Another nail in Trump's coffin about to be pounded...

[AsianTrumpSupporter]

Isn't this what the liberals kept saying all throughout 2016? "This is it! This will be the one!"

 

[NoNukes]

Wh

Except that the majority of the freeloaders are in the red states

The vast majority of freeloaders are in the inner cities. That's where all the free stuff and Democrats are.

Not true, most of them are in red states.

And that means what in a state like Wisconsin.

Pray tell....just how should we interpret your comment for a state like that ?

Or can you just admit you are to lazy to come up with talking points of your own.

I see charm school did nothing for that hostility.

So no explanation ?

Hhhhmmmmm........

Why should I satisfy someone who comes at me with such uncalled for hostility?

 

[Mac1958]

Good.

So you have two parts of this plan into which you have to pay: An HDHP (High Deductible Health Plan) and your HSA, which is essentially a "medical IRA" account. For a typical family of four, that may be, say, $600 a month. Then you have to contribute to your HSA. For a $6,100 deductible, that's another $500 per month.

So if you don't have the money to contribute into your HSA on top of your health care plan premium, you won't have money to pay your deductible. Hospitals have long since figured this out, so they are now demanding payment of your deductible before they render significant care.

How does this make your health care more affordable or accessible?
.

First, you fail to understand the significant DECREASE in cost when you transition from an ACA insurance program to a HDHP. The saving will be significant - depending on your age. The reason for this is simple - YOU get to decide what coverage you want. You will not be paying for programs you don't want - i.e., birth control, end-of-life planning, Planned Parenthood, etc., etc., etc. You get a program tailored to you - and you aren't funding free contraceptives for college co-eds, morning after pills, exercise programs for old people, pedicures for diabetics, etc.

The $6,100 you so blithely quote isn't a deductible - it is the maximum tax-deductible contribution to the HSA for a family.

But, let's take what I think you meant - let's assume you have a $5,000 deductible HDCP policy - you are not REQUIRED to fund the entire deductible in the HSA. You can choose to fund $2500 in the HSA (keep in mind that''s actually only about $2150 in actual net income - the rest is tax saved), and be ready to fund the additional $2500 out of pocket in the event you have medical costs. At the end of 2 years, you may choose to never pay into the HSA again, and just have it there in case. In reality, you'll probably fund it at a much lower level, as a hedge against multiple catastrophic events.

While we all realize that a medical catastrophe is possible in Year 1, it is highly unlikely. If it doesn't happen, the $2500 you put in the HSA is now available to be added to the $2500 from Year 2.

Take a realistic look at your ACTUAL health care costs for the past 5 years - that should be your planning target. If you have have an expectation of a catastrophic health incident in the next 5 years, tailor your HDCP accordingly. If you haven't, the same applies.

Is healthcare free? No. Can it be managed? Yes.

It is not an all-or-nothing program.

The HDHP deductible is directly relational to the amount you're contributing to your HSA account. That's the whole point, unless you're going to write a check for your deductible, which most people can't do.

If you're healthy and you don't access your HSA for deductibles, great. The amount grows tax-deferred and will be available for retirement income. But if you're not healthy, or if shit just happens, you have to keep contributing.

The word just came out today that more than half the country can't write a check for $500. And we're expecting Americans to pay for both an HDHP and an HSA? This just simply is not realistic.
.

Half the knowledge, my friend --- half the knowledge.

The amount contributed into an HSA is NOT driven by the size of the deductible of your HDHP, nor vice versa. You can buy a HDHP and make no contribution to an HSA whatsoever. Further, you do not have to "keep contributing". You control the size, duration, and rhythm of your HSA contributions.

I have heard there are products out there that tie the two together - but they are trying to take advantage of your ignorance. If your insurance specialist tells you that you MUST buy a linked product, get a new insurance specialist.

Also, your assumption that you must cover all the deductible isn't exactly true, either. Some private hospitals may require an up-front payment, or verification that your deductibles have been previously covered, but most doctors or hospitals don't. This may happen for routine care, but not usually. For catastrophic care? Never.

Think of it this way ---- you have had a catastrophic incident. The hospital can NOT refuse you service (by law). You have a HDCP that covers everything above $10,000 and about $2500 in your HSA against what is going to be a $100,000 medical bill. Do you seriously believe they are going to turn you away? They will take the $92,500 and work with you for the remaining.

It's correct that you don't have to contribute to your HSA, thereby leaving yourself (or the hospital) at risk for your deductible. But that goes against the spirit of the plan, especially when the GOP pretends an HSA is the answer to our health care problems. People can't afford both sides to these plans. And anyone who thinks they're not paying for the health care of those who can't afford it is dreaming.
.

An HSA is the spirit of the plan and, frankly, it IS the answer to your health care insurance problems. When you buy insurance (or make a HSA deposit) to cover your first-dollar medical expenses, the insurance company knows that you are going to do that year after year after year. So, they know that your policy must cover $1,000 (for example) every single year. That drives your insurance costs up. However, when the insurance company knows that you are going to pay that yourself (either out of pocket or from an HSA), the insurance company can lower the cost of your policy significantly. The insurance on the first $10,000 is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the cost of insurance for the second $10,000. (The first is a an absolute probability of 1, while the probability of paying out the second $10K is significantly less).

Get a quote on a $7500 catastrophic health insurance policy, and then get a quote for a $500 deductible health insurance policy. I suspect the difference will go a long way towards funding your HSA.

It's not my health plan that I'm worried about. And I know the numbers and the process, as I train annually on health insurance so that I can help my advisory clients make decisions on both individual health plans and Medicare plans. I've watched as a health care plan was pieced together, as they increased or decreased a benefit, co-pay or co-insurance level and their software told them how that change affected the premium, how the contracts with providers and provider groups were negotiated, tweaked, and re-negotiated, and how those contracts affected plans and premiums.

No, my issue is this: When someone can't afford their health insurance, or if it's too much of a stretch for them, they just won't have any. They'll just pack the ER for their primary care, and you know who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they have no coverage and can't get solid preventive and diagnostic care, and their small issues fester until they're big, expensive issues, and they can't pay for it, who will? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they can't pay the deductible on their HSA and stiff the hospital, who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes.

And here's the funny part: We'll think we're "free" and "paying our way" only, free from those nasty, dirty, lazy people who can't, and we'll just be fooling ourselves.

I believe that a healthier populace is good economics, and it's the sign of a more advanced civilization. I'd get rid of this absolutely absurd, comically inefficient, seven-piece health care delivery/payment "system" that both parties just seem to love and expand the already-functioning Medicare/Medicare Advantage/Medicare Supplement system to all. An excellent blend of public foundational coverage and efficient free market competition and innovation.
.

 

[Claudette]

Good. The mandate needs to go. Ocare is dying quickly. That should put the joke of a law to death.

I agree and looking at the plan I like it.

He's going to get the country opened up to let insurance companies compete. Competition drives costs down and he's also going to let folks buy meds from other countries which is always cheaper.

A pretty good plan in my estimation.

Trumpcare vs Obamacare: How Does Trump's Plan Compare?

Here's the differences in a nutshell.

 

[Spare_change]

First, you fail to understand the significant DECREASE in cost when you transition from an ACA insurance program to a HDHP. The saving will be significant - depending on your age. The reason for this is simple - YOU get to decide what coverage you want. You will not be paying for programs you don't want - i.e., birth control, end-of-life planning, Planned Parenthood, etc., etc., etc. You get a program tailored to you - and you aren't funding free contraceptives for college co-eds, morning after pills, exercise programs for old people, pedicures for diabetics, etc.

The $6,100 you so blithely quote isn't a deductible - it is the maximum tax-deductible contribution to the HSA for a family.

But, let's take what I think you meant - let's assume you have a $5,000 deductible HDCP policy - you are not REQUIRED to fund the entire deductible in the HSA. You can choose to fund $2500 in the HSA (keep in mind that''s actually only about $2150 in actual net income - the rest is tax saved), and be ready to fund the additional $2500 out of pocket in the event you have medical costs. At the end of 2 years, you may choose to never pay into the HSA again, and just have it there in case. In reality, you'll probably fund it at a much lower level, as a hedge against multiple catastrophic events.

While we all realize that a medical catastrophe is possible in Year 1, it is highly unlikely. If it doesn't happen, the $2500 you put in the HSA is now available to be added to the $2500 from Year 2.

Take a realistic look at your ACTUAL health care costs for the past 5 years - that should be your planning target. If you have have an expectation of a catastrophic health incident in the next 5 years, tailor your HDCP accordingly. If you haven't, the same applies.

Is healthcare free? No. Can it be managed? Yes.

It is not an all-or-nothing program.

The HDHP deductible is directly relational to the amount you're contributing to your HSA account. That's the whole point, unless you're going to write a check for your deductible, which most people can't do.

If you're healthy and you don't access your HSA for deductibles, great. The amount grows tax-deferred and will be available for retirement income. But if you're not healthy, or if shit just happens, you have to keep contributing.

The word just came out today that more than half the country can't write a check for $500. And we're expecting Americans to pay for both an HDHP and an HSA? This just simply is not realistic.
.

Half the knowledge, my friend --- half the knowledge.

The amount contributed into an HSA is NOT driven by the size of the deductible of your HDHP, nor vice versa. You can buy a HDHP and make no contribution to an HSA whatsoever. Further, you do not have to "keep contributing". You control the size, duration, and rhythm of your HSA contributions.

I have heard there are products out there that tie the two together - but they are trying to take advantage of your ignorance. If your insurance specialist tells you that you MUST buy a linked product, get a new insurance specialist.

Also, your assumption that you must cover all the deductible isn't exactly true, either. Some private hospitals may require an up-front payment, or verification that your deductibles have been previously covered, but most doctors or hospitals don't. This may happen for routine care, but not usually. For catastrophic care? Never.

Think of it this way ---- you have had a catastrophic incident. The hospital can NOT refuse you service (by law). You have a HDCP that covers everything above $10,000 and about $2500 in your HSA against what is going to be a $100,000 medical bill. Do you seriously believe they are going to turn you away? They will take the $92,500 and work with you for the remaining.

It's correct that you don't have to contribute to your HSA, thereby leaving yourself (or the hospital) at risk for your deductible. But that goes against the spirit of the plan, especially when the GOP pretends an HSA is the answer to our health care problems. People can't afford both sides to these plans. And anyone who thinks they're not paying for the health care of those who can't afford it is dreaming.
.

An HSA is the spirit of the plan and, frankly, it IS the answer to your health care insurance problems. When you buy insurance (or make a HSA deposit) to cover your first-dollar medical expenses, the insurance company knows that you are going to do that year after year after year. So, they know that your policy must cover $1,000 (for example) every single year. That drives your insurance costs up. However, when the insurance company knows that you are going to pay that yourself (either out of pocket or from an HSA), the insurance company can lower the cost of your policy significantly. The insurance on the first $10,000 is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the cost of insurance for the second $10,000. (The first is a an absolute probability of 1, while the probability of paying out the second $10K is significantly less).

Get a quote on a $7500 catastrophic health insurance policy, and then get a quote for a $500 deductible health insurance policy. I suspect the difference will go a long way towards funding your HSA.

It's not my health plan that I'm worried about. And I know the numbers and the process, as I train annually on health insurance so that I can help my advisory clients make decisions on both individual health plans and Medicare plans. I've watched as a health care plan was pieced together, as they increased or decreased a benefit, co-pay or co-insurance level and their software told them how that change affected the premium, how the contracts with providers and provider groups were negotiated, tweaked, and re-negotiated, and how those contracts affected plans and premiums.

No, my issue is this: When someone can't afford their health insurance, or if it's too much of a stretch for them, they just won't have any. They'll just pack the ER for their primary care, and you know who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they have no coverage and can't get solid preventive and diagnostic care, and their small issues fester until they're big, expensive issues, and they can't pay for it, who will? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they can't pay the deductible on their HSA and stiff the hospital, who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes.

And here's the funny part: We'll think we're "free" and "paying our way" only, free from those nasty, dirty, lazy people who can't, and we'll just be fooling ourselves.

I believe that a healthier populace is good economics, and it's the sign of a more advanced civilization. I'd get rid of this absolutely absurd, comically inefficient, seven-piece health care delivery/payment "system" that both parties just seem to love and expand the already-functioning Medicare/Medicare Advantage/Medicare Supplement system to all. An excellent blend of public foundational coverage and efficient free market competition and innovation.
.

You're making the same old rhetorical argument - one without a shred of facts in it.

You claim that health insurance can be unaffordable for some. But you fail to recognize the refundable tax credits in which the other taxpayers give a gift so that you can buy insurance. Now, reality tells us that there will be certain percentage of people who will take the gift, and buy a new TV, instead of buying health insurance. You can't fix stupid.

Every sane person realizes that we will be paying for health care insurance for other people - we always have, and we always will. It's built right into our insurance policies (unfunded care drives hospital/doctor costs up, which drives insurance costs up), and we'll pay for it in a tax credit. We recognize that, and we accept that.

Your supposed approach to expanding Medicare, etc. is nothing more than socialized medicine that puts the government in charge of your healthcare. Instead, the new approach allows you to tailor your medical services to your needs, and you don't have to pay for those services for others that you don't want to.

Your argument looks good on paper - but it doesn't pass the harsh light of reality.

 

[Mac1958]

The HDHP deductible is directly relational to the amount you're contributing to your HSA account. That's the whole point, unless you're going to write a check for your deductible, which most people can't do.

If you're healthy and you don't access your HSA for deductibles, great. The amount grows tax-deferred and will be available for retirement income. But if you're not healthy, or if shit just happens, you have to keep contributing.

The word just came out today that more than half the country can't write a check for $500. And we're expecting Americans to pay for both an HDHP and an HSA? This just simply is not realistic.
.

Half the knowledge, my friend --- half the knowledge.

The amount contributed into an HSA is NOT driven by the size of the deductible of your HDHP, nor vice versa. You can buy a HDHP and make no contribution to an HSA whatsoever. Further, you do not have to "keep contributing". You control the size, duration, and rhythm of your HSA contributions.

I have heard there are products out there that tie the two together - but they are trying to take advantage of your ignorance. If your insurance specialist tells you that you MUST buy a linked product, get a new insurance specialist.

Also, your assumption that you must cover all the deductible isn't exactly true, either. Some private hospitals may require an up-front payment, or verification that your deductibles have been previously covered, but most doctors or hospitals don't. This may happen for routine care, but not usually. For catastrophic care? Never.

Think of it this way ---- you have had a catastrophic incident. The hospital can NOT refuse you service (by law). You have a HDCP that covers everything above $10,000 and about $2500 in your HSA against what is going to be a $100,000 medical bill. Do you seriously believe they are going to turn you away? They will take the $92,500 and work with you for the remaining.

It's correct that you don't have to contribute to your HSA, thereby leaving yourself (or the hospital) at risk for your deductible. But that goes against the spirit of the plan, especially when the GOP pretends an HSA is the answer to our health care problems. People can't afford both sides to these plans. And anyone who thinks they're not paying for the health care of those who can't afford it is dreaming.
.

An HSA is the spirit of the plan and, frankly, it IS the answer to your health care insurance problems. When you buy insurance (or make a HSA deposit) to cover your first-dollar medical expenses, the insurance company knows that you are going to do that year after year after year. So, they know that your policy must cover $1,000 (for example) every single year. That drives your insurance costs up. However, when the insurance company knows that you are going to pay that yourself (either out of pocket or from an HSA), the insurance company can lower the cost of your policy significantly. The insurance on the first $10,000 is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the cost of insurance for the second $10,000. (The first is a an absolute probability of 1, while the probability of paying out the second $10K is significantly less).

Get a quote on a $7500 catastrophic health insurance policy, and then get a quote for a $500 deductible health insurance policy. I suspect the difference will go a long way towards funding your HSA.

It's not my health plan that I'm worried about. And I know the numbers and the process, as I train annually on health insurance so that I can help my advisory clients make decisions on both individual health plans and Medicare plans. I've watched as a health care plan was pieced together, as they increased or decreased a benefit, co-pay or co-insurance level and their software told them how that change affected the premium, how the contracts with providers and provider groups were negotiated, tweaked, and re-negotiated, and how those contracts affected plans and premiums.

No, my issue is this: When someone can't afford their health insurance, or if it's too much of a stretch for them, they just won't have any. They'll just pack the ER for their primary care, and you know who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they have no coverage and can't get solid preventive and diagnostic care, and their small issues fester until they're big, expensive issues, and they can't pay for it, who will? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they can't pay the deductible on their HSA and stiff the hospital, who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes.

And here's the funny part: We'll think we're "free" and "paying our way" only, free from those nasty, dirty, lazy people who can't, and we'll just be fooling ourselves.

I believe that a healthier populace is good economics, and it's the sign of a more advanced civilization. I'd get rid of this absolutely absurd, comically inefficient, seven-piece health care delivery/payment "system" that both parties just seem to love and expand the already-functioning Medicare/Medicare Advantage/Medicare Supplement system to all. An excellent blend of public foundational coverage and efficient free market competition and innovation.
.

You're making the same old rhetorical argument - one without a shred of facts in it.

You claim that health insurance can be unaffordable for some. But you fail to recognize the refundable tax credits in which the other taxpayers give a gift so that you can buy insurance. Now, reality tells us that there will be certain percentage of people who will take the gift, and buy a new TV, instead of buying health insurance. You can't fix stupid.

Every sane person realizes that we will be paying for health care insurance for other people - we always have, and we always will. It's built right into our insurance policies (unfunded care drives hospital/doctor costs up, which drives insurance costs up), and we'll pay for it in a tax credit. We recognize that, and we accept that.

Your supposed approach to expanding Medicare, etc. is nothing more than socialized medicine that puts the government in charge of your healthcare. Instead, the new approach allows you to tailor your medical services to your needs, and you don't have to pay for those services for others that you don't want to.

Your argument looks good on paper - but it doesn't pass the harsh light of reality.

There will be millions who don't have coverage, and you and I will pay for them one way or the other. And what I'm proposing is not socialized medicine. And ironically, the "harsh light of reality" is what I deal with when helping my clients, their kids, and the employees of my business owner clients.

I know that you're ideologically obligated to oppose government at almost every turn, and I can see that you're fine with our seven-headed hydra.

So we'll see. And if folks can't afford coverage, too bad for them, they and their families probably deserve what happens to them.

Why should we care, anyway?
.

 

[Spare_change]

Half the knowledge, my friend --- half the knowledge.

The amount contributed into an HSA is NOT driven by the size of the deductible of your HDHP, nor vice versa. You can buy a HDHP and make no contribution to an HSA whatsoever. Further, you do not have to "keep contributing". You control the size, duration, and rhythm of your HSA contributions.

I have heard there are products out there that tie the two together - but they are trying to take advantage of your ignorance. If your insurance specialist tells you that you MUST buy a linked product, get a new insurance specialist.

Also, your assumption that you must cover all the deductible isn't exactly true, either. Some private hospitals may require an up-front payment, or verification that your deductibles have been previously covered, but most doctors or hospitals don't. This may happen for routine care, but not usually. For catastrophic care? Never.

Think of it this way ---- you have had a catastrophic incident. The hospital can NOT refuse you service (by law). You have a HDCP that covers everything above $10,000 and about $2500 in your HSA against what is going to be a $100,000 medical bill. Do you seriously believe they are going to turn you away? They will take the $92,500 and work with you for the remaining.

It's correct that you don't have to contribute to your HSA, thereby leaving yourself (or the hospital) at risk for your deductible. But that goes against the spirit of the plan, especially when the GOP pretends an HSA is the answer to our health care problems. People can't afford both sides to these plans. And anyone who thinks they're not paying for the health care of those who can't afford it is dreaming.
.

An HSA is the spirit of the plan and, frankly, it IS the answer to your health care insurance problems. When you buy insurance (or make a HSA deposit) to cover your first-dollar medical expenses, the insurance company knows that you are going to do that year after year after year. So, they know that your policy must cover $1,000 (for example) every single year. That drives your insurance costs up. However, when the insurance company knows that you are going to pay that yourself (either out of pocket or from an HSA), the insurance company can lower the cost of your policy significantly. The insurance on the first $10,000 is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the cost of insurance for the second $10,000. (The first is a an absolute probability of 1, while the probability of paying out the second $10K is significantly less).

Get a quote on a $7500 catastrophic health insurance policy, and then get a quote for a $500 deductible health insurance policy. I suspect the difference will go a long way towards funding your HSA.

It's not my health plan that I'm worried about. And I know the numbers and the process, as I train annually on health insurance so that I can help my advisory clients make decisions on both individual health plans and Medicare plans. I've watched as a health care plan was pieced together, as they increased or decreased a benefit, co-pay or co-insurance level and their software told them how that change affected the premium, how the contracts with providers and provider groups were negotiated, tweaked, and re-negotiated, and how those contracts affected plans and premiums.

No, my issue is this: When someone can't afford their health insurance, or if it's too much of a stretch for them, they just won't have any. They'll just pack the ER for their primary care, and you know who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they have no coverage and can't get solid preventive and diagnostic care, and their small issues fester until they're big, expensive issues, and they can't pay for it, who will? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they can't pay the deductible on their HSA and stiff the hospital, who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes.

And here's the funny part: We'll think we're "free" and "paying our way" only, free from those nasty, dirty, lazy people who can't, and we'll just be fooling ourselves.

I believe that a healthier populace is good economics, and it's the sign of a more advanced civilization. I'd get rid of this absolutely absurd, comically inefficient, seven-piece health care delivery/payment "system" that both parties just seem to love and expand the already-functioning Medicare/Medicare Advantage/Medicare Supplement system to all. An excellent blend of public foundational coverage and efficient free market competition and innovation.
.

You're making the same old rhetorical argument - one without a shred of facts in it.

You claim that health insurance can be unaffordable for some. But you fail to recognize the refundable tax credits in which the other taxpayers give a gift so that you can buy insurance. Now, reality tells us that there will be certain percentage of people who will take the gift, and buy a new TV, instead of buying health insurance. You can't fix stupid.

Every sane person realizes that we will be paying for health care insurance for other people - we always have, and we always will. It's built right into our insurance policies (unfunded care drives hospital/doctor costs up, which drives insurance costs up), and we'll pay for it in a tax credit. We recognize that, and we accept that.

Your supposed approach to expanding Medicare, etc. is nothing more than socialized medicine that puts the government in charge of your healthcare. Instead, the new approach allows you to tailor your medical services to your needs, and you don't have to pay for those services for others that you don't want to.

Your argument looks good on paper - but it doesn't pass the harsh light of reality.

There will be millions who don't have coverage, and you and I will pay for them one way or the other. And what I'm proposing is not socialized medicine. And ironically, the "harsh light of reality" is what I deal with when helping my clients, their kids, and the employees of my business owner clients.

I know that you're ideologically obligated to oppose government at almost every turn, and I can see that you're fine with our seven-headed hydra.

So we'll see. And if folks can't afford coverage, too bad for them, they and their families probably deserve what happens to them.

Why should we care, anyway?
.

LOL ---- believe me, I am NOT "ideologically obligated".

I've been on your side ... I used to own a wealth management firm, and I've seen how it actually works. Interesting, isn't it, that your "seven-headed hydra" contains seven government programs, or programs dictated by the government.

That's more than a coincidence. Who do you suppose has created the monster we live with?

 

[Mac1958]

It's correct that you don't have to contribute to your HSA, thereby leaving yourself (or the hospital) at risk for your deductible. But that goes against the spirit of the plan, especially when the GOP pretends an HSA is the answer to our health care problems. People can't afford both sides to these plans. And anyone who thinks they're not paying for the health care of those who can't afford it is dreaming.
.

An HSA is the spirit of the plan and, frankly, it IS the answer to your health care insurance problems. When you buy insurance (or make a HSA deposit) to cover your first-dollar medical expenses, the insurance company knows that you are going to do that year after year after year. So, they know that your policy must cover $1,000 (for example) every single year. That drives your insurance costs up. However, when the insurance company knows that you are going to pay that yourself (either out of pocket or from an HSA), the insurance company can lower the cost of your policy significantly. The insurance on the first $10,000 is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the cost of insurance for the second $10,000. (The first is a an absolute probability of 1, while the probability of paying out the second $10K is significantly less).

Get a quote on a $7500 catastrophic health insurance policy, and then get a quote for a $500 deductible health insurance policy. I suspect the difference will go a long way towards funding your HSA.

It's not my health plan that I'm worried about. And I know the numbers and the process, as I train annually on health insurance so that I can help my advisory clients make decisions on both individual health plans and Medicare plans. I've watched as a health care plan was pieced together, as they increased or decreased a benefit, co-pay or co-insurance level and their software told them how that change affected the premium, how the contracts with providers and provider groups were negotiated, tweaked, and re-negotiated, and how those contracts affected plans and premiums.

No, my issue is this: When someone can't afford their health insurance, or if it's too much of a stretch for them, they just won't have any. They'll just pack the ER for their primary care, and you know who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they have no coverage and can't get solid preventive and diagnostic care, and their small issues fester until they're big, expensive issues, and they can't pay for it, who will? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they can't pay the deductible on their HSA and stiff the hospital, who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes.

And here's the funny part: We'll think we're "free" and "paying our way" only, free from those nasty, dirty, lazy people who can't, and we'll just be fooling ourselves.

I believe that a healthier populace is good economics, and it's the sign of a more advanced civilization. I'd get rid of this absolutely absurd, comically inefficient, seven-piece health care delivery/payment "system" that both parties just seem to love and expand the already-functioning Medicare/Medicare Advantage/Medicare Supplement system to all. An excellent blend of public foundational coverage and efficient free market competition and innovation.
.

You're making the same old rhetorical argument - one without a shred of facts in it.

You claim that health insurance can be unaffordable for some. But you fail to recognize the refundable tax credits in which the other taxpayers give a gift so that you can buy insurance. Now, reality tells us that there will be certain percentage of people who will take the gift, and buy a new TV, instead of buying health insurance. You can't fix stupid.

Every sane person realizes that we will be paying for health care insurance for other people - we always have, and we always will. It's built right into our insurance policies (unfunded care drives hospital/doctor costs up, which drives insurance costs up), and we'll pay for it in a tax credit. We recognize that, and we accept that.

Your supposed approach to expanding Medicare, etc. is nothing more than socialized medicine that puts the government in charge of your healthcare. Instead, the new approach allows you to tailor your medical services to your needs, and you don't have to pay for those services for others that you don't want to.

Your argument looks good on paper - but it doesn't pass the harsh light of reality.

There will be millions who don't have coverage, and you and I will pay for them one way or the other. And what I'm proposing is not socialized medicine. And ironically, the "harsh light of reality" is what I deal with when helping my clients, their kids, and the employees of my business owner clients.

I know that you're ideologically obligated to oppose government at almost every turn, and I can see that you're fine with our seven-headed hydra.

So we'll see. And if folks can't afford coverage, too bad for them, they and their families probably deserve what happens to them.

Why should we care, anyway?
.

LOL ---- believe me, I am NOT "ideologically obligated".

I've been on your side ... I used to own a wealth management firm, and I've seen how it actually works. Interesting, isn't it, that your "seven-headed hydra" contains seven government programs, or programs dictated by the government.

That's more than a coincidence. Who do you suppose has created the monster we live with?

The government, of course. I'm tempted to say that they'll never get their act together enough to do what I want, but I don't know. The mess they're offering now won't work, and then there will be a kneejerk reaction in the other direction, because that's what we do.

What concerns me is that when that happens, we'll go to real socialized medicine, single payer, instead of what I want.

The GOP knows pure free market health care won't work, and they don't have to balls to do anything else beyond tweaking Obamacare. So be careful what you wish for, single payer is still a possibility.
.

 

[Spare_change]

An HSA is the spirit of the plan and, frankly, it IS the answer to your health care insurance problems. When you buy insurance (or make a HSA deposit) to cover your first-dollar medical expenses, the insurance company knows that you are going to do that year after year after year. So, they know that your policy must cover $1,000 (for example) every single year. That drives your insurance costs up. However, when the insurance company knows that you are going to pay that yourself (either out of pocket or from an HSA), the insurance company can lower the cost of your policy significantly. The insurance on the first $10,000 is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the cost of insurance for the second $10,000. (The first is a an absolute probability of 1, while the probability of paying out the second $10K is significantly less).

Get a quote on a $7500 catastrophic health insurance policy, and then get a quote for a $500 deductible health insurance policy. I suspect the difference will go a long way towards funding your HSA.

It's not my health plan that I'm worried about. And I know the numbers and the process, as I train annually on health insurance so that I can help my advisory clients make decisions on both individual health plans and Medicare plans. I've watched as a health care plan was pieced together, as they increased or decreased a benefit, co-pay or co-insurance level and their software told them how that change affected the premium, how the contracts with providers and provider groups were negotiated, tweaked, and re-negotiated, and how those contracts affected plans and premiums.

No, my issue is this: When someone can't afford their health insurance, or if it's too much of a stretch for them, they just won't have any. They'll just pack the ER for their primary care, and you know who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they have no coverage and can't get solid preventive and diagnostic care, and their small issues fester until they're big, expensive issues, and they can't pay for it, who will? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they can't pay the deductible on their HSA and stiff the hospital, who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes.

And here's the funny part: We'll think we're "free" and "paying our way" only, free from those nasty, dirty, lazy people who can't, and we'll just be fooling ourselves.

I believe that a healthier populace is good economics, and it's the sign of a more advanced civilization. I'd get rid of this absolutely absurd, comically inefficient, seven-piece health care delivery/payment "system" that both parties just seem to love and expand the already-functioning Medicare/Medicare Advantage/Medicare Supplement system to all. An excellent blend of public foundational coverage and efficient free market competition and innovation.
.

You're making the same old rhetorical argument - one without a shred of facts in it.

You claim that health insurance can be unaffordable for some. But you fail to recognize the refundable tax credits in which the other taxpayers give a gift so that you can buy insurance. Now, reality tells us that there will be certain percentage of people who will take the gift, and buy a new TV, instead of buying health insurance. You can't fix stupid.

Every sane person realizes that we will be paying for health care insurance for other people - we always have, and we always will. It's built right into our insurance policies (unfunded care drives hospital/doctor costs up, which drives insurance costs up), and we'll pay for it in a tax credit. We recognize that, and we accept that.

Your supposed approach to expanding Medicare, etc. is nothing more than socialized medicine that puts the government in charge of your healthcare. Instead, the new approach allows you to tailor your medical services to your needs, and you don't have to pay for those services for others that you don't want to.

Your argument looks good on paper - but it doesn't pass the harsh light of reality.

There will be millions who don't have coverage, and you and I will pay for them one way or the other. And what I'm proposing is not socialized medicine. And ironically, the "harsh light of reality" is what I deal with when helping my clients, their kids, and the employees of my business owner clients.

I know that you're ideologically obligated to oppose government at almost every turn, and I can see that you're fine with our seven-headed hydra.

So we'll see. And if folks can't afford coverage, too bad for them, they and their families probably deserve what happens to them.

Why should we care, anyway?
.

LOL ---- believe me, I am NOT "ideologically obligated".

I've been on your side ... I used to own a wealth management firm, and I've seen how it actually works. Interesting, isn't it, that your "seven-headed hydra" contains seven government programs, or programs dictated by the government.

That's more than a coincidence. Who do you suppose has created the monster we live with?

The government, of course. I'm tempted to say that they'll never get their act together enough to do what I want, but I don't know. The mess they're offering now won't work, and then there will be a kneejerk reaction in the other direction, because that's what we do.

What concerns me is that when that happens, we'll go to real socialized medicine, single payer, instead of what I want.

The GOP knows pure free market health care won't work, and they don't have to balls to do anything else beyond tweaking Obamacare. So be careful what you wish for, single payer is still a possibility.
.

You're opposed to single payer - and you say the free market approach won't work. What's your recommendaton? What do you want?

 

[bripat9643]

The ACA replacement suggested by Trump is yet another fuck up.....

Follow this.......

Trump (going considerably back from his bullshit promise that his HC plan would cover EVERYBODY, be CHEAPER, and be BETTER)......is now laying out his new plan.

He proposes to allow pre-existing conditions to be insured, BUT has eliminated the mandate.....which anyone with a few functioning brain cells knows is WHAT insurance companies need to help defray the costs of insuring someone with diabetes.

But, it goes further.....Trump wants t give "tax credits" to the poor to help in paying for their health coverage........BUT, we should know that most of the poor pay little or NO taxes, so that these credits are meaningless....SWo these poor are royally screwed.

Wait until those coal miners in WVA and KY who "loved" Trump find out what he has done for them..........It'd be almost funny if it weren't so fucking sad.....

I agree with you: this plan is a fuck up. That's why Congressional Republicans will vote it down.

Sent from my SM-G930U using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[Mac1958]

It's not my health plan that I'm worried about. And I know the numbers and the process, as I train annually on health insurance so that I can help my advisory clients make decisions on both individual health plans and Medicare plans. I've watched as a health care plan was pieced together, as they increased or decreased a benefit, co-pay or co-insurance level and their software told them how that change affected the premium, how the contracts with providers and provider groups were negotiated, tweaked, and re-negotiated, and how those contracts affected plans and premiums.

No, my issue is this: When someone can't afford their health insurance, or if it's too much of a stretch for them, they just won't have any. They'll just pack the ER for their primary care, and you know who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they have no coverage and can't get solid preventive and diagnostic care, and their small issues fester until they're big, expensive issues, and they can't pay for it, who will? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes. When they can't pay the deductible on their HSA and stiff the hospital, who will pay for it? You and I, via higher premiums and taxes.

And here's the funny part: We'll think we're "free" and "paying our way" only, free from those nasty, dirty, lazy people who can't, and we'll just be fooling ourselves.

I believe that a healthier populace is good economics, and it's the sign of a more advanced civilization. I'd get rid of this absolutely absurd, comically inefficient, seven-piece health care delivery/payment "system" that both parties just seem to love and expand the already-functioning Medicare/Medicare Advantage/Medicare Supplement system to all. An excellent blend of public foundational coverage and efficient free market competition and innovation.
.

You're making the same old rhetorical argument - one without a shred of facts in it.

You claim that health insurance can be unaffordable for some. But you fail to recognize the refundable tax credits in which the other taxpayers give a gift so that you can buy insurance. Now, reality tells us that there will be certain percentage of people who will take the gift, and buy a new TV, instead of buying health insurance. You can't fix stupid.

Every sane person realizes that we will be paying for health care insurance for other people - we always have, and we always will. It's built right into our insurance policies (unfunded care drives hospital/doctor costs up, which drives insurance costs up), and we'll pay for it in a tax credit. We recognize that, and we accept that.

Your supposed approach to expanding Medicare, etc. is nothing more than socialized medicine that puts the government in charge of your healthcare. Instead, the new approach allows you to tailor your medical services to your needs, and you don't have to pay for those services for others that you don't want to.

Your argument looks good on paper - but it doesn't pass the harsh light of reality.

There will be millions who don't have coverage, and you and I will pay for them one way or the other. And what I'm proposing is not socialized medicine. And ironically, the "harsh light of reality" is what I deal with when helping my clients, their kids, and the employees of my business owner clients.

I know that you're ideologically obligated to oppose government at almost every turn, and I can see that you're fine with our seven-headed hydra.

So we'll see. And if folks can't afford coverage, too bad for them, they and their families probably deserve what happens to them.

Why should we care, anyway?
.

LOL ---- believe me, I am NOT "ideologically obligated".

I've been on your side ... I used to own a wealth management firm, and I've seen how it actually works. Interesting, isn't it, that your "seven-headed hydra" contains seven government programs, or programs dictated by the government.

That's more than a coincidence. Who do you suppose has created the monster we live with?

The government, of course. I'm tempted to say that they'll never get their act together enough to do what I want, but I don't know. The mess they're offering now won't work, and then there will be a kneejerk reaction in the other direction, because that's what we do.

What concerns me is that when that happens, we'll go to real socialized medicine, single payer, instead of what I want.

The GOP knows pure free market health care won't work, and they don't have to balls to do anything else beyond tweaking Obamacare. So be careful what you wish for, single payer is still a possibility.
.

You're opposed to single payer - and you say the free market approach won't work. What's your recommendaton? What do you want?

I've already said it: Expand the current Medicare/Medicare Supplement/Medicare Advantage system to all. Among other things, it would accomplish the following:

• End the insane, inefficient, inconsistent, seven-headed delivery/payment system we have now
• Retain free market competition and innovation on non-Medicare-approved services
• Take a massive cost monkey off the backs of American employers
• Provide a comprehensive public foundation for preventive & diagnostic treatment
• Simplify coverage schedules for health insurers
• Create a massive new preventive/diagnostic provider cottage industry
• Give people portability so that they're not stuck keeping a job for the insurance
• Eliminate traffic jams in ER once people no longer have to use them for basic care
• Open up massive new markets for insurers

... off the top of my head. Or, we can continue with the seven-headed beast and Frankenstein's Monster 2.0.
.

 

[P@triot]

Wait until those coal miners in WVA and KY who "loved" Trump find out what he has done for them..........It'd be almost funny if it weren't so fucking sad.....

Those "coal miners in WV and KY" certainly found out what Obama did for them - and it was fuck'n tragic. Most of them lost their coverage altogether. You really can't accept that Obamacare was a catastrophic failure and that the American people overwhelmingly reject Obama and the Dumbocrats. And that is funny.

 

[P@triot]

The ACA replacement suggested by Trump is yet another fuck up.....

Hey - remember when you made this post nat4900?

There is, however, one MAIN asset that Hillary still holds and will inevitably give her the oval office....and that is our "beloved" Donald Trump......a.k.a. the greatest mistake the GOP has made since Sarah Palin.

You'll have to forgive us nat4900 if we all laugh at you - but your history of "predictions" is absolutely laughable. You have no credibility left son. There is no "nail" in the Trump "coffin". There is only you losing your shit over the fact that the Dumbocrat Party is in complete and total disarray and that the American people reject everything about the communism you love and embrace.

 

[P@triot]

The ACA replacement suggested by Trump is yet another fuck up.....

Hey - remember when you made this post nat4900?

Of course, right wingers and Trump acolytes will reject the "source" of this report...but the implosion may be all too real.

You'll have to forgive us nat4900 if we all laugh at you - but your history of "predictions" is absolutely laughable. You have no credibility left son. There is no "nail" in the Trump "coffin". There is only you losing your shit over the fact that the Dumbocrat Party is in complete and total disarray and that the American people reject everything about the communism you love and embrace.

 

[P@triot]

The ACA replacement suggested by Trump is yet another fuck up.....

Hey - remember when you made this post nat4900?

Based on a CNN report, Latinos who are eligible to naturalize number 4.5 MILLION...with Florida having almost 3/4 of million just in that state.

Latino media outlets are encouraging such eligible individuals to register to vote and.......naturally, to vote AGAINST Trump.

Should be interesting since we all reap what we sow....eventually.

You'll have to forgive us nat4900 if we all laugh at you - but your history of "predictions" is absolutely laughable. You have no credibility left son. There is no "nail" in the Trump "coffin". There is only you losing your shit over the fact that the Dumbocrat Party is in complete and total disarray and that the American people reject everything about the communism you love and embrace.

 

[P@triot]

The ACA replacement suggested by Trump is yet another fuck up.....

Hey - remember when you made this post nat4900? You titled this thread "Trump....the pig....is DONE". Bwahahahahaha!

As smarter republicans are abandoning Trump like rats on a sinking ship, I actually feel a bit bad about Pence whose ambitions were clearly to have a presidential aspiration and is now stuck with either "defending" the indefensible.....or dropping out of his VP candidacy.

Keep in mind that Trump stated his boorish, misogynistic statements, NOT as a 20 year old locker room idiot, but as a 60 year old, narcissistic idiot in his assertion that he could do whatever he wants to women because he was a "rich, star"

The pig can't even decently apologize and drop out.... Let's see if even Melania or Ivanka (besides, Pence) defend this moron.

You'll have to forgive us nat4900 if we all laugh at you - but your history of "predictions" is absolutely laughable. You have no credibility left son. There is no "nail" in the Trump "coffin". There is only you losing your shit over the fact that the Dumbocrat Party is in complete and total disarray and that the American people reject everything about the communism you love and embrace.

 

[nat4900]

Wait until those coal miners in WVA and KY who "loved" Trump find out what he has done for them..........It'd be almost funny if it weren't so fucking sad.....

Those "coal miners in WV and KY" certainly found out what Obama did for them - and it was fuck'n tragic. Most of them lost their coverage altogether. You really can't accept that Obamacare was a catastrophic failure and that the American people overwhelmingly reject Obama and the Dumbocrats. And that is funny.

COAL MINERS WORRY OBAMACARE REPEAL COULD MEAN LOSS OF BENEFITS

Coal Miners Worry Obamacare Repeal Could Mean Loss of Benefits - ABC 36 News

 

[P@triot]

COAL MINERS WORRY OBAMACARE REPEAL COULD MEAN LOSS OF BENEFITS

Coal Miners Worry Obamacare Repeal Could Mean Loss of Benefits - ABC 36 News

Oh look - nat4900 believes that he types in all caps, bolds it, and then makes it the biggest font available, it will somehow restore credibility to him.

Here is why the coal miners love President Trump and why you guys turned the solid blue state of West Virginia into a solid red state. It was bad enough your failed ideology resulted in the failed policies which made them lose their healthcare. But it also made them lose their jobs....

Furious Coal CEO Lets It All Out: "Obama Is Nation's Great Destroyer" | Zero Hedge

Furious Coal Baron Lashes Out: "Obama Is The Greatest Enemy I've Ever Had. It's Beyond Personal" | Zero Hedge

Obama Delivers On Vow To "Bankrupt" Coal Industry - Chart Of Mining Job Losses Is Staggering | Zero Hedge

Over 11,000 Coal Miners Lost Their Jobs In The Last Year

Ohio coal miners to Obama: Stop lying - Hot Air

Coal Miners Praise Trump For Signing Bill Rolling Back Obama Restrictions On Industry

Coal Miner Who Spoke Alongside Trump: I'm Excited, He Kept His Promise

You insulted these people and you tried to put them out of business so that your "green" pals could go from millionaires to billionaires. They reject everything about your side of the aisle. President Trump thanks you and your unhinged ideology.

 

[P@triot]

You have to love the alt-reality mind of the modern-day hatriot. The coffin which doesn't exist is being nailed by a hammer which doesn't exist with nails that don't exist.

The man is a month into his presidency. A presidency he won in a landslide over a heavy favorite with every advantage known to man. The hatriots just can't wrap their mind around the fact that Donald Trump is their president.

 

[whitehall]

How about tax credits to small businesses who employ the "poor" and can't insure them? How about tax credits for the middle class who have a deductible liability big enough to have bought a freaking house in their grandparents time.