• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Heeeeeeere's Obamacare!

Fast Eddie B said:
Really?

Is that really what you took from what Obama said?

It sounds like really tortured parsing to me - "Under my plan, the typical American family will save $2,500 a year." Just does not seem that open to interpretation.

I just took it at face value - and I don't think I'm alone.
Click to expand...

No Eddie, I didn't get that from what Obama said. I did a bit of research back when this first came up and discovered where the $2,500 figure came from.

If I run across the original article again, I will post a link.
 
Eddie seems to be claiming his current health insurance policy with a monthly premium of $325 covers two people over 60.

My current, non ACA compliant plan from United Health has a premium of $375 per month. It covers one person over 60 with a $5,000 deductible, 20% copays after the deductible is met, no coverage for prescription drugs, physical therapy or mental health treatment. It does not have a cap on insurance payments, or an out of pocket maximum for the insured. If I racked up $100,000 in medical bills during a year, my share would be $24,000.

My new ACA compliant plan that kicks in next month has a slightly higher premium of $395 a month for the same deductible, has better coverage and limits my out of pocket costs to $6,350 per year regardless of how high the bills pile up.

Medical insurance costs are based on expected medical costs. For those of us over 60, it gets expensive because the risk of having a serious medical problem goes up at this age.

Eddie didn't get ahis policy from an insurance fairy, he got it from a company that expects to make a profit. For his policy to cover two people for less than I pay to cover one indicates that the policy has some serious limitations. Such as an extremely high deductible, or a cap on insurance company payouts.
 
Kestrel said:
Eddie seems to be claiming his current health insurance policy with a monthly premium of $325 covers two people over 60...
Click to expand...

I'm 64. Karen's 7 years younger (do the math).

$363/month total. $10,000 deductible each. In a really bad year we could handle the $20k without major issues. Even a few in a row would not be debilitating, and much of it would be covered by premiums saved over the years with a high deductible plan. We have not had that bad year yet, 4 or 5 years on this plan, so our savings over a more comprehensive plan have been substantial.

Additionally its not at all like we start from zero each year and pay everything out of pocket until we hit $20k. Lots is still covered, albeit in an apparently random fashion. Flu shots were free, for instance, and our specialist co-pay is $50. Also help with drugs.

Works for us for now. Do not really appreciate being forced to pay more for something we don't want, though admittedly that has not happened yet.
 
Last edited:
Fast Eddie B said:
I'm 64. Karen's 7 years younger (do the math).

$363/month total. $10,000 deductible each. In a really bad year we could handle the $20k without major issues. Even a few in a row would not be debilitating, and much of it would be covered by premiums saved over the years with a high deductible plan. We have not had that bad year yet, 4 or 5 years on this plan, so our savings over a more comprehensive plan have been substantial.

Additionally its not at all like we start from zero each year and pay everything out of pocket until we hit $20k. Lots is still covered, albeit in an apparently random fashion. Flu shots were free, for instance, and our specialist co-pay is $50. Also help with drugs.

Works for us for now. Do not really appreciate being forced to pay more for something we don't want, though admittedly that has not happened yet.
Click to expand...

Saving $700 per month would net you $8400 per year. Under the ACA, the max out of pocket is $6,500 per year, which would save you $3,500 per year if you got sick. If both you and your wife got sick in the same year, you'd only be down $900 from pre-ACA, even if we take all of your other numbers at face value though they sound suspect to me. And then if you did get sick, your insurance company can't drop you, and other insurance companies can't deny you coverage. And let's not fail to note that you're about to become a "winner" and get Medicare which will exempt you from any premiums at all and be covered by everyone else, even though you purport to have a lot of savings. So for a person who could afford to pay out $60,000 without a sweat, it seems odd that you're calling yourself a loser over such a small amount, especially since your slightly higher cost is helping to cover millions and millions of your fellow Americans and guarantee you health coverage for the rest of your life.
 
Unabogie said:
Saving $700 per month would net you $8400 per year. Under the ACA, the max out of pocket is $6,500 per year, which would save you $3,500 per year if you got sick. If both you and your wife got sick in the same year, you'd only be down $900 from pre-ACA, even if we take all of your other numbers at face value though they sound suspect to me. And then if you did get sick, your insurance company can't drop you, and other insurance companies can't deny you coverage. And let's not fail to note that you're about to become a "winner" and get Medicare which will exempt you from any premiums at all and be covered by everyone else, even though you purport to have a lot of savings. So for a person who could afford to pay out $60,000 without a sweat, it seems odd that you're calling yourself a loser over such a small amount, especially since your slightly higher cost is helping to cover millions and millions of your fellow Americans and guarantee you health coverage for the rest of your life.
Click to expand...

One goal of the ACA is to cut down on bankruptcies due to medical bills. The ACA did this by requiriring all health insurance policies to have an out of pocket maximum of $6,350, an amount that most middle class households could handle without going bankrupt. To accomidate the wishes of Eddie who has the resources to handle a much larger amount would have required an intrusive examination of family finances.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
And you forgot they're looking out for me by deciding how big my drink can be in NYC.

Thank goodness for that.
Click to expand...


And you are also saved from buying a toilet that will work with older plumbing and the horror of those cheap incandescent light bulbs!

Gosh, aren't we all so blessed that one size really does fit all!

;)
 
balrog666 said:
And you are also saved from buying a toilet that will work with older plumbing and the horror of those cheap incandescent light bulbs!

Gosh, aren't we all so blessed that one size really does fit all!

;)
Click to expand...

Ours is truly a dystopian society of nightmarishly Orwellian proprortions.
 
As far as seat belt laws...

I think you have to be seriously deficient to drive without a seatbelt on, or ride a motorcycle with no helmet.

Yet being forced to by law bugs me just a little.

I would wear a seatbelt/helmet religiously and without question. And mandate them below a certain age - think of the children!

But for adults? Not so sure.

Same with health insurance, if that's not too much of a reach.
 
Last edited:
Fast Eddie B said:
And mandate them below a certain age - think of the children!
Click to expand...

Wrong!

People should get to decide what's best for their own children without the oppressive intervention of a nanny state.

How dare you bring this socialist claptrap into a forum of free-thinking skeptics. This isn't Russia.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
As far as seat belt laws...

I think you have to be seriously deficient to drive without a seatbelt on, or ride a motorcycle with no helmet.

Yet being forced to by law bugs me just a little.

I would wear a seatbelt/helmet religiously and without question. And mandate them below a certain age - think of the children!

But for adults? Not so sure.

Same with health insurance, if that's not too much of a reach.
Click to expand...

If such behavior did not effect the rest of society, I'd agree. However, seat belt laws and helmet laws aren't just designed to protect the drivers, but to help keep health insurance costs down. Same with the health insurance mandate.
 
Kestrel said:
$2,500 is an estimate of how much medical cost shifting added to the annual cost of insurance and medical care for a typical American family prior to the Affordable Care Act.

As more Americans are covered by comprehensive insurance, the need to shift medical costs to paying customers will decrease. The ACA will not eliminate all cost shifting, nor should we expect all of the savings to be passed directly to consumers. Medical providers may raise profit margins instead of passing the savings on to their customers. Consumers who live in states that expanded Medicaid should see lower costs than those in states that rejected expansion. States with low rates of compliance with the individual mandate should also see higher insurance rates.
Click to expand...

I don't follow your reasoning for these assumptions. Can you elaborate?
 
Kestrel said:
Discussing the ACA on other forums, I keep running into people who claim they had a great insurance policy canceled due to Obamacare. When asked for details, they seem unfamiliar with basic insurance terms like deductible, out of pocket limits and coverage caps.

Few seem to understand that the real test of an insurance policy is not a low copay to see your doctor, but how well the policy covers a heart attack that runs up a six figure medical bill.
Click to expand...

Most people never experience a heart attack, so their entire exposure is to copays to see their doctor. The health insurance industry has done a remarkably poor job of educating people on the fact that it is selling protection against financial ruin, just like any other insurance product. We've allowed our products to become conflated with medical services and access to medical care... which I personally think is to our detriment. But that's just my opinion...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom