Page 14 of 27 FirstFirst ... 5121314151623 ... LastLast
Results 651 to 700 of 1339

Thread: Health Insurance and National Health Care

  1. #651
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,006
    Less children and more older people are what is causing the entitlement problems. Everything from Social Security to Healthcare being affordable depend in a young healthy population supporting the sick and elderly. I don't get this the rich part either. People who are not sick have to foot for a crappy health insurance that keeps going up with nothing benefitting them.
    I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his pay-roll.

    Edna St. Vincent Millay

  2. #652
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Connecticut, You know home of ESPN
    Posts
    9,165
    I pay 473.00 a month for mine. Starting in Jan... 596.00... I am 30 years old. Healthy and a non smoker with no husband or kids. You have to be freaking kidding me?? This is with a 1,500 deductible and my lowest copay is 30.00 for visits. I should just quit my job and go on state insurance so I can have a litter of kids and get my Oxy and Vic's for free.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    "I will be buried in a spring loaded casket filled with confetti, and a future archaeologist will have one awesome day at work."

  3. #653
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Miho View Post
    I pay 473.00 a month for mine. Starting in Jan... 596.00... I am 30 years old. Healthy and a non smoker with no husband or kids. You have to be freaking kidding me?? This is with a 1,500 deductible and my lowest copay is 30.00 for visits. I should just quit my job and go on state insurance so I can have a litter of kids and get my Oxy and Vic's for free.
    Thats pretty high for someone as young as you. Can you get the deductible raised a bit? The chances of you being hospitalized are pretty slim so I would rather you keep the money in your pocket instead of paying for something that might never happen. I just did a quote for a guy (25) with a 3000 deductible for 115. He saved 200 a month (2400 per year) by being exposed to an additional 1500.

  4. #654
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,006
    This is an interesting statistic

    Fifty-one percent oppose the new national health care law, with 42% saying they favor the measure, known officially as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and nicknamed by many as "Obamacare.

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...iref=allsearch
    This means that people actually voted Obama in that didn't approve of his healthcare. Obama is acting now like he has a mandate to do this.

    THere was the question earlier of why Obama focused on this and not on the economy in his first term. Healthcare was one of Ted Kennedy's things. Ted knew that he wasn't going to live long enough to pass it gave his support to Obama in exchange for the Healthcare reform.
    I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his pay-roll.

    Edna St. Vincent Millay

  5. #655
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    If anyone out there has a serious health problem here is what I learned from my friend whose life was saved by Obamacare

    Hi well if they are in need of insurance they need to go to MRMIP if they have been out of insurance for more than 6 months they need to go to PCIP. The web sites are good. The law kicked in where they cannot discriminate if you have a previous condition (PCIP means pre existing condition insurance program)

  6. #656
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    1,229
    They can't turn you down for pre existing conditions, but they sure as hell won't pay anything. DO NOT GET ME STARTED ON OBAMACARE or Obama in general. It's basically the reason why I got layed off in October.

  7. #657
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027

    Comparative Effectiveness Research

    Here is an excerp from an email I just recieved. Read then I'll explain:

    IRS Issues Final Regulations on Comparative Effectiveness Research Fee
    On December 5, 2012, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued final regulations on the Comparative Effectiveness Research Fee (CERF). This is a Final Rule, so there is no comment period.
    CERF is an annual fee on insured and self-insured health plans that will be used to fund the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which will conduct research designed to determine which of two or more treatments works best when applied to actual patients.
    The fee applies for plan years beginning on or after 10/2/11 and continues through 2019. Insurers pay the fee for insured plans and employers pay the fee for self-insured plans. The first payments are due for some plans on 7/31/13. The annual fee begins at $1 per participant and will increase in future years.

    So what this says is that the government is charging a fee (tax) on health plans to help fund the PCORI to compare treatments to figure which will work best "when applied to actual patients" as opposed to virtual once I suppose. Once these comparisons are done, what will happen is the results will be used to set compensation schedules for doctors and hospitals based on which procedure the government has determined are best. NOT WHAT YOUR DOCTOR SAYS IS BEST.

