# The Cost of Affordable Healthcare:Domino Principal



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

I was forced this year to get insurance through the Marketplace. My own out of pocket insurance was being phased out and due to pre-existing conditions nobody would touch me for a reasonable amount of money.

So I used my insurance for the first time last month. All of my refills on my medicines had expired and they are meds that I need to stay healthy. Retiring and becoming a full time homesteader forced me to change physicians. My new health care provider is a Nurse Practitioner and I really like him.

My old physician charged us 75$ for an office visit. He gave us a professional discount as we were health care providers in a previous career life and neither of us had insurance that would cover office visits. I expected my first visit to be a little higher with the new medical practice given it was an initial visit and more complex. I reasonably thought to myself may 125$.

Imagine my surprise when I got my statement today and the initial cost of my first visit was 202.00 dollars. That is for a basic sit down, getting to know you and your chronic health problems sort of visit. No labs, no preventative health care. Just talk.

I hadn't reached my deductible yet on my policy and they gave me a $94.93 write off on my charges leaving me with a total of 107.00 to pay out of pocket.

Now first off, that's okay. I'm willing to pay that out of pocket for good health care. But look at the regular cost of service! 202.00 dollars (if they pay in installments. You'll understand this better in a minute) and think of the people who are going to that practice, possibly Amish if the need arises, or people who just haven't insurance to fall back on and are paying the annual penalty in their Taxes.

For every 94.93 that office is writing off on me, some poor soul with no insurance is paying the full amount of 202 dollars for an initial visit to make up for the loss that practice is taking in seeing me.

And we wonder about the rising costs of health care in America!

The office is offering a 50% discount to people who pay cash at the time of service but if you have insurance to use that pretty much goes out the window. Although if I had used that option, I would have only paid 101$. So they are making 6$ more on me than they would have if I had paid cash at the time of service. Oh man, 6$ that really is going to be a big money maker in a medical practice where insurance rates and licensing fees, not to mention operating expenses are skyrocketing. And many people do not have 101 dollars in ready cash to hand over to anyone these days. So those folks are paying the full price of 202 dollars in monthly payments.

Anybody else ran into this with their Marketplace policy? Have you noticed a rise in the charges for an office visit/services from your family doctor since the start of Obamacare?

For me, it's a safety net. I lead a pretty energetic life style for a lady in her 60s and as I like to say, it's not a matter of if I break a bone but when. But I only see this having, as I expected, a HUGE negative effect on health care in America.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

All I can say is: Hang on til medicare. 
DH lost his ins due to the "If you like your ins you can keep it. Period." He'll be medicare age in 1 1/2 yrs, hoping for no lithotripsy charges in the meantime. He passed a small stone just the other day. Nearly a weekly occurance.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Man, I feel for him. As bad as childbirth, I have been told.

That is what happened to my personal policy also. I could keep it if I liked it but then I was told it was obsolete and due to be phased out.

Medicare is 3.5 years away for me and 1.5 years off for DH.

What is so alarming is whether or not price tags on medical care are going to rise, or maybe even double because of Obamacare.

If they do, you will see more people filing for assistance. 

Where are we as a nation going to get all this money?


----------



## Helena (May 10, 2002)

I live in PAand the large medical center has a healtph plan that is working for me very well. I have a $300 deductible..but they "give me $1500 in a hospital checking account that I write the checks to pay for that first $1500. Since i hadn't used it for a couple of years and this year I needed too badly I was able to pay my $3000 from my hospital piggy bank money so no out of pocket for me this time.For prescription I use our county hospital from the same medical center and am able to get heart medication x'3 for 90 days for reasonable rates with no added policy. For a 90 day supply of one it cost me $12 yes..twelve dollars and the other 2 are less. This has worked well for me and what happens is the SS medicare payment takes care of the monthly cost.so I don't pay any real out of pocket preminum payments either . It has worked well for me so far. It doesn't cover eyes, dental or hearing exams but usually can afford twice a year dental checkups and every 2 years for glasses and lenses. Will cover the eye exam though.


----------



## Helena (May 10, 2002)

OPPS!!!!!..Mean a $3000..3 thousand...deductible..Need to prove read better...


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

The people who've been pushing for socialized medicine for decades have finally gotten the foot in the door. They don't give a rat's rear if it puts people in hardship as long as they've got their "control" through the ability to dictate the most vital part of our lives. From here it just gets worse, until people are clamoring for relief. That's when they "give" us the relief of what they term "single payer" (national healthcare), just like Great Britain.

Next year, when my wife retires, we'll sign up for Medicare. I can hardly wait.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Ozarks Tom said:


> The people who've been pushing for socialized medicine for decades have finally gotten the foot in the door. They don't give a rat's rear if it puts people in hardship as long as they've got their "control" through the ability to dictate the most vital part of our lives. From here it just gets worse, until people are clamoring for relief. That's when they "give" us the relief of what they term "single payer" (national healthcare), just like Great Britain.
> 
> Next year, when my wife retires, we'll sign up for Medicare. I can hardly wait.



Isn't Medicare "Socialized Medicine"?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

plowjockey said:


> Isn't Medicare "Socialized Medicine"?


Yeppers, and I highly doubt it would pass the big 0's "test" without buying supplemental insurance to go with it.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

plowjockey said:


> Isn't Medicare "Socialized Medicine"?


Of course.

Honestly, I don't know how else to do healthcare for the elderly except the kind of coverage Medicare offers.

The problem is that most elderly people are on limited fixed incomes and are unable to supplement their incomes because they are unable to work. At the same time, their healthcare is more expensive than it's ever been before in their lives. The idea is that when people reach retirement age their health insurance was already paid for during working years. Additional funds come from people who die younger and didn't need to use it. Think of it as insurance against growing very old.

In theory, Medicare could be done by private insurance instead of the government, but it would then have built-in profit drag on the program. I don't know if the results would be a good as what we have today.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yeppers, and I highly doubt it would pass the big 0's "test" without buying supplemental insurance to go with it.


You don't believe in supplemental insurance?


----------



## Trainwrek (Aug 23, 2014)

I pay cash out of pocket at the local walk in. Last year it was 100 per appointment, this year I went in for something minor and saw the price had gone up to 150.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> You don't believe in supplemental insurance?


of course I believe in supplemental insurance. I believe in it enough to purchase it. My point was that medicare by itself would most likely not qualify as being adequate by Ocares standards when it comes to "if you like your plan you can keep it". At best its very expensive and offers very little by way of coverage without purchasing supplemental coverage to fill in all the gaps.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Of course.
> 
> Honestly, I don't know how else to do healthcare for the elderly except the kind of coverage Medicare offers.
> 
> ...


Oddly enough that profit drag you speak of is usually far less than most government waste. How much profit drag would it take to equal a billion dollars or so of aircraft being sold to scrap dealers for what figured out to about 6 cents a pound? ($30,000) I saw that one on the news just last night.... I cant think of ANY private company that would throw that much money out the window. Our government does it on a regular basis.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Nevada said:


> You don't believe in supplemental insurance?


You know, Nevada, there are times I agree with you and times I disagree but this time I agree with you 100%.

I remember during my nightmare ordeal/personal purgatory dealing with the Marketplace seeing a note somewhere that said "please notify us if and when you qualify for Medicare".

I dread the day I have to do that. IMHO they are going to push everyone into that mandatory purchase also. I think insurance is a great safety net. I just question the definition of 'affordable' and what 'affordable' is doing to medical practices and private pay individuals.

I have always thought of Medicare as the ultimate Ponzi Scheme. They are just sitting around hoping we all die young instead of old and broke.

It all reminds me of the old joke that goes, how dare they say this is a dictatorship. Just because we demand that everyone learn to play a musical instrument or face death? We are not dictators, we are music lovers!

No matter how you stir it up and serve it, or label it, it still smacks of socialized medicine and yes, a dictatorship presidency.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Trainwrek said:


> I pay cash out of pocket at the local walk in. Last year it was 100 per appointment, this year I went in for something minor and saw the price had gone up to 150.



Yes, and next year it will probably be 175 or higher. The docs have to make up the loss somewhere and it's gonna be through you, the private, cash on the line patient.

It makes me want to curse and cry at the same time.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

badlander said:


> I think insurance is a great safety net.


Health insurance isn't really a safety net any longer. Insurance used to be limited to care for major illness or injury, but routine care has become unaffordable. The idea of insuring routine care is to spread the cost of routine care over monthly payments.

The thing is that most of us will only see our doctors once or twice each year. If the doctor visit, lab work, and immunizations are going to hit us with a bill of several hundred dollars, then spreading that cost over monthly payments is going to help a lot of people.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

I think Medicare needs to be audited. You figure most people pay into it for 40 years before they collect a penny in benefits. 4.5% of their gross pay, up to $113k per year, just recently it was raised. Then, they pay over $100 monthly premium when they start using it. Look at the obituaries on any given day. A lot of people die in their 50s and early 60s, they paid in but didn't collect much if any benefits. So cutting $700billion out of Medicare to help pay for O-care is stealing, IMHO.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

From my post: "Next year, when my wife retires, we'll sign up for Medicare. I can hardly wait."



plowjockey said:


> Isn't Medicare "Socialized Medicine"?


I was being facetious.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Ozarks Tom said:


> From my post: "Next year, when my wife retires, we'll sign up for Medicare. I can hardly wait."


I think you'll find Medicare to be pretty good insurance. The conservative complaint isn't that it's bad coverage, the complaint is that it's so good that we can't afford it.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Boy you are so far out of this world if your thinking is that about the right. WOW just wow.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> Boy you are so far out of this world if your thinking is that about the right. WOW just wow.


OK, straighten me out then.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> OK, straighten me out then.


Personal responsibility!


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Nevada said:


> I think you'll find Medicare to be pretty good insurance. The conservative complaint isn't that it's bad coverage, the complaint is that it's so good that we can't afford it.


Okay, this is one of those times that I'll just have to disagree with....on both parts of your statement. 

From a provider POV medicare is a POS when it comes to reimbursement to providers, but then most insurances are, forcing the doctors to take a write off that equals about 70% of their profit margin. And Why? Why to have the ability to see the patients that have the insurances to start with.

Second, as a conservative desperately clinging to my Bible and my guns, I don't have any recollection of anyone saying that Medicare is so good we can't afford it. But I do remember a lot being said about money being funneled from Medicare to fund Obamacare. And whose idea was that?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> I think you'll find Medicare to be pretty good insurance. The conservative complaint isn't that it's bad coverage, the complaint is that it's so good that we can't afford it.


Who is saying that?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

badlander said:


> Okay, this is one of those times that I'll just have to disagree with....on both parts of your statement.
> 
> From a provider POV medicare is a POS when it comes to reimbursement to providers, but then most insurances are, forcing the doctors to take a write off that equals about 70% of their profit margin. And Why? Why to have the ability to see the patients that have the insurances to start with.


From an insured point of view, Medicare is standard 80/20 indemnity insurance, with affordable supplemental insurance available.



badlander said:


> Second, as a conservative desperately clinging to my Bible and my guns, I don't have any recollection of anyone saying that Medicare is so good we can't afford it. But I do remember a lot being said about money being funneled from Medicare to fund Obamacare. And whose idea was that?


https://www.google.com/#q=medicare+unfunded+liabilities


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Nevada said:


> From an insured point of view, Medicare is standard 80/20 indemnity insurance, with affordable supplemental insurance available.
> 
> https://www.google.com/#q=medicare+unfunded+liabilities


_Of what THEY consider to be usual and customary charges based on regional average...supposedly. Trust me when I say I know what I am talking about with this. It was my job for 7 years._ _And Affordable? By whose standards are you saying that? What is affordable for a retired government employee isn't the same for a retired non union factory worker or a retired restaurant employee.
_

_I don't have time to read every link but the one I did scan from WSJ claimed that rising medical costs would be slowed. Nope. Not seeing it. Not when an office visit costs 202 dollars and another posters visit to an urgent care walk in clinic went up 50$. Had we stayed in business, we were looking at sharp increases in our fees in order to cover the hit we were going to be taking from Obamacare and the rising cost of licensing and insurance coverage_. 

