best news I've got from an insurance company in years. Premium went up $10/month, health subsidy and deductible went from $2500 to $2000 (and my $2000 is tax exempt), and co-insurance split went from 80-20% to 85-15% split. Tongue

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
24-12-2013, 01:30 PM
RE: "Obamacare"
We picked a PPO silver level plan. It will cost us $383/month without subsidy. The mere fact that I didn't have to go into my personal pre-existing conditions with some underwriter was so incredibly wonderful. $15 copy $30 specialist $50 we visit. $4500 deductible. I think it's very affordable for our needs. I also am able to have health insurance that isn't handled through my employer allowing me to work where I want to rather than who has the best benefit package.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2013, 04:39 PM
RE: "Obamacare"
I know a lot of people who have not been able to get full time employment since the last crash and all work as contractors. They are all self insured and all of them have seen their premiums rise the past couple of months as they have rolled out the Obamacare exchanges. I understand the rates vary state to state but in New Jersey and New York people are seeing increases. And, they are seeing significant increases at that, some in the range of 20%. I was genuinely surprised at that, too. I assumed that forcing people 30 and under into insurance plans who did not previously have them would stablize the market and either hold prices where they were or maybe even reduce them (although that seemed a long shot). But, it's been the opposite.

I think there are a lot of possible explanations as to what is causing the prices to rise (at least where I am). The one I ascribe to is that the new law does not allow the insurance companies to turn anyone around and they don't let them "discriminate" against people for certain things in terms of what rates they charge. Basically, they are taking away the underwriting and risk assessment part of the insurance. The insurance companies, therefore, are probably scared they are taking on a whole bunch of people who are ticking time bombs and the rates are going up on everyone to account for the fact that some of the new people are people they either previously wouldn't have insured or would have charged more money to insure. Now that they have lost the ability to make either of those choices, they are just pushing the risk to everyone.

Over time I think the market will straighten itself out. One of the positives the ACA did was eliminate some of the monopoly protections insurance carries have had since 1948 and pushed real competition into the market. It will take some time, but ultimately I think that will help drive down premiums. Whether or not we can really take cost of the system doing this is a different story. I've seen no reason to believe anything Obama has proposed or the Democrats pushed into law will actually reduce costs.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BnW's post
24-12-2013, 04:55 PM
RE: "Obamacare"
(24-12-2013 04:39 PM)BnW Wrote:  I know a lot of people who have not been able to get full time employment since the last crash and all work as contractors. They are all self insured and all of them have seen their premiums rise the past couple of months as they have rolled out the Obamacare exchanges. I understand the rates vary state to state but in New Jersey and New York people are seeing increases. And, they are seeing significant increases at that, some in the range of 20%. I was genuinely surprised at that, too. I assumed that forcing people 30 and under into insurance plans who did not previously have them would stablize the market and either hold prices where they were or maybe even reduce them (although that seemed a long shot). But, it's been the opposite.

I think there are a lot of possible explanations as to what is causing the prices to rise (at least where I am). The one I ascribe to is that the new law does not allow the insurance companies to turn anyone around and they don't let them "discriminate" against people for certain things in terms of what rates they charge. Basically, they are taking away the underwriting and risk assessment part of the insurance. The insurance companies, therefore, are probably scared they are taking on a whole bunch of people who are ticking time bombs and the rates are going up on everyone to account for the fact that some of the new people are people they either previously wouldn't have insured or would have charged more money to insure. Now that they have lost the ability to make either of those choices, they are just pushing the risk to everyone.

Over time I think the market will straighten itself out. One of the positives the ACA did was eliminate some of the monopoly protections insurance carries have had since 1948 and pushed real competition into the market. It will take some time, but ultimately I think that will help drive down premiums. Whether or not we can really take cost of the system doing this is a different story. I've seen no reason to believe anything Obama has proposed or the Democrats pushed into law will actually reduce costs.