    So what we have is a tax that no one talked about, to pay for research institue created by Obamacare to make determinations about your care and what your doctor should be able to do. This is our reality folks.

  8. #658
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,571
    I didn't read any of the other posts but if I don't have a job when this sh.. kicks in, how am I supposed to pay a fine? Why not fine us (me) for poverty?

  9. #659
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,266
    lol as the obama ppl say "it's not a fine!" it's a tax". uh huhhhhhh

  10. #660
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Near the shores of Lake Huron, Michigan
    Posts
    489
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulination View Post
    So what this says is that the government is charging a fee (tax) on health plans to help fund the PCORI to compare treatments to figure which will work best "when applied to actual patients" as opposed to virtual once I suppose. Once these comparisons are done, what will happen is the results will be used to set compensation schedules for doctors and hospitals based on which procedure the government has determined are best. NOT WHAT YOUR DOCTOR SAYS IS BEST.

    So what we have is a tax that no one talked about, to pay for research institue created by Obamacare to make determinations about your care and what your doctor should be able to do. This is our reality folks.
    Isn't this the same idea as Diagnosis Related Groupings or DRGs started in the Reagan years? Sounds pretty similar to DRGs that determined patient length of stays and reasonable treatments as a basis for Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement. My understanding is that the insurance industry used these codes to determine reimbursement as well.

    I worked with a hospital in the 80s that provided a respected Drug Addiction 28 day inpatient treatment. DRGs determined 21 days sufficient, then 14 days, then only outpatient treatment and the much-needed unit failed. Don't DRGs determine length of stay for many procedures such as childbirth? When I had my last child 13 years ago, the woman across the hall who had a difficult delivery had to leave within 24 hours per her insurance. I had better insurance and an easy delivery but was allowed to stay 48 hours. It really wasn't up to the physician. It was up to the insurance provider.

    Like I say, this idea of the government (or insurance industry) determining what's best (overriding doctors and providers) in terms of procedures and length of stays started during the Reagan years. There was a lot of anger back then as providers scrambled and streamlined.
    Archer Fact: You canâ??t tourniquet the taint. (Source: Ray Gillette)

  11. #661
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by homesgirl View Post
    Isn't this the same idea as Diagnosis Related Groupings or DRGs started in the Reagan years? Sounds pretty similar to DRGs that determined patient length of stays and reasonable treatments as a basis for Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement. My understanding is that the insurance industry used these codes to determine reimbursement as well.

    I worked with a hospital in the 80s that provided a respected Drug Addiction 28 day inpatient treatment. DRGs determined 21 days sufficient, then 14 days, then only outpatient treatment and the much-needed unit failed. Don't DRGs determine length of stay for many procedures such as childbirth? When I had my last child 13 years ago, the woman across the hall who had a difficult delivery had to leave within 24 hours per her insurance. I had better insurance and an easy delivery but was allowed to stay 48 hours. It really wasn't up to the physician. It was up to the insurance provider.

    Like I say, this idea of the government (or insurance industry) determining what's best (overriding doctors and providers) in terms of procedures and length of stays started during the Reagan years. There was a lot of anger back then as providers scrambled and streamlined.
    Nothing new under the sun

    That is why I find it so ridiculous that people are shrieking about this as if it something SO revolutionary.

    It isn't. it is long overdue
    If I have to pay for your damn kids schooling them YOU can pay for my healthcare

  12. #662
    Wendy A. Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulination View Post
    Here is an excerp from an email I just recieved. Read then I'll explain:

    IRS Issues Final Regulations on Comparative Effectiveness Research Fee
    On December 5, 2012, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued final regulations on the Comparative Effectiveness Research Fee (CERF). This is a Final Rule, so there is no comment period.
    CERF is an annual fee on insured and self-insured health plans that will be used to fund the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which will conduct research designed to determine which of two or more treatments works best when applied to actual patients.
    The fee applies for plan years beginning on or after 10/2/11 and continues through 2019. Insurers pay the fee for insured plans and employers pay the fee for self-insured plans. The first payments are due for some plans on 7/31/13. The annual fee begins at $1 per participant and will increase in future years.

    So what this says is that the government is charging a fee (tax) on health plans to help fund the PCORI to compare treatments to figure which will work best "when applied to actual patients" as opposed to virtual once I suppose. Once these comparisons are done, what will happen is the results will be used to set compensation schedules for doctors and hospitals based on which procedure the government has determined are best. NOT WHAT YOUR DOCTOR SAYS IS BEST.

    So what we have is a tax that no one talked about, to pay for research institue created by Obamacare to make determinations about your care and what your doctor should be able to do. This is our reality folks.
    This is insane! I guess this was in the bill that we didn't get to see? I see this as a disaster. I don't want what the government deems best, I want what my Dr. deems best. I kinda have an idea of how this might work. I used to do warranty claims for a local dealership, and their was one company that was a royal pain in the ass to deal with. What was wrong with the car had to match what was done to the car, even if it wasn't right... or what the mechanic had to do to fix it.. but I had to find a way to get the damn claims paid, and it was a nightmare and usually took forever. So I see it being like that.. with the Government being the pain in the ass car company that I despised. I have a feeling that Dr's are going to get sick and tired of dealing with it. Oh, and a lot of the time we LOST money on the claims with the car company due to the way they had their warranty program set up. I see this happening as well. If this makes any sense?

  13. #663
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Near the shores of Lake Huron, Michigan
    Posts
    489
    This isn't new. Been going on since at least the 80s. For years, reimbursement regulations have dictated the care we receive.
    Archer Fact: You canâ??t tourniquet the taint. (Source: Ray Gillette)

  14. 12-06-2012, 06:17 PM

  15. #664
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by shipmatekate View Post
    Nothing new under the sun

    That is why I find it so ridiculous that people are shrieking about this as if it something SO revolutionary.

    It isn't. it is long overdue
    If I have to pay for your damn kids schooling them YOU can pay for my healthcare
    Wait, if it is nothing new, then how is it long overdue?

    Quote Originally Posted by homesgirl View Post
    This isn't new. Been going on since at least the 80s. For years, reimbursement regulations have dictated the care we receive.
    So what you are saying is the government has now created a new bureaucracy and is now taxing businesses for a service it has been doing since the 80's? Sorry but you are underestimating what this is and what it will become.

  16. #665
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Near the shores of Lake Huron, Michigan
    Posts
    489
    So what you are saying is the government has now created a new bureaucracy and is now taxing businesses for a service it has been doing since the 80's? Sorry but you are underestimating what this is and what it will become.[/QUOTE]

    Paulination, I was responding to the alarm call and the scary idea that Obamacare will "suddenly" dictate how care is provided. Like I said in my earlier post (#49), since DRGs started in the Reagan years, physicians and providers have been tied to prescribed treatments and lengths of stays (if they want to be reimbursed.)

    In your earlier post (#46) you wrote, "....based on which procedure the government has determined are best. NOT WHAT YOUR DOCTOR SAYS IS BEST."

    This is unsettling, but not new. Healthcare has been dealing with this for quite a while.
    Archer Fact: You canâ??t tourniquet the taint. (Source: Ray Gillette)

  17. #666
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    1,229
    I don't want government health care because I don't want to government dictating what I do with my body. (any more than they already do) This is a bad idea. We are headed towards a socialised medicine. Not good.

  18. #667
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by homesgirl View Post
    This is unsettling, but not new. Healthcare has been dealing with this for quite a while.
    But it was always very limited. Now it has been expanded to ecompass a huge population. Folks in the past were able to trade compliance for cost control. Now if you are part of the expanded subsidy umbrella (millions) you will be caught in this trap. It is the classic "trade freedom for security" scenario except you don't have the freedom part because of the mandate.

  19. #668
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Near the shores of Lake Huron, Michigan
    Posts
    489
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulination View Post
    But it was always very limited. Now it has been expanded to ecompass a huge population. Folks in the past were able to trade compliance for cost control. Now if you are part of the expanded subsidy umbrella (millions) you will be caught in this trap. It is the classic "trade freedom for security" scenario except you don't have the freedom part because of the mandate.
    I disagree with the concept that the effect of DRGs has always been "very limited." It affects everyone who has been hospitalized and has used Medicare and or most insurances since 1983. Those who could escape it or be "free" of it are those who are able to pay for inpatient hospitalization with their own money.


    It's been many years since doctors and hospitals would provide what is considered appropriate service and care and the insurance companies would pay all or a portion of it. The care must fit into specified guidelines for reimbursement to be considered.

    It's not all bad - this prompts hospitals to provide new innovations to decrease patient length of stays, ie. laporoscopic surgery, robotic surgery, etc.
    Archer Fact: You canâ??t tourniquet the taint. (Source: Ray Gillette)

  20. #669
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by homesgirl View Post
    So what you are saying is the government has now created a new bureaucracy and is now taxing businesses for a service it has been doing since the 80's? Sorry but you are underestimating what this is and what it will become.
    Paulination, I was responding to the alarm call and the scary idea that Obamacare will "suddenly" dictate how care is provided. Like I said in my earlier post (#49), since DRGs started in the Reagan years, physicians and providers have been tied to prescribed treatments and lengths of stays (if they want to be reimbursed.)

    In your earlier post (#46) you wrote, "....based on which procedure the government has determined are best. NOT WHAT YOUR DOCTOR SAYS IS BEST."

    This is unsettling, but not new. Healthcare has been dealing with this for quite a while.[/QUOTE]





    Exactly

    Thank you

  21. #670
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Connecticut, You know home of ESPN
    Posts
    9,165
    Quote Originally Posted by shipmatekate View Post
    Nothing new under the sun

    That is why I find it so ridiculous that people are shrieking about this as if it something SO revolutionary.

    It isn't. it is long overdue
    If I have to pay for your damn kids schooling them YOU can pay for my healthcare
    Exactly!
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    "I will be buried in a spring loaded casket filled with confetti, and a future archaeologist will have one awesome day at work."

  22. #671
    Bidmor Guest

  23. #672
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by homesgirl View Post
    I disagree with the concept that the effect of DRGs has always been "very limited." It affects everyone who has been hospitalized and has used Medicare and or most insurances since 1983. Those who could escape it or be "free" of it are those who are able to pay for inpatient hospitalization with their own money.
    OK, so lets assume that you know better than I, then please explain once again why if nothing is different, the government needed to create a new bereauocracy and now taxes businesses for a process that you say has been in place since the 80's?

  24. #673
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Near the shores of Lake Huron, Michigan
    Posts
    489
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulination View Post
    OK, so lets assume that you know better than I, then please explain once again why if nothing is different, the government needed to create a new bereauocracy and now taxes businesses for a process that you say has been in place since the 80's?
    I would never assume to know more than you...I only wanted to audit this class. Thank goodness it's not required for my degree.

    Again - as I said before, I'm not responding to the tax; and I'm not defending the practice. I do, however stand by the fact that DRGs have strongly determined how hospitals (and therefore physician providers) have provided care since 1983. I felt I had to interject because comments such as "NOT WHAT YOUR DOCTOR THINKS IS BEST" only incite fear; not understanding.

    I'm dismissing myself from this class. I worked in healthcare administration for 10 years beginning in 1986 and I wanted to provide a perspective from my experience; rather than from the insurance industry. Carry on.
    Archer Fact: You canâ??t tourniquet the taint. (Source: Ray Gillette)

  25. #674
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,006
    There is still no cost containment. I don't picture most people's lives getting saved. I think that most people would be told they are not worth it and directed to hospice care. More money and less control and coverage.
    I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his pay-roll.

    Edna St. Vincent Millay

  26. #675
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by homesgirl View Post
    "NOT WHAT YOUR DOCTOR THINKS IS BEST" only incite fear; not understanding.
    It incites reality. That is where these things go when you have a panel making decisions with the intent to reduce cost in a method outside of the patient/doctor relationship. Don't worry, I won't ask that original unanswered question again.

    EDIT:\

    Last week I pointed out the new tax for studying procedures, well heres another one. This one starts at $63 per person and is used to offset the increased cost to health insurance carriers due to the unpredictability of covering the uninsured. Like I said two years ago, this thing will be littered with new taxes. This will become a weekly event.

    http://money.msn.com/health-and-life...10&id=15884956
    Last edited by Paulination; 12-11-2012 at 02:04 PM.