_Unless you've been a medical professional, working in the trenches of trying to run a medical practice, you only know what the media and Google is letting you know. _

_Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Try talking to some Doctors and Office Managers some time who are dealing with insurance companies on daily basis. I guarantee it will be an eye opener for you._


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

badlander said:


> _Unless you've been a medical professional, working in the trenches of trying to run a medical practice, you only know what the media and Google is letting you know._


I don't draw my medical experience or opinions from Google.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> Isn't Medicare "Socialized Medicine"?


Why do I bother answering this?
Do you not read anything on HT, do you just post?
Do you ever look at paycheck stubs?
Do you even know Medicare is paid into all your working life w/o any benefit at all til age 65? Then another $100/mo is taken from you.
Do you think ins. is socialized medicine? People pay into it every month whether used or not. 
Save this post for when you are tempted to post that ? again. And again. And again.
Yes, medicare IS a form of soc. med but we pay for it.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

badlander said:


> You know, Nevada, there are times I agree with you and times I disagree but this time I agree with you 100%.
> 
> I remember during my nightmare ordeal/personal purgatory dealing with the Marketplace seeing a note somewhere that said "please notify us if and when you qualify for Medicare".
> 
> ...


Post of the century award.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

NV, I'll tell ya agian, you've got ONE leftie site saying the 1/2 trillion TAKEN from medicare was NOT really taken & we've provided you w/several TRUE sites tellin ya that it WAS taken. but carry on w/lies, we all know.
Love ya anyway.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> Why do I bother answering this?
> Do you not read anything on HT, do you just post?
> Do you ever look at paycheck stubs?
> Do you even know Medicare is paid into all your working life w/o any benefit at all til age 65? Then another $100/mo is taken from you.
> ...


You do know that you described socialized medicine.

Socialized medicine is paid for by the people to be used by the people, it just leaves out the insurance companies.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I think you'll find Medicare to be pretty good insurance.


If it's so good, why do you want a supplemental policy? Maybe because the base coverage isn't really as good as you say?


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> So I used my insurance for the first time last month. All of my refills on my medicines had expired and they are meds that I need to stay healthy.


I need a script refilled, too, and the doctor won't do it unless I come in. That's fair enough -- I don't work for free and I don't expect anyone else to, either. 

But here's what I did: Obamacare allows one free 'well-woman' visit per year for a physical or checkup. You don't have to meet your deductible first in order to have the cost of the visit paid for by insurance. If you Google 'ACA preventative care,' you'll find a list of screenings and other services that are supposed to be included in this free visit. 

I figured I'd keep this option in my back pocket, like a 'Get Out Of Jail Free' card in Monopoly, until I needed to see the doctor, and then I'd invoke it. 

I printed off a list of the screenings and highlighted the ones I want to discuss with the doc. But while I'm there, I'll also ask about getting my scripts refilled. 

I can't say whether this tactic will work -- my appointment isn't until Monday! -- but I figured it was worth a shot.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

willow_girl said:


> I need a script refilled, too, and the doctor won't do it unless I come in. That's fair enough -- I don't work for free and I don't expect anyone else to, either.
> 
> But here's what I did: Obamacare allows one free 'well-woman' visit per year for a physical or checkup. You don't have to meet your deductible first in order to have the cost of the visit paid for by insurance. If you Google 'ACA preventative care,' you'll find a list of screenings and other services that are supposed to be included in this free visit.
> 
> ...


GO FOR IT, GIRL! Let us know if your 'get out of jail free' card works for you.

I talked the preventative care options over with my NP and he said that they are now advising labs every three years and if you have had a pap done within 4 years of your 65 birthday and it was negative, you didn't have to have anymore unless you started having symptoms that warranted it. Well, darn, I had everything done last fall so no freebie for me.

I try to avoid doctor's offices as much as possible and told the new provider that. I'd bow to coming in every 6 months but unless I was deathly sick or hurt, don't count on seeing me.

For years I have paid for my own office visits and really thought I would be paying less with my Anthem coverage. Surprise. I'm paying more. That was the whole jest of this topic. 

Are you paying more or less for you health care coverage under Obamacare?


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

jtbrandt said:


> If it's so good, why do you want a supplemental policy? Maybe because the base coverage isn't really as good as you say?


It was passed down to providers last year that we were going to be getting reimbursed less by Medicare this year. I don't remember just how much less but whatever we didn't get paid means either the patient will pick up the copay if their supplemental insurance doesn't or the physician will be forced to do a write off of the charges.

That's bad news for the Medicare enrollees and for the providers.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> If it's so good, why do you want a supplemental policy? Maybe because the base coverage isn't really as good as you say?


Some retired people can't afford 20% with straight Medicare. We have alternatives to that here. We have Medicare Advantage HMOs that have modest enough copays that supplemental insurance isn't necessary. That's what I'll be getting next summer when I go on Medicare.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Nevada said:


> Some retired people can't afford 20% with straight Medicare. We have alternatives to that here. We have Medicare Advantage HMOs that have modest enough copays that supplemental insurance isn't necessary. That's what I'll be getting next summer when I go on Medicare.


I'll say it again. Medicare is cutting what they are paying to health care providers. Who is that going to affect? The group who is going to be paying more for their health care is the percentage of people who do not have insurance. That's the whole point I'm trying to make here. Physicians and health care providers are having to raise their fees in order to off set the hit they are taking from the Affordable Health Care Act.

It doesn't matter what type of supplemental insurance you have, Medicare Advantage, HMO...dealt with it. BCBS dealt with it, Humana Medicare? Dealt with it. They are all on board to pay the health care providers less leading to higher fee prices being passed down to the private pay, non insured patient.

Raise prices enough and you force people to sign up for insurance to avoid paying the higher out of pocket prices. It's the same thing they are doing to gun owners. They can't take the guns away but they can control the amount of ammo you can buy by buying up the public surplus ammo sitting on the gun shops shelves. Tried to buy .22's lately? Can hardly do it.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

badlander said:


> Physicians and health care providers are having to raise their fees in order to off set the hit they are taking from the Affordable Health Care Act.


In a lot of ways the party is just about over for medical providers. They've finally killed the goose that lays the golden egg through overpricing. They've priced themselves into a new era. They'll either become more efficient and do things for less, or go work for someone else.

An industry can only raise prices to a certain point before consumers revolt. We've reached that point in medicine. The ACA is telling providers that we're not going to pay six figures for heart attacks and cancer any longer.

They only have themselves to blame for this.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

jtbrandt said:


> If it's so good, why do you want a supplemental policy? Maybe because the base coverage isn't really as good as you say?


A better question.... If its so good why isnt it offered "free choice" instead of being forced upon everyone?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> In a lot of ways the party is just about over for medical providers. They've finally killed the goose that lays the golden egg through overpricing. They've priced themselves into a new era. They'll either become more efficient and do things for less, or go work for someone else.
> 
> An industry can only raise prices to a certain point before consumers revolt. We've reached that point in medicine. The ACA is telling providers that we're not going to pay six figures for heart attacks and cancer any longer.
> 
> They only have themselves to blame for this.


Oddly enough it isnt the consumers that revolted.... once again its the government forcing the citizens to play in their game. They got away with it with SS, They got away with it with Medicare, now they are taking over everyones freedom to choose for themselves with the ACA. I am quite sure the government knows best how to make our choices for us... I dont know of any citizen who would go into 17 trillion dollars worth of debt with no possible way to pay it off. That kind of wisdom seems to be reserved for the government. :hair


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> A better question.... If its so good why isnt it offered "free choice" instead of being forced upon everyone?


Supplemental insurance is your choice, as are Medicare Parts B, C, and D. Medicare part A is moot because it's free for most of us.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Supplemental insurance is your choice, as are Medicare Parts B, C, and D. *Medicare part A is moot because it's free for most of us.*


I feel left out.... Medicare part A was never my choice, nor is it "free"... those payments came right off the top of every penny I earned during my entire work history. Now I am really curious.... how do "most" people get it for free? I am also pretty sure part C is private insurance that I do have the option of purchasing. But then I have always had the option of buying from private companies.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

I'm not going to argue apples to oranges here. I know what I know. If you are friends with a doctor sometime, ask him how much his medical licensing cost has increased over the last 25 years he's been in practice. Ask him how much continuing education, malpractice insurance and operating costs have gone up in the last decade. I think you will be surprised to hear that the cost of just hanging a license on their wall has doubled and for some is nearly 1000.00 if not more. Those costs go hard on a small private practice. Especially when insurance companies are forcing them to take large write offs on services.

And here's a news flash for you. Doctors do not set the amount Medicare will pay them for any given service. Medicare sets the usual and customary charges determined by where you live. Charge a patient more than the Medicare declared U&C? You are not going to get paid extra. Charge less? You still aren't going to get U&C. You will get reimbursed less.

So where is the doctor supposed to make up that deficit when Medicare pays pennies on the dollar for services? He or she is running a business. It's not all 'a calling to serve'. They have staff to pay along with personal and professional operating services and yes they have themselves and their families to support.

Your statement makes as much sense as saying grocery store owners are responsible for the pennies on the dollar that they are reimbursed through the food stamp program because grocery prices have gone up.

Medical professionals are not killing the goose. That bird is slowly but surely being strangled to death by an entitlement mentality that pervades Washington.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I feel left out.... Medicare part A was never my choice, nor is it "free"... those payments came right off the top of every penny I earned during my entire work history. Now I am really curious.... how do "most" people get it for free? I am also pretty sure part C is private insurance that I do have the option of purchasing. But then I have always had the option of buying from private companies.


FICA is a tax. There is no choice in paying taxes.

Medicare Part A does not have a monthly premium if you contributed to FICA for 10 years or more. That includes most of us. If you contributed to FICA for under 10 years the premium is $426/month. It will be lowered to $407/month next year.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I feel left out.... Medicare part A was never my choice, nor is it "free"... those payments came right off the top of every penny I earned during my entire work history. Now I am really curious.... how do "most" people get it for free? I am also pretty sure part C is private insurance that I do have the option of purchasing. But then I have always had the option of buying from private companies.


Semantics, of course. We pay for Medicare during our working years because we anticipate medical costs running out of control after we retire, when we can least afford it. But while we pay for Medicare Part A during our working years, there is no monthly premium associated with Medicare Part A after retirement.

At over $100/month for Part B, Part A sure seems a lot more free than Part B.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> FICA is a tax. There is no choice in paying taxes.
> 
> Medicare Part A does not have a monthly premium if you contributed to FICA for 10 years or more. That includes most of us. If you paid in under 10 years the premium is $426/month. It will be lowered to $407/month next year.


Which is exactly my point! We have NO CHOICE when it comes to Medicare part A.... it is forced upon us by the government..... if it were so durned good why does it have to be forced upon everyone? Its no better than the ACA.... which again... has to be forced upon us... it is not optional.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Which is exactly my point! We have NO CHOICE when it comes to Medicare part A.... it is forced upon us by the government..... if it were so durned good why does it have to be forced upon everyone? Its no better than the ACA.... which again... has to be forced upon us... it is not optional.


Because virtually all elderly people need health insurance. The problem with making it voluntary is that a lot of Americans would opt out and not plan for the future. We tried that system and it didn't work.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Semantics, of course. We pay for Medicare during our working years because we anticipate medical costs running out of control after we retire, when we can least afford it. But while we pay for Medicare Part A during our working years, there is no monthly premium associated with Medicare Part A after retirement.
> 
> *At over $100/month for Part B, Part A sure seems a lot more free than Part B.*


pure illusion... aka "fuzzy math". If my home is paid for, does that mean I am living there for free? Just because my mortgage is paid off doesnt mean I live here for free. Even though in my particular case I never had a mortgage, paid cash as I built it, most of us do have a rather lengthy period of mortgage payments we have to make. There is no such thing as "free". particularly when it comes to a US citizen... those days are long gone!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Because virtually all elderly people need health insurance. The problem with making it voluntary is that a lot of Americans would opt out and not plan for the future. We tried that system and it didn't work.


It worked perfectly! Those who planned ahead created a stable future for themselves.... those who did not... well, life has consequences built in from the get go. Your system would require people to remove all stoves from our homes, my system teaches little ones not to touch them by letting them get their fingers burnt once or twice. I dont know about you, but I like my system better, I get to cook nutritious meals, and warm my toes in the wintertime by a toasty fire.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> It worked perfectly! Those who planned ahead created a stable future for themselves.... those who did not... well, life has consequences built in from the get go. Your system would require people to remove all stoves from our homes, my system teaches little ones not to touch them by letting them get their fingers burnt once or twice. I dont know about you, but I like my system better, I get to cook nutritious meals, and warm my toes in the wintertime by a toasty fire.


Good! That sounds like what republicans should run in this year; revoking everybody's SS & Medicare.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Good! That sounds like what republicans should run in this year; revoking everybody's SS & Medicare.


Thats really what every elected official should be running on.... republicn, democrat, independent or other.... upholding our Constitution, and getting our nation back on track. Not gonna happen, I know that, but its what needs to happen.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Thats really what every elected official should be running on.... republicn, democrat, independent or other.... upholding our Constitution, and getting our nation back on track. Not gonna happen, I know that, but its what needs to happen.


Do you know why that's not going to happen? Because revoking SS or Medicare is a radical idea. It's radical by any standard.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Do you know why that's not going to happen? Because revoking SS or Medicare is a radical idea. It's radical by any standard.


Not really as radical as invoking them was in the first place. The federal government has NO BUSINESS involving itself in the private lives of its citizens other than to protect them from governments... foreign and domestic. I have never found ANY form of authorization in our Constitution for any of our social programs.... I find violating our highest law of the land to be not just radical.... but downright treasonous.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Not really as radical as invoking them was in the first place. The federal government has NO BUSINESS involving itself in the private lives of its citizens other than to protect them from governments... foreign and domestic. I have never found ANY form of authorization in our Constitution for any of our social programs.... I find violating our highest law of the land to be not just radical.... but downright treasonous.


 Your inferior education is showing.
You see the supreme court with their better education and reasoning abilities have ruled it IS in there!


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Not really as radical as invoking them was in the first place. The federal government has NO BUSINESS involving itself in the private lives of its citizens other than to protect them from governments... foreign and domestic. I have never found ANY form of authorization in our Constitution for any of our social programs.... I find violating our highest law of the land to be not just radical.... but downright treasonous.


And there are some that even think there is a 'right to vote in a national election in the Constitution but there isn't. There are a few bills floating around trying to make it a right but so far no go.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

arabian knight said:


> And there are some that even think there is a 'right to vote in a national election in the Constitution but there isn't. There are a few bills floating around trying to make it a right but so far no go.


This is correct, and for good reason. The founders knew that if "the people" were allowed to vote, we would end up with a doomed to fail democracy. The average citizen was never supposed to be voting for presidents nor senators ever, and only those men of reasonable mental capacity (those who had some skin in the game primarily) were to even have a vote for our representatives. The federal government was never supposed to be a government of, for and by the people.... it is supposed to be a government of, for and by the several states. Anyone with one good eye and the reading capacity of a 5th grader can plainly see this by simply reading our Constitution.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Are you paying more or less for you health care coverage under Obamacare?


It's hard to say because it's like comparing apples to oranges. The policies available now have different deductibles and levels of coverage. 

I was uninsured from 2/13 until I enrolled in Obamacare as of 01/01/14. After my divorce was final (which nullified my insurance) I priced out policies but decided I'd see if I could squeak by until the ACA went into effect. In retrospect, that turned out to be a good decision, as my total health care costs for 10-month that period amounted to $38 (paid cash to have a couple of scripts refilled). 

Prior to Obamacare, I could have had a decent PPO for about $160 a month. A catastrophic policy with a $10,000 deductible but 100% coverage beyond that first $10K would have cost $90 a month. A policy similar to the latter today comes with a $6,300 deductible but costs $277 a month. The ACA policy I selected has a $2,650 deductible and costs about $225 a month, but the subsidy I receive covers 3/4 of the cost. 

I think of it as true "insurance" -- it's there if I have a catastrophic emergency, but other than that, I'm pretty much on my own, as it's unlikely I'll ever meet the deductible, and thus will have to pay for routine care out-of-pocket. There has only been one year in my adult life that my medical bills have totaled more than $2,650!

If it wasn't for the subsidy, which pays most of the cost, I wouldn't bother with it. I certainly wouldn't pay more than $200 a month for it!


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Some retired people can't afford 20% with straight Medicare. We have alternatives to that here. We have Medicare Advantage HMOs that have modest enough copays that supplemental insurance isn't necessary. That's what I'll be getting next summer when I go on Medicare.


I don't understand this because I really don't know anything about Medicare. The Medicare Advantage HMO is an alternative, not a supplement? Not that it matters to me because I want nothing to do with Medicare in any form, but it seems very confusing.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> I don't understand this because I really don't know anything about Medicare. The Medicare Advantage HMO is an alternative, not a supplement? Not that it matters to me because I want nothing to do with Medicare in any form, but it seems very confusing.


Medicare recipients have the option to have a private insurance company administrate their health insurance, depending on what's available in the area where they live. That's called either Medicare Part C or Medicare Advantage.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

badlander said:


> It was passed down to providers last year that we were going to be getting reimbursed less by Medicare this year. I don't remember just how much less but whatever we didn't get paid means either the patient will pick up the copay if their supplemental insurance doesn't or the physician will be forced to do a write off of the charges.
> 
> That's bad news for the Medicare enrollees and for the providers.


Also, some home health services were drastically cut, along w/hospitilization-under some circumstances.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

badlander said:


> I'm not going to argue apples to oranges here. I know what I know. If you are friends with a doctor sometime, ask him how much his medical licensing cost has increased over the last 25 years he's been in practice. Ask him how much continuing education, malpractice insurance and operating costs have gone up in the last decade. I think you will be surprised to hear that the cost of just hanging a license on their wall has doubled and for some is nearly 1000.00 if not more. Those costs go hard on a small private practice. Especially when insurance companies are forcing them to take large write offs on services.
> 
> And here's a news flash for you. Doctors do not set the amount Medicare will pay them for any given service. Medicare sets the usual and customary charges determined by where you live. Charge a patient more than the Medicare declared U&C? You are not going to get paid extra. Charge less? You still aren't going to get U&C. You will get reimbursed less.
> 
> ...


Post of the decade award.
Those who think docs make too much $$$ are totally UNaware.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Your inferior education is showing.
> You see the supreme court with their better education and reasoning abilities have ruled it IS in there!


Are you speaking of the ObummerUNcare? B/c all that was ruled about that is that it is a tax...the penalty, that is; just what the lying dems yelled over&over&over that it was NOT. Some parts of it have been struck down. More to come...


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

63


Tricky Grama said:


> Are you speaking of the ObummerUNcare? B/c all that was ruled about that is that it is a tax...the penalty, that is; just what the lying dems yelled over&over&over that it was NOT. Some parts of it have been struck down. More to come...


 Im sure there will be More rullings by the SCOTUS.

On a different subject why the name calling? :catfight: You usually have well reasoned posts that I learn a lot from but when I see a lot of name calling in a post I tend to skip over the logic and just get mad.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Are you speaking of the ObummerUNcare? B/c all that was ruled about that is that it is a tax...the penalty, that is; just what the lying dems yelled over&over&over that it was NOT. Some parts of it have been struck down. More to come...


Yes parts have been struck down and when these other parts that have been suspended because Obama doesn't want to take the risk of a backlash in the up coming elections more will be struck down on this Uncare that was shoved down the throats of the American people by the liberal left so conveniently that many teem to think it is a good thing, when in fact it is the worst piece of legislation to come out of the One Sided WH in many a year.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> Yes parts have been struck down and when these other parts that have been suspended because Obama doesn't want to take the risk of a backlash in the up coming elections more will be struck down on this Uncare that was shoved down the throats of the American people by the liberal left so conveniently that many teem to think it is a good thing, when in fact it is the worst piece of legislation to come out of the One Sided WH in many a year.


I'm not really seeing the ACA as a major issue in this election. At least not so far. At this point there isn't any single major issue to define the 2014 elections.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Want me to go get Ads for Our Governors race here in WI? ]
Want me to go get other Governors AND Senators And Congressmen ads in races throughout this country? 
It IS a Big Issue and will be on top of the list in the up-coming elections. 
Wow not sure where or what elections and issues you are paying attention to, but ObamaUncare is a big issue in this country as it is still unwanted by the majority in this country. Just because you may not be hearing much about it your part of the world, it is out there.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> Wow not sure where or what elections and issues you are paying attention to


Hint: Nevada...

But here are some national trends to consider. As you can see, there's no single dominant issue and healthcare interest is on the decline.









http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/pa...nt-issue-leading-into-midterm-elections/1243/


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Medicare recipients have the option to have a private insurance company administrate their health insurance, depending on what's available in the area where they live. That's called either Medicare Part C or Medicare Advantage.


Thanks for the explanation. So Part C is an option to replace Parts A & B. Part A is "free" in that there are no monthly premiums and it's for hospitalization and nursing homes and such. Part B is optional and is like regular health coverage that covers doctors visits and such (at 80%). Is this all correct so far? Now Part D. I know it's for drugs, but is it optional? I've heard of penalties related to it, but don't understand.



Nevada said:


> I'm not really seeing the ACA as a major issue in this election. At least not so far. At this point there isn't any single major issue to define the 2014 elections.


It's not a major issue in this election because Obama's plan worked...not the ACA plan, but the plan to delay a lot of the parts that are really going to tick people off. You're right, there isn't a single defining issue this year. There have been several that seemed big and then fizzled. I don't foresee a huge turnout for this election.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> Thanks for the explanation. So Part C is an option to replace Parts A & B. Part A is "free" in that there are no monthly premiums and it's for hospitalization and nursing homes and such. Part B is optional and is like regular health coverage that covers doctors visits and such (at 80%). Is this all correct so far? Now Part D. I know it's for drugs, but is it optional? I've heard of penalties related to it, but don't understand.


Around here Part D compliant medication insurance is usually included in Medicare Advantage plans, although that's not always the case.

Part D is optional, but if you don't subscribe or carry compliant insurance when you become eligible then you will have to pay a ~$30/month penalty if you decide to signup later.


----------



## FrugalFannie (Jul 29, 2012)

last job my husband had they decided to change the plans mid year due to a consolidation of companies they bought up. so we get new rates for the new plan - nearly $500 per month in premiums for our family of 3 plus $2000 each for deductibles and then 80/20. We couldn't afford it. opted out. paid cash for our visits. husband gets laid off. new job pays for his health insurance. cool. then we get the package. just to add the kid $480 per month. just to add me $520 per month. BUT for the bargain basement price of $900 per month we can add both of us! $3000 per person deductible. 80/20 co insurance. limited number of providers, etc etcâ¦ let's just say we are going to keep paying for care out of our pockets.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Nevada said:


> you become eligible then you will have to pay a ~$30/month penalty if you decide to signup later.


No it isn't 30 bucks that is the Top of the mark. it is 1% a month for non compliance yes if you run it out for a long time it can add up to that much but waiting a year to two it is not that high. 


> Since Mrs. Martin was without creditable prescription drug coverage from July 2011&#8211;December 2013, her penalty in 2014 is 30% (1% for each of the 30 months) of $32.42 (the national base beneficiary premium for 2014), which is $9.73. The monthly penalty is rounded to the nearest $.10, so she'll be charged $9.70 each month in addition to her plan's monthly premium in 2014.
> Here's the math:
> .30 (30% penalty) Ã $32.42 (2014 base beneficiary premium) = $9.73
> $9.73 (rounded to the nearest $0.10) = $9.70
> $9.70 = Mrs. Martin's monthly late enrollment penalty for 2014


 I am at 18 bucks a month penalty. Cause it is something like 18 months I did not have D.
But that will stop next year when I turn 65. YEAH.
Cause I did this before the age 65 if you do this at age 65 the penalty goes on Forever.
http://www.medicare.gov/part-d/costs/penalty/part-d-late-enrollment-penalty.html


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yep, the Medicare penalty is for a lifetime once you hit 65. My dad was late in signing up for Medicare and SS both. Partly because he's just a procrastinator, partly because we had a dickens of a time getting his birth certificate. He had the name of the hospital he was born in wrong. He pays extra for his Medicare for the rest of his life, I think it's $40 a month. 

SS on the other hand, gave him back pay! One hand giveth, the other taketh away.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> 63
> 
> Im sure there will be More rullings by the SCOTUS.
> 
> On a different subject why the name calling? :catfight: You usually have well reasoned posts that I learn a lot from but when I see a lot of name calling in a post I tend to skip over the logic and just get mad.


Who did I name-call? IF you are referring to the Idiotincharge, I always capitalize that, out of respect for the office. If you can give me some swell reasons why he's not an idiot, I might change my name. 
But then, maybe not. During his 1st election some liberals got upset b/c I generally referred to him as Barack Hussein Obama. They were offended. Go figure.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I'm not really seeing the ACA as a major issue in this election. At least not so far. At this point there isn't any single major issue to define the 2014 elections.


Another block of millions are set to lose their ins...that really COULD pose a prob for any "D" who's running.
And the Idiotincharge just gave a speech the other day where he said HE was'nt running but make no mistake, his policies are. That just about gave 'em all cardiac arrest.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> No it isn't 30 bucks that is the Top of the mark.


Sorry, I meant to say up to about $30.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> Another block of millions are set to lose their ins...


More like "change" their insurance, not necessarily lose it. A lot of those people will get ACA compliant policies.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

And depending on what poll a person looks at ObamaUncare is unpopular with 65% of the voters. And may even go higher after the first of the year when some really find out how much things are going to cost them in the way of medical care and this confounded ACA stuff. And come the 2016 elections the doo doo will really be all over the fan and spreading like wildfire when it comes to Uncare card that is and will be implemented by that time, Unless o decides once again to put many points on hold once again.
If this was so good 100% of this care stuff would be up and running and talked about in glowing terms but it is NOT. intact after dark behind closed doors the talk about ObamaUncare is not flattering at all.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> More like "change" their insurance, not necessarily lose it. A lot of those people will get ACA compliant policies.


When you get a letter telling you your policy is being cancelled, that is LOSING your insurance. Then one has to do all the migraine-inducing leg work of finding a replacement policy. Not easy and not fun. I think I'd rather get a root canal! 

I think it's going to be a real challenge to find a new policy that we can afford. I'll thank you not to make light of it.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> More like "change" their insurance, not necessarily lose it. A lot of those people will get ACA compliant policies.


Ah, the hope & CHANGE thing.

These are folks that will LOSE ins b/c co.s will not offer it. LOSE. But prolly they didn't LIKE their ins. That's why they didn't keep it.
So, a lot will go to the ObummerUNcare...is this what is going to make it a success? Will folks like it NEXT spring?


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

MO_cows said:


> When you get a letter telling you your policy is being cancelled, that is LOSING your insurance. Then one has to do all the migraine-inducing leg work of finding a replacement policy. Not easy and not fun. I think I'd rather get a root canal!
> 
> I think it's going to be a real challenge to find a new policy that we can afford. I'll thank you not to make light of it.


If you find yourself dealing with The Marketplace, brace yourself. I've never dealt with a bigger mess in my life. Up till last month I have been getting regular letters from them asking for me to verify my citizenship.

Huh?

I won't get into that. I called them and they checked my account. No, everything was fine. They had received my proof of citizenship and I didn't need to submit any more. The next month I get yet another letter this one telling me that if they didn't receive documented proof of my citizenship, I could be loosing my insurance. So I copied my birth certificate and drivers license along with a copy of my marriage abstract and wrote them a nice letter telling them that I had no other documentation to send them. I also told them to check things on their end and make sure I didn't have a duplicate application floating around because I had tried to apply early on when they were having the cluster....well never mind with their computers. 

Two weeks later I get another letter from them telling me I had certified my citizenship, thank you and need not do anything else.

:sob::hair

Probably if I was an illegal entry from south of the border they would have come to my house, shook my hand and handed me my insurance card free of charge.

Next month I will probably get another letter from them asking if I really am an American Citizen and the whole mess will start again.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Badlander, be careful & watch for id theft. This same scenario that you described happened to TWO of our neighbors...nevermind that they are just 1/2 of those around here who have the ins anyway-seems they're not getting things right most of the time.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Thanx TG, I always do. I was one of the folks who had their credit card information stolen in the Home Depot debacle and 3 years ago somebody bought a 9,000 diamond bracelet using my CC information at a jewelry store in Texas. Musta been one sweet bracelet. 

This all came through the mail with the marketplace phone number on it. When I tried to call there was a 3 hour wait. No lie. 3 flipping hours. 

I told them long ago to contact me by mail if they had to and never by email. So far they have done that but don't worry. I will keep an eye on my credit card....I already am thanks to Home Depot but the company told me that they were already on it and had covered everyones card involved with identity theft.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> So, a lot will go to the ObummerUNcare...is this what is going to make it a success? Will folks like it NEXT spring?


They like their Obamacare now. In many ways, it's the best insurance many of us ever had.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Sorry, I've got and it's not the best I've ever had. I spent a month in the hospital in 76. Thanks to my Insurance through my employment and employee discount for working at the hospital I paid the whole sum of $40.00. I didn't have to give out way more information than I'm comfortable with to qualify for it. All I had to do was show up to work every day.

With Obamacare I've learned that anything that is too good to be true generally is. I'm just waiting for the you know what to hit the fan with it if you get my drift.

OR at this point if they somehow decide to abolish it, once again be stuck out spinning in the wind unable to get insurance due to preexisting conditions.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> They like their Obamacare now. In many ways, it's the best insurance many of us ever had.


The only people I have heard have anything good to say about it are those who arent paying for it. You know the ones.... those who get the big fat subsidies... everyone else seems to think they have been forced into paying much higher premiums for insurance that they dont need. Maybe you can tell us why a single male, age 30, needs and has to pay for maternity coverage?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

badlander said:


> Sorry, I've got and it's not the best I've ever had.


Have you ever had insurance with no lifetime maximum before? Have you ever had insurance with no annual maximum before? Have you ever had insurance that couldn't be cancelled because of health issues?

Those sorts of things were unheard of before the ACA, as was someone with cancer getting insurance at the same rate as everyone else.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

Nevada said:


> Have you ever had insurance with no lifetime maximum before? Have you ever had insurance with no annual maximum before? Have you ever had insurance that couldn't be cancelled because of health issues?
> 
> Those sorts of things were unheard of before the ACA, as was someone with cancer getting insurance at the same rate as everyone else.


Please do not tell me what I have and haven't had. I'm in a better position to know that than you are.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Badlander, I feel your pain. I keep getting requests to submit proof of income. The uploader function on the website doesn't work, and sending it by snail mail got a reply saying the information can only be provided via the Internet or phone (how do you verify your income over the phone? Still trying to figure THAT one out!). 

I haven't been asked to verify my citizenship yet. Gee, I can hardly wait! 

Then, when I made my first doctor's appointment, I attempted to verify that the provider accepted my insurance. The clerk said that the doctor participates with BCBS, but told me I'd have to call my insurance company to see whether my particular policy would be honored. 

When I called BCBS, their clerk kept me on the line for so long while trying to find an answer that when she came back to apologize for the wait, I asked her to leave me a voicemail, as I had to go to work. When I got her voicemail, she confirmed that the provider was in the Blue Cross network, but advised me to check with the doctor to see whether my particular policy was accepted.

And 'round and 'round we go ... :huh:

Now, I'm in good health and was merely making an appointment in order to get a prescription refilled. I pity anyone who is actually sick and has to deal with this system on top of the stress of an illness ...


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> They like their Obamacare now. In many ways, it's the best insurance many of us ever had.


You are right there, about some of you on it but how is it a success when only 5 mil or less have it? MANY of whom already HAD ins.? There are comparatively few who have it that never b/4 had ins.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The only people I have heard have anything good to say about it are those who arent paying for it. You know the ones.... those who get the big fat subsidies... everyone else seems to think they have been forced into paying much higher premiums for insurance that they dont need. Maybe you can tell us why a single male, age 30, needs and has to pay for maternity coverage?


Same reason a 60 yr/old male needs it. And b.c. too.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Have you ever had insurance with no lifetime maximum before? Have you ever had insurance with no annual maximum before? Have you ever had insurance that couldn't be cancelled because of health issues?
> 
> Those sorts of things were unheard of before the ACA, as was someone with cancer getting insurance at the same rate as everyone else.


Yes, yes, yes. 
Have you ever had car ins that only covered your own mistakes? No 'comprehensive"? B/c of CHOICE?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> Badlander, I feel your pain. I keep getting requests to submit proof of income. The uploader function on the website doesn't work, and sending it by snail mail got a reply saying the information can only be provided via the Internet or phone (how do you verify your income over the phone? Still trying to figure THAT one out!).
> 
> I haven't been asked to verify my citizenship yet. Gee, I can hardly wait!
> 
> ...


Hey, look on the bright side, you could be a vet w/life-threatening illness...


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> Yes, yes, yes.


Where did you find insurance with no lifetime or annual maximums? I wasn't aware that anyone offered it before ACA. Do you have a link?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Where did you find insurance with no lifetime or annual maximums? I wasn't aware that anyone offered it before ACA. Do you have a link?


The aca has no life time payout limits? Are you sure that my 94 year old father could get a hip transplant or new kidneys? My doctor says no, they won't cover them, so does Ezikiell ?)


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

California is dropping thousands of folks "enrolled" here because they have failed to provide the proper id. It will end up being tens of thousands. Hundreds of millions have been spent on failed software in Oregon. I've been ripped off and demand a refund! Consumer fraud!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

JeffreyD said:


> The aca has no life time payout limits? Are you sure that my 94 year old father could get a hip transplant or new kidneys? My doctor says no, they won't cover them, so does Ezikiell ?)


In the first place your father should be covered by Medicare, not an Obamacare policy. But if he can't get a hip job or kidney transplant authorized then there have to be medical reasons for it.

I know someone who's on dialysis and can't get a kidney. He's an advanced mismanaged diabetic, so he's got other problems. He can't get the kidney because they want it to go to someone who has a chance of living a normal lifespan with the kidney. There are only so many kidneys to go around.

Unfortunately, there are medical realities with or without the ACA.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Where did you find insurance with no lifetime or annual maximums? I wasn't aware that anyone offered it before ACA. Do you have a link?


As long as I was employed at Berlex Labs, I had unlimited ins.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> In the first place your father should be covered by Medicare, not an Obamacare policy. But if he can't get a hip job or kidney transplant authorized then there have to be medical reasons for it.


Good ol medicare.... another "single payer" system.... what do you suppose the limits are on medicare? I know I wouldnt be able to "go the distance" with medicare on lifetime limits I had with my 2 million limit with blue cross blue shield... the 20 percent copay with medicare would wipe me out long before I ever got to that point. BCBS didnt have an annual limit either on my policy. My deductible started over at the beginning of the new year, but there was no limit to what would be spent in any given year.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Have you ever had insurance with no lifetime maximum before? Have you ever had insurance with no annual maximum before? Have you ever had insurance that couldn't be cancelled because of health issues?
> 
> Those sorts of things were unheard of before the ACA, as was someone with cancer getting insurance at the same rate as everyone else.


What Nevada fails to take into account is that all of these things come at a cost. Nothing in this world is free! When the government mandates that insurance companies must take all comers, regardless of medical history, actuaries in windowless offices sharpen their pencils and get to work estimating the cost. And that increased cost is passed on to customers across-the-board. 

So, yes, people with catastrophic illnesses no longer face caps on their coverage. People can't be canceled if they become sick. The cancer patient's premium doesn't reflect the fact that his treatment will cost thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of dollars. But everyone else pays more so these folks can catch a break. It isn't "free."


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

willow_girl said:


> What Nevada fails to take into account is that all of these things come at a cost. Nothing in this world is free!


I appreciate the cost, but that's not what this discussion is about. The discussion is about the quality of ACA plans, not the cost.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I appreciate the cost, but that's not what this discussion is about. The discussion is about the quality of ACA plans, not the cost.


Did you happen to read the thread title?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

jtbrandt said:


> Did you happen to read the thread title?


That is a common trick, side step, change, tweak, and then go on to some other off topic subject that has nothing to do with the OP.


----------