Well reasoned and well stated. Thumbsup

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-12-2013, 01:05 PM
RE: "Obamacare"
(24-12-2013 04:39 PM)BnW Wrote:  I understand the rates vary state to state but in New Jersey and New York people are seeing increases. And, they are seeing significant increases at that, some in the range of 20%. I was genuinely surprised at that, too.

I saw a 50% increase a couple years ago (my share went from $250/month to $375). I assumed it was because the ACA forced Aetna to cover my adult children under 27. It's still a hell of a deal and my adult children have needed and used it for some pricey procedures (25 yo needed a colonoscopy and they found and removed some polyps).

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-12-2013, 01:10 PM (This post was last modified: 25-12-2013 02:16 PM by frankksj.)
RE: "Obamacare"
(24-12-2013 04:39 PM)BnW Wrote:  One of the positives the ACA did was eliminate some of the monopoly protections insurance carries have had since 1948 and pushed real competition into the market.


Can you clarify how Obamacare increased competition and eliminated a monopoly? Before Obamacare, in addition to a handful of insurance companies, you could choose from many cash-only out-of-network facilities, as well as thousands of international medical tourism facilities providing better care for 1/10 the price, employer-funded HSA's, and informal risk pools, as well as non-traditional medicine (homeopathic, etc.), religious shamans, folk remedies, etc. Now, all of those choices are removed and everybody must get their health care ONLY from a handful of Obamacare-approved insurance companies, which for the first time ever collectively have an absolute monopoly. How is that more competition? We already had websites that compared the rates of all the insurance companies.

Also, regarding pre-existing conditions, of course every insurance company would have loved to cover them. Heck, they'd like to cover everything, from haircuts to manicures, since they get a markup on everything that passes through them. The only thing holding them back was that other insurance companies might not offer the same coverage. Say the insurance company wants to cover a monthly $40 haircut for all their policyholders, which with their 25% markup, means a $50 increase in premiums. If you were comparing 2 plans from 2 different companies, and the plans were completely identical, except one cost $550/month and included a $40 haircut, and the other cost $500/month and did not, most would choose the cheaper plan and just pay for the $40 haircut out of pocket. A law that requires EVERY insurance company to cover haircuts, and EVERY person to buy insurance solves that problem for the insurance companies. Same thing with pre-existing conditions. Of course the insurance company would LOVE to take on a cancer patient that's going to need $1 million in care. With their 25% markup, they'll make $250k off that one patient alone. The problem was that if one insurance company covered pre-existing conditions, and the rate was, say, $1000/month, and another insurance company did not, and the rate was $500/month, all the healthy people will go with the latter, and then when the former has only $1 million cancer patients, their premiums will be $1,250,000, and nobody will be able to afford them. Before Obamacare the only thing holding insurance companies back from paying for anything and everything was competition with other insurance companies which did not offer the same coverage. Now that the coverage is regulated and uniform between all insurance companies, the competition is gone.

(24-12-2013 04:39 PM)BnW Wrote:  It will take some time, but ultimately I think that will help drive down premiums.

Why would you think that? If you compared insurance rates nationwide a couple years ago, as I recall the rate in Massachusetts (which had their own Obamacare) was 4.5 the national average, and nearly double the next highest state. Now that the whole country has the same system, why do you think we won't see the same type of increase? I'm predicting over the next 5 years premiums will at least double. And, as the cost of insuring US employees continues to go through the roof driving up the overall cost of employment, I'm sure more and more companies will simply offshore, and we'll see the rate at which jobs are leaving the US pick up pace.