  27. #676
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    BUMP (because I edited)

  28. #677
    Wendy A. Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulination View Post

    Last week I pointed out the new tax for studying procedures, well heres another one. This one starts at $63 per person and is used to offset the increased cost to health insurance carriers due to the unpredictability of covering the uninsured. Like I said two years ago, this thing will be littered with new taxes. This will become a weekly event.

    http://money.msn.com/health-and-life...10&id=15884956

    This is shocking yet, it doesn't surprise me... I'm sure there will be more to come. This is set to phase out in 2017 unless it is extended, and I'm sure it will be. I've been searching the net looking for affordable health insurance because I can no longer afford it through my employer, and I may try to qualify for a state type of insurance.. other than that I'm basically screwed.. But I have seen a lot of happy college kids that now get to stay on Mom & Dad's insurance... so long as mom & dad can afford it now I guess? (Nothing against college kids getting to remain on their parents insurance, I have a daughter a year away from it myself, so I totally understand it.)

  29. #678
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    3,846
    If you are on any kind of medication I would be very careful about insurance companies that practice "fail first" methods regarding pharmaceuticals. The company I work for changed insurance carriers to a company that wanted me to try a less expensive medication than what my doctor has been prescribing for years (after much trial and error) so that they could save a few dollars. If my doctor wasn't as adamant as he was, I would likely be a mess right about now.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    "Do mind the pedestrian, Richard."
    - Hyacinth Bucket

  30. #679
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,006
    I don't understand why only gay partners and married get to share health insurance. I think also if you have a household made up of a mutual friend, sibling or other relative that you should be able to share it. Why is the definitions of household so limited? You should be able to share your health insurance with at least one other person. Why so you have to be married or in a gay relationship?
    I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his pay-roll.

    Edna St. Vincent Millay

  31. #680
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by coconn04 View Post
    I don't understand why only gay partners and married get to share health insurance.
    Domestic partners can be male + female and qualify for mutual benefits, not just the gay and marrierd.

    On another note:

    Many States are opting out of setting up the exchanges leaving it to the federal government. The main reason, too complicated and too expensive. Having the feds do it will just increase the cost of Obamacare. So with the goal of insuring everyone and decreasing healthcare costs, the real result is an increase in overall cost.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/many-s...230600008.html

  32. #681
    Wendy A. Guest
    Its a mess. I tried to get our state healthcare, and I can't because insurance is offered where I work, it will take 75% of my paycheck each week. Lovely.

  33. #682
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    3,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Wendy A. View Post
    Its a mess. I tried to get our state healthcare, and I can't because insurance is offered where I work, it will take 75% of my paycheck each week. Lovely.
    And I thought I had it bad. That's horrible and I'm sorry for you. My company has paid for my health insurance so far but now they aren't getting the tax breaks for insurance that they used to so they are either going to have us pay for some or we won't be getting pay increases this year.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    "Do mind the pedestrian, Richard."
    - Hyacinth Bucket

  34. #683
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    I wish everybody had Health Care the same
    as we people here in Canada have.
    Carolyn(1958-2009) always in my heart.

  35. #684
    Wendy A. Guest
    I'm at the point where I wonder why in the hell even work? I mean really? I go to work EVERYDAY, pay my own bills, pay for my Dr. out of pocket.. I don't get food stamps or any of that crap... but if I'm going to be fined or taxed because I can't afford to give 75% of my paycheck for health insurance what's the point of even going to work? I can't pay my mortgage let alone any utilities and groceries with whats left. I'm so discouraged... maybe I should become a fat lazy bum and pop out a few more kids and get all the freebies off the system? (I WOULD NEVER DO THIS..) just saying. I just royally pissed about the whole situation. Obamacare has done nothing but ensure me denial of healthcare, and a certain death... seeing how I may very possibly have cancer but hell, I'm middle class so the Gov't doesn't give 2 shits about me anyway.

