AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT

[WebSpinner]

better known as obamacare and the IRS just released info, not sure why them, that the cost would be $4,000 per year per person, not family but person thus a family of four $16,000. not sure how many of us are paying over $1,000 per month currently, know some are but does not look like this is going to be the freebie that some thought. the sad thing is, it is going to cost the govt a lot of money as well, money they do not have. when do we end this crazy stuff?

 

[BillyWayne]

Hopefully in just under 4 years.

 

[MolivaManiac]

That cost is for the 'Bronze' plan too.I bet the government's Bronze plan will be fantastic coverage, right?

This is going to be really, really bad. Open enrollment just over 6 months away.

 

[Eight Legger]

You could argue, though, that a family earning $120,000 a year (the figure used by the IRS) likely already has health insurance of some type (or could afford to get it elsewhere for a lot cheaper than $16,000 a year) and therefore will not be affected. I don't know many families in that salary range with three kids who wouldn't have insurance anyway. Kids are sick a lot, I hear.

But if that family chooses not to get health insurance, the max penalty they'd pay is about $2,800 a year or so, but not until 2016 when the thing is fully phased in. So people have three years to get their stuff figured out.

For those on the low end of the totem pole who might otherwise try to mooch off the system, this forces them to step up and pay their share one way or another so that the whole system is not overburdened by their moochiness. I may have just concocted that word.

To be sure, I'm not in love with the entire thing but I also understand the basic logic behind it. I also understand and respect why a lot of people are opposed to it. If it makes us healthier as a nation in the long-run and provides access to necessary care for all of us ? while making sure that we are all paying our fair share in order to receive it ? then I would call it a success.

I'm willing to cede some of my personal freedom/finances for the betterment of the population at large. Is this the best way to make that happen? I'm not sure. But I think that is the goal.

 

[SFspidur]

Anybody have a link to this info from the IRS? I see some stuff the IRS released about a week ago, but it seems different from what you guys were talking about.

 

[MolivaManiac]

It's in page 56 and again page 60 of this 73 page document on the matter.

This post was edited on 2/8 3:56 PM by MolivaManiac

"Affordable" Health Care

 

[SFspidur]

So I'm not seeing what you guys are talking about with bronze level plans costing $4000 per year. Those sections are talking about how you can be exempted from having to carry coverage or pay a penalty...so they're giving examples of people for whom for whatever reason they're premiums would be extremely high. And they're exempt from the requirements.

Or am I missing something?

 

[MolivaManiac]

"Example 3. Family without minimum essential coverage.
"(i) In 2016, Taxpayers H and J are married and file a joint return. H and J have three children: K, age 21, L, age 15, and M, age 10. No member of the family has minimum essential coverage for any month in 2016. H and J's household income is $120,000. H and J's applicable filing threshold is $24,000. The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000.

 

[SFspidur]

Thanks. So it's just a hypothetical example, but still, it's pretty close to reality. The average premium for a family is already over $15K, and this is looking at 2016 when everything is fully implemented.

 

[WebSpinner]

i would define "fully implemented" to be when the insurance companies fold up their tents and there is only one option, that is the objective here.

 

[SFspidur]

Ideally, yes.

 

[WebSpinner]

ideally for some but not all. the freedoms one will lose with the govt controlling this is quite scary but we are on course for it and for those who desire it, congratulations. would love to be just left out of it but not an option.

 

[WebSpinner]

this morning on the local news they were discussing the new AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT and for some reason used a 40 year old man living in richmond, VA, as an example and his cost is going to be 3X higher than it was before and forced on top of that. a free country no more.

 

[SFspidur]

Still too early to tell how it will all shake out. Some insurers have been proposing big jumps in individual premiums. But California announced their entire suite of premiums for next year and the companies came in way lower than was projected by the CBO.

 

[CarolinaSpider]

Spinner, I just had my Inclusive State Pre-existing condition plan be discontinued in NC and got a letter second week of June saying I would have to go on the Federal Govt plan starting July 1st which includes higher deductibles, greater co-pays, poorer coverage and a 35% increase in premiums or about $6900 a year for an individual. To top it off the plan has no providers signed up in NC and you must create them yourself.

Our govt at its best! Ain't it a peach!

 

[Eight Legger]

I haven't spent enough time analyzing this thing to say I love it, hate it or am indifferent about it, but it's not the first time we are required to do something that we might not choose to do on our own. I can't drive a car without buying insurance or paying a no-insurance penalty.

Imagine the outrage if all these years we'd been able to drive without any insurance and then all of sudden, every state enacted insurance laws. People would be livid about all the extra money they had to pay all of a sudden.

Of course the counter-argument is that you don't HAVE to own a car if you don't want to, but I think the comparison still is applicable to most people. To some extent, government always will be in the business of trying to protect us from ourselves and each other.

Now, whether this is the best and most effective way to do that in the case of health care certainly remains to be seen. There are many valid questions and concerns about it.

 

[MolivaManiac]

SF, not sure what the CBO is looking at in California but Aetna and now United Health have now pulled out of California individual market and individuallt purchased policies are projected to increase over 100% versus this year.

 

[CarolinaSpider]

Having worked in healthcare for over 30 years our system definitely needed addressing, not sure it needed an overhaul. What this all amounts to if you need medical care, you are going to pay more. The key is "Affordable Healthcare". How does the govt decide what is affordable? By creating higher deductibles, greater co-pays and less coverage, you may be creating sicker patients as folks avoid procedures, medications, monitoring, etc... Due to lack of funds. So insurers are spreading costs among all customers regardless of health status. Now question is how long will the govt wait before controlling how much an insurer can charge? I believe a Mell of a Hess has been created.

 

[Eight Legger]

I think you said the key words Carolina: the current system is a joke too. I'm sort of resigned to the fact that no matter we have, we'll get screwed one way or another.

Case in point for me: I had a physical earlier this year and routine EKG as part of it. My insurance (Cigna) paid for it because it was part of the physical. My doctor billed the insurance company $90 for the EKG. Two weeks later I had an unexpected hospital visit during which I had another EKG done (literally the same exact type of EKG machine, too). This time when I saw the bill, the hospital had billed my insurance company $900 for that test. Insurance paid about $90 and left me to pay the rest. How can the same test cost $90 one day and $900 two weeks later?

 

[urfan1]

we have been through other market collapses (financial, real estate) in recent history. I believe if the health care industry doesn't find a way to get costs firmly under control in the near future it too will face an implosion

 

[CarolinaSpider]

Maybe what we need is a three tier or choice system. Modified Universal Healthcare system 80% funded by Govt based on need basis and pre existing conditions, major medical plans for higher income recipients who can afford and not heavily regulated and a blended major medical/catastrophic plans for businesses and individuals that is more affordable but is monitored for rate control by state and federal agencies. Eight Legger your EKG is the result of hospitals being allowed to charge more for a procedure then an outside entity. Now ironically that EKG machine cost the hospital possibly less then your physician cause of their buying group.

That $900 EKG charge could have been a non contracted charge with Cigna and they paid only up to the allowed charge like in physcians office. Anyone today who goes to a hospital for any reason should always be asking for an itemized bill. Many charges are for things and care you never received. Lastly, you never know how good your insurance is, till you have to use it.

 

[WebSpinner]

there are those, led by ted kennedy,. who have attempted to push through natiionalized (socialized) medicine for decades, just what they want and think is "fair". we have the best healthcare in the world, don't let others fool you otherwise and the entire prob all along has been how to pay for it. millions have no coverage and the majority are young folks who choose not to spend their money on premiums but even they can obtain treatment, as can the poor and others. everyone can get treatment, it is just that not everyone participates in insurance. the CBO is now saying that under the new bill, millions will still be without insurance, the price tag has doubled and will not stop but now we are forced to take it, face tax/fine if we do not and the most inefficient entity known to man, will be in charge of it. this is not a solution but something that is going to exacerbate the problem. we needed reform not take over but heck the govt grows every day and we have to pay for it, not the way it should work but don't think we can change it at this point. the states regulate auto insurance, not the feds, still govt, but they let insurance companies handle it because they do a better job than they can. believe you can still go uninsured but not positive but we all pay unisured motorist charges in out bills to cover accidents caused by those who do not carry it. not really a good comparison but what the dems and the prez used, along with Eight, to make it seem better to have this thing forced down our throats without even reconciliation and a final vote. just think irs, doj, dmv, doe, defense overspending, any dept in govt and realize this will be just a sick deal for all of us but some people will think it is just so great until they realize what has just happened to them. amazing how many uninformed people we have in this country and they can vote

.

 

[Eight Legger]

Originally posted by WebSpinner:
amazing how many uninformed people we have in this country

Why ? because they disagree with you?

Come on now. You can make a lot of good points without going there. This is the problem with most political discussions these days. They all turn into "If you don't agree with me, you're an idiot." For the record, I don't necessarily disagree with much of what you have theorized, and I wasn't making an "argument" about auto insurance ? I was just using it as a point of comparison because I think it is a valid one to show that we are already "forced" to pay for insurance.

I view this whole healthcare debate as being similar to the trickle-down economics debate. You can argue it from either side and make relevant points. Both policies are good for some and not necessarily as good for others.

I don't think anyone will know the overall effect of this thing until it is fully implemented. Maybe it will be a huge disaster of epic proportions, or maybe it will accomplish many of its goals. I may not agree with all or even most of its points, but I certainly don't think it was intentionally created to screw the entire nation and send us all deeper into debt. Does anyone really believe that was the goal here?

 

[WebSpinner]

like most social legislation, would submit that they always say it is about fairness, and the way it should be but mainly about the govt taking over more control and making itself bigger when it should be getting smaller. that is the battle that is going on right now, uncontrolled govt vs smaller govt. that is the bottom line, this is not about better or more efficient healthcare, it is about govt growing bigger and having more control. the program cost has already doubled, it is not going to be more affordable, will be more expensive, there will still be millions uninsured, these were the two main reasons for the bill, or so "they" said. one can look at so many things the govt has done, all the while saying, it is about making us feel good about ourselves whether the program actually works or not, it make us feel good. hope there are many others who do not feel like i do and feel they have every right to vote as do uninformed voters who are a different type completely. we now have more people living off the govt, depending on the govt and they are going to vote one way and one way only even if they have no idea of finances, economics, etc. they just want "their's", period, the prob is "their's" is someone else's money, not their's. govt is so inefficient, so bloated, look at anything that is going on right now in washington with privacy (phone calls, emails), the irs, huge military overspends ($1000 hammers, $10,000 toilets) the justice, state, and why would common sense people, not liberals or conservatives but all the others, want another huge, inefficient bureaucracy to be in charge of such a private, personal deal in their lives? this is just common sense but we are so polarized right now that people, who once were grounded, are voting for things they never would have in the past, because of this divide, and it is going to be a huge prob in the future, rationed care, inability to pay for it both the individual and the govt (see social security, medicare which are broke). why when we are already spending a TRILLION more than we are taking in each year, add this to an out of contol debt? this is common sense? no other deal, a business, a church, an individual or family, could be run in this manner, none, yet we continue to vote for those who want to keep it going down this road. where is common sense, reality?

This post was edited on 7/3 12:16 PM by WebSpinner

This post was edited on 7/3 3:09 PM by WebSpinner

 

[CarolinaSpider]

All of this is a vicous cycle as most healthcare products are made over seas ( anything plastic disposable comes from China) to cut cost. But what does that result in: closed plants and unemployment. The hospital pays less for product but their list price the same for the insurer while cutting staff and hours back so they do not have to pay FT benefits. The consumer is treated like a piece on tne assembly line cause the physician must see so many patients a day. One of the top reasons for bankruptcy today, is burden of medical debt. If we have the best system in the world then why are we penalized for using it?

 

[WebSpinner]

Carolina, there are few good solutions to making it affordable but do know the govt taking over is not one of them and is probably last in line as to a viable solution. it will now get worse, a lot worse.

 

[Stork3]

Great discussion on a topic that certainly will not go away anytime soon.

IMHO, ObamaCare will be difficult to run, and to measure accurately. It will piss off the general public, especially the disabled and the elderly. After two or three years, someone out there is going to promise the moon if we can just "transition" to socialized medicine. If you need any work done on your body now, get it done as soon as is practical. All socialized medicine systems have loooonnnnnngggggg waiting times for procedures like hip replacements, heart bypass surgery, etc.

Try to remain upbeat, fellow Spiders. 95% of American citizens at any one moment are healthy. All the mess will happen with the 5% who are sick. Let's all stick together and provide info to help each other out, if it is possible. Obamacare will fail miserably, the population will revolt, and the next president will morph it into socialized health care delivery. My best advice? See your doctor regularly, do everything he says, stay healthy, stay vigilant. And good luck.

 

[WebSpinner]

actually feel that the entire purpose of obamacare is to eliminate all other options and to transition to socialized medicine, never thought any other way on this subject. govt take over, ie socialized medicine is the goal. the prob is, if we all hate it, still won't be able to do anything about it, look at social security or medicare, cannot touch it, fine tune it, eliminate it, here forever once it is in place and that is a shame. have to admit that standardizing the medicare supplement plans and allowing medicare advantage was a plus though many politicians want to eliminate the medicare advantage because it takes the govt kind of out of it which they don't like but i love.

 

[CarolinaSpider]

I don't envy anyone on trying to improve our healthcare system, but when we are short 20,000 family medicine docs, a lot of people fall under the radar. The regulation part of the govt such as HIPPA, Joint Commission, that is suppose to protect us, has created a mountain of buracreacy, more headaches, and made the system boggle down. Physicians spend more time on the paperwork side of things and less time on the most important, patient care.
Let's start by getting physicians back to spending more time with the end user and less time at the desk and of course tort reform has to be in the discussion.

Education is in the same boat, as teachers no longer have time for one on one, as standardized testing rules the day. But this is another equally as challenging subject as I come from long line of teachers and am married to one.

This post was edited on 7/4 10:36 AM by CarolinaSpider

 

[WebSpinner]

well, it has begun, off to a normal, government kickoff, face plant. unfortunately, the roll out is nothing, when it gets into our pocketbooks, then the crap will hit the fan and further down the road when they start eliminating 64oz sodas and other things like trans fats, whoops, they are already doing that. when government controls this completely in a few years, all of us will be less happy, content and healthy, will be poorer though.

 

[Spidertag]

So far, about 5,000,000 have lost coverage, 1/100th have signed up... A million of those are in California. Estimates range up to 85,000,000, which is twice as high as the highest number of estimated uninsured prior to the time that we passed the law so that we could find out what was in it. Where is SFSpider when you need him? (Just a good natured poke there, no offense intended.)

 

[Spidertag]

Read and share... We are looking at literally a quarter of the population, well over half of the working population, and well more than double the highest estimate, pre ObamaCare estimate of uninsured becoming...

Uninsured....

They promised to insure the uninsured.

They delivered the uninsuring of the previously insured.

+/- 85,000,000

And it was done with full knowledge and consideration. And they lied to us all the while... And they don't think that this microwave oven, I want it now, what have you done for me lately society will remember.

Will you?

Taking it to the streets... Great Read!

 

[WebSpinner]

again, the roll out just tells me that the government is the most inefficient, wasteful and fraud-ridden entity in the world but already knew that, just look at anything they do. am just blown away that they are going to be in charge of, control, a piece of our lives that is so private and so none of their business. our choices will be taken away, bureaucrats will ration our care and who will want to become a doctor in this mess? seems obvious that our "healthcare" not insurance but "healthcare" is going downhill toward third world country status and the country just cannot afford this and we as individuals cannot afford this, which will be the next shoe to drop when people find out how much of this is coming out of their wallets. we needed a few tweaks and we got take over forced down our throats by a group of people who would not even reconcile the bill or take a final vote on the bill. i really do not like people who think they know what is best for me and then make me have to do what they think.

 

[Eight Legger]

Welcome to America, Spinner. As long as there are laws made by elected officials, there will probably be some that you disagree with. The alternative is no government and no laws whatsoever, which I don't think any of us would really support when it comes right down to it.

However, the ACA is not off to a rousing start, that's for sure.

 

[WebSpinner]

understand our system completely and abide by it but just don't like being forced to adhere to someones's else's desires about my personal health and life. if they wish to change it for those who do not pay for it, great but for those of us who do pay for it, we should have choices and not forced to do what a few want.

 

[Eight Legger]

My point is just that in a representative democracy, someone else is always going to be making decisions and laws that you don't agree with or that you may think are not always in your best interests, but you have to abide them anyway or face penalties if you don't. Maybe you think your body benefits from occasional steroid use, or you don't want to wear a seat belt while driving, or you feel like blasting your music at home at 3 am with all your windows open, or you think you're a good enough driver to go 100 mph on the interstates. All of those things are illegal, even though you might believe they are best for you.

My guess is that you're doing several of those regularly anyway ? am I right??

 

[WebSpinner]

Eight, know you are attempting to be funny while demonstrating that our country is no longer free or at least it is heading more and more to where some legislator, bureaucrat, county councilman or mayor controls more and more of our personal lives all in the glory of what is for the "good of all". BS, give me back our freedoms and quit micro managing us. it is really scary to think about all the things we must do and all the things we cannot do because some politician or group of politicians or big brother, think they know what is best for me or you. did they not write a book about this some time ago.......

 

[Eight Legger]

Hey I'm all for personal freedoms, but I don't think we should all just be able to do whatever we want all the time. Do you? What freedoms of yours are you missing right now, and how would you like them to be restored? I'm genuinely curious.

 

[WebSpinner]

first and foremost is the freedom to have health insurance or not and if i choose to have it, which i do, to have choices. if i own a bar, to have the right as owner to decide if i allow smoking, am not a smoker, but no business of a city council or state legislature to say i cannot. patrons decided if they wish to visit my establishment with their feet and not be told they cannot enjoy their personal pleasure of smoking there. don't ride a motorcycle, way too dangerous, sorry Fluco, but if i did, would not wish to wear a helmet yet politicians say i must. in nyc, the mayor wants to ban 64oz sodas, never had one but don't think it is right to say i cannot. i wear seatbelts, always have and have had my life saved by that but do not think i should have to wear one, kids yes, adults too stupid to secure their kids but adults, none of their business. that is just a few but you know that the little things are being taken away piece by piece by these politicians because they think it is right. the government continues to enter areas where they have no business, not what they were created for and we just sit back and let them do it and they say we have the best intentions and i say, go pound sound and let us live our lives unencumbered by your egos and agendas.

 

[Eight Legger]

Ok. What it sounds like to me is that you personally haven't actually had any of your rights taken away. You probably already have health insurance (and have other choices if you're not happy with your current policy), you don't own a restaurant, you already wear your seatbelt, you don't drive a motorcycle (smart man, I'm with ya there), and you don't live in NYC.

So what I think you're actually saying is not that you're opposed to your rights being taken away or limited -- they already are limited, for all of us -- but rather that you want to pick and choose which specific rights should or should not be limited for you specifically.

Whereas you object to being required to wear a seatbelt or not to smoke in a restaurant, I could just as easily complain in the same way about being required to pay taxes of any kind ('I earned my money, and I should get to keep it all') or about getting arrested if I feel like running naked through my neighborhood shouting anti-VCU obscenities at 3 am ('I'll do what I want to do, when I want to do it!').

Unfortunately, we don't all have the right to pick and choose which laws we follow and which we reject. I don't know how a country like ours could function if that were the case. So the next best way to operate is through a system in which the majority elected opinion -- ruled by a set of checks and balances -- implements rules and laws that we all must follow, for the intended benefit of each of us individually and the nation as a whole.

Debate about which issues should or should not be regulated or imposed as laws is fair game, but it's not a question of whether the line of government enforcement/oversight should be drawn or not -- it's just a question of where to draw it.