You'll say I'm being paranoid, but remember for years the Obamcare-defenders have predicted rates would go down, while others have warned it will be the opposite. Now that you've conceded we were right in the short-term and the Obamacare-defenders simply misunderstood the effects their law would have, why would you think things will be different in the long term?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2013, 09:02 AM (This post was last modified: 26-12-2013 09:05 AM by BnW.)
RE: "Obamacare"
1. I have no idea what "cash-only out-of-network facilities" are, so can't comment on that. And employer funded HSAs still exist. My employer offers one. The rest of the things you desribed are not real options, including medical tourism. If you have the cash to go elsewhere that is always your option and choice but that does not mean medical tourism is a viable health care option for the country as a whole. It's not. Homeopathy and shamans are not real things, no matter how many people to believe in them. Choosing not to participate in the health care system is not a choice. At some point, everyone is going to need healthcare. If you don't pay in along the way, you end up freeloading when you finally need the care. We have proven already that system is not sustaintable. That was the basis for the Heritage Foundations idea for mandates for coverage, which is what Obamacare is based on. But, to your first point, the only real options that every existed for health care coverage are the same companies that are providing it now. No matter how much you want to bluster about losing your right to use plants to treat appendicities, it doesn't change the fact that insurance companies provided the only real health care option choices.

2. My comment on increasing competition was based on the repeal of the McCarran Ferguson Act (the "Act"). The Act was passed in 1945 and gave anti-trust exemptions to insurance companies provided they were regulated at the state level. What happened was we created 50 individual insurance markets which had the impact of reducing competition and limiting choices to a state by state level. Repealing the Act was the cornerstone of the McCain insurance idea when he ran for POTUS in 2008, the idea being that allowing people from all over the country to buy from whomever they wanted would increase competition and reduce rates. The AFA was supposed to repeal the Act but it originally did not. A law was pushed through the House in 2012 to fix the problem and that is what I was referring to when I said it should increase competition and eliminated the monopolies. However, I just double checked and that repeal was never passed by Congress. So, I do stand corrected on that point. I thought it had gone though by the end of last year but it did not. That means we still don't have the amount of choice we were promised and rates won't come down like they should. Hopefully that gets fixed soon.

3. Your comments on why insurance companies want to cover pre-existing conditions are nonsense. I have no idea what you're even trying to say. You seem to be implying that they get some magic payment of money when they have an outlay, but that is demonstrably false. The ratios of what they must spend are a floor, not a ceiling. They don't automatically get money to cover their mark-up. Pre-existing conditions were always exempted from coverage to prevent people from gaming the system. Insurance is purchased to protect against a future event, not a past or current one. You can't insure against something that did happen, only against what may happen. If they allowed you to purchase insurance for a burst appendix the day after it burst, they would all go bankrupt, not make 25% on that surgery.

Btw, I'm no fan of Obamacare. I think there are things that it does that are positive but in its totality I don't love it. I already said I don't think it's going to do anything to lower costs. If anything, I think it's going to contribute to raising costs (and I can explain why in more detail if anyone gives a rats patootie on my opinion on this). But, unlike you, I don't base my views on pure idealogy. You are throwing out a whole bunch of things that are just ridiculous. Crap like people shouldn't be insured because it encrouages them to go sky diving without a parachute and other such nonsense. You may not be aware of this but you have zero credibility on this topic at this point to probably anyone who is reading your posts. You have long ago passed the point of rational debate and gone over the edge into the Limbaugh zone.

You don't like Obama and his law. We get it. Move on already.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like BnW's post
26-12-2013, 09:11 AM
RE: "Obamacare"
**sigh**

My poor husband has attempted 5 (that's FIVE) times to get us logged in and signed up for Obamacare --- they STILL don't show us ANYwhere on the site... zip nada...

poor man he finally said "Fuck it" after his third customer service rep who managed NOTHING.......

it's retarded - the site doesn't work and customer service reps are lame.


my president broke up with me.
I voted Obama TWICE - FOR public health care --- and now THIS....?????


grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2013, 09:23 AM
RE: "Obamacare"
That sucks, Sabrina. The roll out for the website was ridiculous, even if you're in favor of the ACA the online bit has been a load of bullshit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2013, 09:39 AM
RE: "Obamacare"
(26-12-2013 09:23 AM)Colourcraze Wrote:  That sucks, Sabrina. The roll out for the website was ridiculous, even if you're in favor of the ACA the online bit has been a load of bullshit.

I cannot even imagine how many of *us* (people like my husband and I) there might be. Failed attempts to get signed up Prior to some erroneous deadline is just ridiculous. Absofuckinglutely ridiculous.

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: