Shocking...providing gov't sponsored healthcare to everyone

[Mac1958]

Yeah, most of the ACA plans have deductibles of $6,000+. Insanity. They do have just co-pays for doc visits and the like, but if any more involved services are required they're paying a lot out of pocket.
.

Really? That figure surprises me. Do you know offhand in what state(s) this is happening?

Most of them, as I understand it. You can buy down, in other words pay higher premiums for, lower deductibles. Which is as it used to be before the ACA.

This article goes into some detail: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/u...-affordable-care-act-to-increase-in-2015.html

So even with the subsidies, lower income people either pay higher premiums or higher deductibles. An expanded Medicare/Medicare Supplement/Medicare Advantage system would take care of all of that.
.

Well, one could always have Medicare. I'm elderly and I have Medicare. Medicare sets the limits for which medical providers may charge for all procedures. Folks on Medicare satisfy a deductible. My health insurance policy pays that Medicare deductible and no more. It also pays for my office visits. I do not owe anything at all above the Medicare limit for any medical procedure nor does my health insurance company have to pay anymore than the limit set by Medicare. It is excellent insurance and can be used to see a doctor for even common colds with no out-of-pocket.

That still doesn't tell me if someone who is not eligible for Medicare or Medicaid but has a standard Obamacare policy can see his/her doctor for a common cold without having to mortgage his/her home to pay a deductible.

Yes, Medicare provider contracts are lower than regular insurance contracts, so that would have to be addressed (as part of a larger package that would include tort reform). Medicare Supplements have no deductibles or co-pays, Medicare Advantage plans have low co-pays, low deductibles and lower premiums.

This program works, it could easily be scaled up. Yes, a few tweaks would be needed, and yes, there might be some kind of tax for it. But compared to this mess now? Not even close.
.

 

[Stephanie]

At least you were willing to give it a try.

What you do have, though, is the knowledge that because of the legislation you'll never be turned down for a preexisting condition or find your coverage capped at some arbitrary point where (as in the past) the insurer decided "Oh, you need $10,000 worth of treatment per year? Well, we'll only cover $5,000, so fuck you!"

My question was simple and sincere though. One may have insurance and still not have insurance. I wanted to hear from someone who had an Obamacare policy to determine if they could actually use their insurance to see a doctor for common illnesses or injuries such as the flu, for a strep throat, a broken finger, etc., or was their deductible so outrageous that it prohibits their using their insurance. I am ineligible for an Obamacare policy and perhaps you are too but maybe someone on here actually has one and could present us with a real life experience.

The problem with presenting RL experiences on this board - if you've already indicated support for the PPACA - is you end up being called a liar by those who don't like their precious confirmation biases challenged. But you've yet to call me a liar, so without giving too much detail:

I was able to sign on to Blue Shield via my state exchange. The deductible for the new plan was the same as it had been on the old plan, but the premiums were lower. I'm pretty healthy, so I didn't blow through the deductible the first year, but I needed a trip to the ER in January, so that blew through the deductible for this year.

Had I not had insurance, that trip to the ER would have cost me $3,000+ more than it did. And there was no change in my premiums. (Prior to the PPACA, I could have expected a snippy little note from BS telling me my premiums were going up because I'd had the temerity to utilize their benefits.)

I'm an independent contractor. No Sugar Daddy employer gives me access to a group plan in lieu of a pay increase...I pay my own way. For people like me, i.e., people who sometimes work a seven-day week (in defiance of the moronic "lazy people who don't work" meme that's so prevalent around here), the PPACA works.

Thank you. That's the kind of information that is helpful.

Also, because I'm reasonably healthy, I opted for a Bronze Plan - high deductible/low premiums. If I had a chronic condition - let's say diabetes - I'd have opted for a Silver Plan - lower deductible/higher premiums.

You can tailor your plan to fit your needs.

Count your blessings. I thought I was healthy as a horse too back when I was younger. I awakened one morning with chest pains and had to have a triple bypass. I was only thirty-eight at the time. The bill for that one was roughly $100K. I had good insurance and it paid for it all except for the tv rental in my room.

glad to hear you are doing better now. My guy just had quadruple bypass and the bill today in 2015, was $500,000. he did have a couple other things. a cancer removed off his lung and twelve weeks of chemo. thankfully he also had good insurance.

 

[Arianrhod]

My question was simple and sincere though. One may have insurance and still not have insurance. I wanted to hear from someone who had an Obamacare policy to determine if they could actually use their insurance to see a doctor for common illnesses or injuries such as the flu, for a strep throat, a broken finger, etc., or was their deductible so outrageous that it prohibits their using their insurance. I am ineligible for an Obamacare policy and perhaps you are too but maybe someone on here actually has one and could present us with a real life experience.

The problem with presenting RL experiences on this board - if you've already indicated support for the PPACA - is you end up being called a liar by those who don't like their precious confirmation biases challenged. But you've yet to call me a liar, so without giving too much detail:

I was able to sign on to Blue Shield via my state exchange. The deductible for the new plan was the same as it had been on the old plan, but the premiums were lower. I'm pretty healthy, so I didn't blow through the deductible the first year, but I needed a trip to the ER in January, so that blew through the deductible for this year.

Had I not had insurance, that trip to the ER would have cost me $3,000+ more than it did. And there was no change in my premiums. (Prior to the PPACA, I could have expected a snippy little note from BS telling me my premiums were going up because I'd had the temerity to utilize their benefits.)

I'm an independent contractor. No Sugar Daddy employer gives me access to a group plan in lieu of a pay increase...I pay my own way. For people like me, i.e., people who sometimes work a seven-day week (in defiance of the moronic "lazy people who don't work" meme that's so prevalent around here), the PPACA works.

Thank you. That's the kind of information that is helpful.

Also, because I'm reasonably healthy, I opted for a Bronze Plan - high deductible/low premiums. If I had a chronic condition - let's say diabetes - I'd have opted for a Silver Plan - lower deductible/higher premiums.

You can tailor your plan to fit your needs.

Count your blessings. I thought I was healthy as a horse too back when I was younger. I awakened one morning with chest pains and had to have a triple bypass. I was only thirty-eight at the time. The bill for that one was roughly $100K. I had good insurance and it paid for it all except for the tv rental in my room.

glad to hear you are doing better now. My guy just had quadruple bypass and the bill today in 2015, was $500,000. he did have a couple other things. a cancer removed off his lung and twelve weeks of chemo. thankfully he also had good insurance.

So the canard you keep posting about how PPACA is the End of the World is just that. Huh.

 

[the_human_being]

My question was simple and sincere though. One may have insurance and still not have insurance. I wanted to hear from someone who had an Obamacare policy to determine if they could actually use their insurance to see a doctor for common illnesses or injuries such as the flu, for a strep throat, a broken finger, etc., or was their deductible so outrageous that it prohibits their using their insurance. I am ineligible for an Obamacare policy and perhaps you are too but maybe someone on here actually has one and could present us with a real life experience.

The problem with presenting RL experiences on this board - if you've already indicated support for the PPACA - is you end up being called a liar by those who don't like their precious confirmation biases challenged. But you've yet to call me a liar, so without giving too much detail:

I was able to sign on to Blue Shield via my state exchange. The deductible for the new plan was the same as it had been on the old plan, but the premiums were lower. I'm pretty healthy, so I didn't blow through the deductible the first year, but I needed a trip to the ER in January, so that blew through the deductible for this year.

Had I not had insurance, that trip to the ER would have cost me $3,000+ more than it did. And there was no change in my premiums. (Prior to the PPACA, I could have expected a snippy little note from BS telling me my premiums were going up because I'd had the temerity to utilize their benefits.)

I'm an independent contractor. No Sugar Daddy employer gives me access to a group plan in lieu of a pay increase...I pay my own way. For people like me, i.e., people who sometimes work a seven-day week (in defiance of the moronic "lazy people who don't work" meme that's so prevalent around here), the PPACA works.

Thank you. That's the kind of information that is helpful.

Also, because I'm reasonably healthy, I opted for a Bronze Plan - high deductible/low premiums. If I had a chronic condition - let's say diabetes - I'd have opted for a Silver Plan - lower deductible/higher premiums.

You can tailor your plan to fit your needs.

Count your blessings. I thought I was healthy as a horse too back when I was younger. I awakened one morning with chest pains and had to have a triple bypass. I was only thirty-eight at the time. The bill for that one was roughly $100K. I had good insurance and it paid for it all except for the tv rental in my room.

glad to hear you are doing better now. My guy just had quadruple bypass and the bill today in 2015, was $500,000. he did have a couple other things. a cancer removed off his lung and twelve weeks of chemo. thankfully he also had good insurance.

Bless the both of you. I wish him a speedy recovery. You are aware though that he may have to do it again in ten to fifteen years. Tell him to take good care of his diet and walk as much as he can.

 

[koshergrl]

Unfortunately,
The governor(TN) was trying to expand and he got outvoted. I wonder if that would have made it worse?

These states will eventually come begging to the feds...just as the same legislators in South Carolina who vetoed aid after Hurricane Sandy are now crying for help.

Add that to the long history of Red States = Taker States.

Red states are mostly Rural, right? But don't let the obvious get in your way.

That's the first time I've seen someone blame farm subsidies (they're usually sacrosanct), but the fact remains that the states that take more federal $ than they put in are always the first ones to bite the hand that feeds them.

I support farmer welfare to a point. But the point is still there. They get ALOT. Which explains ALOT.

It's funny how few people outside rural areas understand the amount of their tax dollars that goes to paying farmers (large agro co-ops) to not grow crops in order to keep prices inflated.

They're usually the same people howling about the genuinely poor ("people who are too lazy to work but are getting stuff that I'm paying for").

The government BRIBES farmers not to grow crops. It's the price they pay to people in order to dictate what they can do with their own land.

 

[koshergrl]

Can anyone actually use their Obamacare? I don't have it but from many reports the deductibles are so high no one can really afford to use it. What's the story on that?

The deductible depends on which insurance company you choose, and which of those company's plans you choose.

(This assumes you understand that the PPACA is not an insurance company. Can you assure us of that?)

So on average are most deductibles reasonable or not?

There are any number of subsidy calculators online, but this one from the Kaiser Foundation is pretty simple:

Subsidy Calculator Widget

Plug in your numbers and see what you get.

I did as you said. I'm not eligible.

At least you were willing to give it a try.

What you do have, though, is the knowledge that because of the legislation you'll never be turned down for a preexisting condition or find your coverage capped at some arbitrary point where (as in the past) the insurer decided "Oh, you need $10,000 worth of treatment per year? Well, we'll only cover $5,000, so fuck you!"

Bullshit you won't.

 

[Arianrhod]

These states will eventually come begging to the feds...just as the same legislators in South Carolina who vetoed aid after Hurricane Sandy are now crying for help.

Add that to the long history of Red States = Taker States.

Red states are mostly Rural, right? But don't let the obvious get in your way.

That's the first time I've seen someone blame farm subsidies (they're usually sacrosanct), but the fact remains that the states that take more federal $ than they put in are always the first ones to bite the hand that feeds them.

I support farmer welfare to a point. But the point is still there. They get ALOT. Which explains ALOT.

It's funny how few people outside rural areas understand the amount of their tax dollars that goes to paying farmers (large agro co-ops) to not grow crops in order to keep prices inflated.

They're usually the same people howling about the genuinely poor ("people who are too lazy to work but are getting stuff that I'm paying for").

The government BRIBES farmers not to grow crops. It's the price they pay to people in order to dictate what they can do with their own land.

They're free to refuse the government handout. Some do, most don't.

 

[Arianrhod]

The deductible depends on which insurance company you choose, and which of those company's plans you choose.

(This assumes you understand that the PPACA is not an insurance company. Can you assure us of that?)

So on average are most deductibles reasonable or not?

There are any number of subsidy calculators online, but this one from the Kaiser Foundation is pretty simple:

Subsidy Calculator Widget

Plug in your numbers and see what you get.

I did as you said. I'm not eligible.

At least you were willing to give it a try.

What you do have, though, is the knowledge that because of the legislation you'll never be turned down for a preexisting condition or find your coverage capped at some arbitrary point where (as in the past) the insurer decided "Oh, you need $10,000 worth of treatment per year? Well, we'll only cover $5,000, so fuck you!"

Bullshit you won't.

You have evidence that insurance companies are still imposing benefit caps? Kindly post it.

 

[koshergrl]

Red states are mostly Rural, right? But don't let the obvious get in your way.

That's the first time I've seen someone blame farm subsidies (they're usually sacrosanct), but the fact remains that the states that take more federal $ than they put in are always the first ones to bite the hand that feeds them.

I support farmer welfare to a point. But the point is still there. They get ALOT. Which explains ALOT.

It's funny how few people outside rural areas understand the amount of their tax dollars that goes to paying farmers (large agro co-ops) to not grow crops in order to keep prices inflated.

They're usually the same people howling about the genuinely poor ("people who are too lazy to work but are getting stuff that I'm paying for").

The government BRIBES farmers not to grow crops. It's the price they pay to people in order to dictate what they can do with their own land.

They're free to refuse the government handout. Some do, most don't.

They aren't handouts. The government restricted the productivity of their OWN LANDS, and in order to get that legislation passed, they had to agree to subsidize them for the reduction. It's how tyrants trick morons like you to pass bad law that diminishes the liberty and self sufficiency of people who produce.

 

[Arianrhod]

That's the first time I've seen someone blame farm subsidies (they're usually sacrosanct), but the fact remains that the states that take more federal $ than they put in are always the first ones to bite the hand that feeds them.

I support farmer welfare to a point. But the point is still there. They get ALOT. Which explains ALOT.

It's funny how few people outside rural areas understand the amount of their tax dollars that goes to paying farmers (large agro co-ops) to not grow crops in order to keep prices inflated.

They're usually the same people howling about the genuinely poor ("people who are too lazy to work but are getting stuff that I'm paying for").

The government BRIBES farmers not to grow crops. It's the price they pay to people in order to dictate what they can do with their own land.

They're free to refuse the government handout. Some do, most don't.

They aren't handouts. The government restricted the productivity of their OWN LANDS, and in order to get that legislation passed, they had to agree to subsidize them for the reduction. It's how tyrants trick morons like you to pass bad law that diminishes the liberty and self sufficiency of people who produce.

They are free to refuse them. Your basic premise is flawed.