  36. #685
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Wendy A. View Post
    I'm at the point where I wonder why in the hell even work? I mean really? I go to work EVERYDAY, pay my own bills, pay for my Dr. out of pocket.. I don't get food stamps or any of that crap... but if I'm going to be fined or taxed because I can't afford to give 75% of my paycheck for health insurance what's the point of even going to work? I can't pay my mortgage let alone any utilities and groceries with whats left. I'm so discouraged... maybe I should become a fat lazy bum and pop out a few more kids and get all the freebies off the system? (I WOULD NEVER DO THIS..) just saying. I just royally pissed about the whole situation. Obamacare has done nothing but ensure me denial of healthcare, and a certain death... seeing how I may very possibly have cancer but hell, I'm middle class so the Gov't doesn't give 2 shits about me anyway.
    Where do you get the info that you have to pay 75 percent of your pay?
    Do not trust conservatives who tell you this
    They are full of shit

  37. #686
    Wendy A. Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by shipmatekate View Post
    Where do you get the info that you have to pay 75 percent of your pay?
    Do not trust conservatives who tell you this
    They are full of shit
    my employer.. its what we have to pay if we want health insurance. It's our new premiums for the year. They gave us the info, and a thing for if we wanted to sign up a few Friday's ago while we were leaving for the weekend. Nobody can afford it. Employee +1 is $135.. not much better. See why I'm upset and freakin' out? I can't get the state sponsored insurance, Ol' Mitch Daniels made sure of that, and I'm CERTAIN that Koch bastard lovechild Mike Pence will fuck the state even more. With Pence being elected I have even more reason to want to flee this ass backwards, rape baby non- aborting, living in the stone-age in the middle of a God Damn corn field state. I hate Indiana. Please don't think I'm ranting at you... I'm not, I'm just really really livid right now.
    Last edited by Wendy A.; 12-13-2012 at 05:40 PM.

  38. #687
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Wendy A. View Post
    my employer.. its what we have to pay if we want health insurance. It's our new premiums for the year. They gave us the info, and a thing for if we wanted to sign up a few Friday's ago while we were leaving for the weekend. Nobody can afford it. Employee +1 is $135.. not much better. See why I'm upset and freakin' out? I can't get the state sponsored insurance, Ol' Mitch Daniels made sure of that, and I'm CERTAIN that Koch bastard lovechild Mike Pence will fuck the state even more. With Pence being elected I have even more reason to want to flee this ass backwards, rape baby non- aborting, living in the stone-age in the middle of a God Damn corn field state. I hate Indiana. Please don't think I'm ranting at you... I'm not, I'm just really really livid right now.

    Your employer is an effing Scrooge.
    I know you aren't ranting at me, but put the blame where it belongs
    With your tightwad employer

    We need UNIVERSAL health care
    And to hell with anyone who thinks that socialist

  39. #688
    DLY303 Guest
    Interesting thread. I wish I had time to read it all, but I don't, so I will just post my own personal experience. I don't know what the answer is, but something has to change in this country. It is insane that someone can be completely financially ruined by illness, even with insurance. I admittedly have not followed all the news about "Obamacare" as much as I should (especially considering my health, but I have left it to my husband to some extent), my attention has been focused on my health and school. A couple comments that lately make me laugh/cry/fume all at the same are the ones about a person's doctor not being able to determine what the best care is for them if we change how we do things and the supposed long waits we will have if we change our current system (among other complaints). Hello? I wonder what direct experience some people have had in making these claims because it seems to me like we are already at this point with the current system (see explanation below).

    I am only 43 and have had the same health insurance about 5-6 years now. When I got it, I was self employed. I purchased a private policy, as it was better and much cheaper at the time than COBRA coverage when I left my employer. It started at I believe $139 per month and they excluded previously existing conditions for the first year. Immediately after the first year, my premium doubled (without warning). It continued to raise over the next few years (during which time I was becoming sick) to where it is now at $500 a month. I kept the insurance just in case I needed it even though I went back to school and don't run my own company anymore. I had sold real estate, but it was just too expensive to maintain my license while only selling part time because I was in school full time (especially with what the RE market was doing).

    Long story short- I developed serious, life threatening illness a couple years ago. I have had 3 surgeries. My insurance has been a nightmare. It has been unreal. We had to get loans to pay for my surgeries because they determined them to be "elective". They regularly refuse approximately 30-40% of the medications my doctors prescribe. They have a couple times agreed to pay for something and then tried to refuse once it was done. I had to raise my deductible to a small fortune to even keep my premium under $500 per month (between the premium, deductible averaged over the year, copays, loans, etc, we are paying now around $1,500 a month, and thankfully that is because a relative paid off one of my loans or it would be more).

    I just reached my deductible for the year and now mysteriously none of my doctors want to order any testing even though I am now 6 months past due on having a large nodule rechecked in one of my lungs (and I haven't been able to breath without oxygen for almost a year, I've been on supplemental oxygen 24/7). After waiting forever to see my pulmonologist's PA, I had to beg to get the CT Scan ordered now, even though when the nodule was found they said it had to be rechecked in 6 months. She wanted me to wait until January for some odd reason (I say that knowing fully well what the reason was.) The last time I saw my primary care doctor a few weeks ago, he literally had a stack of letters from my health insurance company with demands for various tests I need and/or don't need and medications I should be on instead (and they can and have refused to pay for the ones I'm prescribed no matter how many times we have fought them on it or they claim I haven't tried something that we have proof I have tried even while being insured by them). Who is really controlling my care? My doctor? Obviously not. (and I strongly suspect that the insurance companies are in some way twisting their arms to force them to agree).

    Back to the thing about appointment times as well, I have been referred out to specialists a few times now (pulmonologist, cardiologist, neurologist, etc..). Depending on the doctor, I have sometimes had to wait 3-4 months for an initial appointment and I am dealing with something LIFE THREATENING. I just wonder where people are living in the US and what insurance they have that they are having such incredibly different experiences. We have been pushed to our financial breaking point. Thank God my husband himself is a medical professional and makes decent money. We have not received or applied for any type of government assistance. We have taken out a couple personal loans and then luckily got a sizable home equity loan to help pay some of the expenses (although "luckily" is not really the best word because we are now upside down in our mortgage). Right now, I am about $100,000 in medical debt and still require oxygen and multiple medications. We are absolutely at our limit. I don't think we could get more credit if we tried. Again, something has to change.

    This sort of thing shouldn't happen in an industrialized, "first world" nation. You shouldn't go to a doctor for one visit and have bills trickle in over a period of several weeks from several different companies all for the same visit. It is insane. For example, at my new pulmonologist, you speak to a PA before the doctor (if you get to see the doctor that is) and an RN checks you in. I discovered that I pay for 3 different appointments separately- the RN "exam", the PA speaking to me for 2 seconds, and the Doctor whom I didn't even see at my last visit. That should be ILLEGAL in my opinion. In addition, it is a satellite office of another speciality hospital located on the grounds of another hospital. Both hospitals also bill me for the appointment. If I have any testing done, that is also billed separately, so I am sometimes receiving 6-7 bills all for the same, simple appointment that lasted 15 minutes tops. The same hospital caused me a huge amount of stress that led me to breaking down in tears in the middle of the hospital because I showed up for a blood test that I had waited several weeks to have (an arterial blood gas test, where they have to go into an artery, so only a limited number of places can do it) and wanted a $2,500 deposit for a test that ended up being only $90 for the test itself, which I had no way of knowing at the time because they never seem to be able to tell you in advance the actual cost of something (no mention of the deposit prior to the appointment either). It is pure craziness. I pity anyone that gets sick in this country, unless you are independently wealthy or have incredibly good health insurance.

  40. #689
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by shipmatekate View Post
    Where do you get the info that you have to pay 75 percent of your pay?
    Do not trust conservatives who tell you this
    They are full of shit
    Only you could spin a completely totally and scientifically undeniably liberal Obama agenda into a conservative issue. Come on Kate, you are better than that.

  41. #690
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,110
    So if you make 3,000 a month, you have to pay 2,200 in healthcare?

    Somehow I doubt this.
    "Death has come to your little town, Sheriff." -Dr. Loomis

  42. #691
    Wendy A. Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by beep View Post
    So if you make 3,000 a month, you have to pay 2,200 in healthcare?

    Somehow I doubt this.
    I prefer to keep what I make a month out of this... but I can assure you, with the health plan offered where I work, it would take 75% of my fuckin' paycheck to get a family plan. It's not right, its not fair, and why doesn't the Gov't offer some kind of low cost alternative for people getting screwed by their employers like me?

  43. #692
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Wendy A. View Post
    I prefer to keep what I make a month out of this... but I can assure you, with the health plan offered where I work, it would take 75% of my fuckin' paycheck to get a family plan. It's not right, its not fair, and why doesn't the Gov't offer some kind of low cost alternative for people getting screwed by their employers like me?
    THat is what they wanted to do, but the conservatives are completely against it.
    Cause they have rich friends who would lose money

    Count me lucky, I only pay $300 a month for hubby and I, however the company ponies up another $900. So $1200 a month at a grou rate. That's insane.

    THat is WAY too expensive and it's all about profit

  44. #693
    Wendy A. Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by shipmatekate View Post
    THat is what they wanted to do, but the conservatives are completely against it.
    Cause they have rich friends who would lose money

    Count me lucky, I only pay $300 a month for hubby and I, however the company ponies up another $900. So $1200 a month at a grou rate. That's insane.

    THat is WAY too expensive and it's all about profit
    Even $300 a month for 2 people is too damn high. I figure that "family plan" mine offered, it's over 11k a year. So this has to be some kind of loophole bull shit thing that's screwing us? It sucks to think because I can't afford this, and the state won't help because it's offered at my work... I'll be fined or taxed? I need to call the state while I'm off during the holidays and see what they tell me. There has to be something?

  45. #694
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Wendy A. View Post
    Even $300 a month for 2 people is too damn high. I figure that "family plan" mine offered, it's over 11k a year. So this has to be some kind of loophole bull shit thing that's screwing us? It sucks to think because I can't afford this, and the state won't help because it's offered at my work... I'll be fined or taxed? I need to call the state while I'm off during the holidays and see what they tell me. There has to be something?
    $300 is a lot, but at least it's something we can afford at the moment.
    Not all of the health care reform has gone into effect yet, in fact very little has,

    Your employer is a tightass

  46. #695
    Wendy A. Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by shipmatekate View Post
    $300 is a lot, but at least it's something we can afford at the moment.
    Not all of the health care reform has gone into effect yet, in fact very little has,

    Your employer is a tightass
    Yep... tightass is a nicer term for what I was thinking!

  47. #696
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Petaluma Ca
    Posts
    4,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Wendy A. View Post
    Yep... tightass is a nicer term for what I was thinking!
    LOL!

    Same here!

  48. #697
    endsleigh03 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by shipmatekate View Post
    $300 is a lot, but at least it's something we can afford at the moment.
    Not all of the health care reform has gone into effect yet, in fact very little has,

    Your employer is a tightass
    Agreed. Tightass.

    Also true about little of the new law being in effect yet.

  49. #698
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,006
    The cost will be past down to the consumer. There is no cost containment. People are kidding themselves if you think this won't effect you. The more this bill will be revealed the more it will cost hard working people. When will people realize this.
    I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his pay-roll.

    Edna St. Vincent Millay

  50. #699
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by coconn04 View Post
    The cost will be past down to the consumer. There is no cost containment. People are kidding themselves if you think this won't effect you. The more this bill will be revealed the more it will cost hard working people. When will people realize this.
    The problem is that no one is willing to do the math. They look at the theoretical benefits and ignore the logistical and monetary inconsistencies. Burrying your head in the sand on this issue will result in the same thing that burrying your head in the sand always does, a compound problem. The difference is that liberals somehow find a way to connect the dots back to Bush which then obscures the true route of the misery caused by the fallout.

  51. #700
    endsleigh03 Guest
    I connect this to Bush, only in the way that he and all the republicans before him didn't take our ever-growing health care crisis seriously. Romney paid some lip service to the need for solutions to it but had he been elected he would have dismantled the ACA.

    And then it would have been dropped and NOTHING would have been done. Same as it ever was.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •