The "Joke" that is "Affordable"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303983904579095731139251304.html?mod=djemalertNEWS#project%3DEXCHANGES0924%26articleTabs%3Dinteractive

As we all know, Lord Obama intends to put a gun to our heads and tell us to pay up so that we can all join in his neat little "Affordable Health Care" Act. Hey, it's affordable and stuff right!?

$195 dollars is NOT affordable(for Pennsylvania). I don't intend to pay it, not when I'm 26(five years from now), not now, not ever. Why? Because the only time I'll need health insurance is when I'm fatally ill!(Or to cover for doctor appointments). I cannot consume health insurance, I cannot travel on it. I cannot make money on it. All I can do, is assure myself of medical treatment.

You see, in the formerly capitalistic country, even Middle Class Americans were able to budget and pool their resources based on the productive means to an end. So, given all that I've said above of what I can and can't do, tell me how it's worth nearly $200? If I'm sick?

This isn't car insurance, where thousands of accidents occur weekly. There are preventative health care measures we can and do take, healthy foods that we can and should eat, etc.

And given these prices, of course jobs will cut hours or employees.(To say that it's not in light of the law, is purely hypocritical in lieu of the FIXED prices we now have). Let's take PA and do some basic math: 200 X 5 Employees=$1,000 U.S dollars.

That adds up, very, very quickly for businesses.

(In particular, I feel bad for New Mexicans. From $38 to $126). But hey, all in the name of "affordability" and in "covering everyone"

 

Can you afford to pay the premiums if you can adjust your expense budget if so its affordable. And premiums is not the issue out of pocket costs and costs to use the plan is more important if your low income your supposed to be on Medicaid, if over that get subsidies to help those costs to and a adjusted annual cap up to 400% of the Federal Poverty line. States where costs are lowered actively moved to work with insurers to do that in many cases a smaller and narrower network of hospitals and providers, and more focus on Licensed Nurse Practitioners for primary care.

And if your income is low enough the Bronze Plan is FREE to get. In addition did you consider another factor that premiums are capped per year so you could end up paying less I'm not sure your income but if you make $15,000 a year by law its capped at $300 for a Silver Plan a YEAR.

 

"All I can do, is assure myself of medical treatment."

And we see the sense of entitlement, irresponsibility, and pure fantasy that the Right Wing has fostered and promoted with their propaganda. What is almost laughable, if it wasn;t so sad, is the utter ignorance displayed!

This person is refusing to take care of themselves, saving money in order to invest or party on, well knowing the taxpayers will take care of him if he runs into trouble. If all the younger people who got ill or injured were lying about in the streets with their mutilated and rotting bodies desperately begging for a bite of food, they might realize their mental picture of the world is as idiotic as the economic ideas the Right tosses about (like the idea that business cost savings are "passed on to the consumer"!)

This clueless person even mentions the thousands of car accidents "occur weekly" (actually, thousands occur DAILY). What does he think HAPPENS in a car accident? Sometimes, people get INJURED, seriously injured sometimes requiring YEARS of medical care! A disproportionately high percentage of them are YOUNG PEOPLE! Few people, especially not young people, buy car insurance that would actually pay for your OWN medical bills, and if the accident is someone else's fault, you are not likely to see an settlements for your medical bills and injuries for YEARS! It is usually not an option to wait on sewing up lacerations, setting bones, surgeries and rehab for those years on the chance of payout if the other person were to actually have insurance and pay something, so who pays those bills? Even in states with no-fault auto insurance where your own policy pays your medical, those amounts are often limited to very low amounts like$25,000, $100,000, or $250,000, amounts of money that disappear like a puff of smoke if a persons spends some time in intensive care!

But young people get cancer, infectious diseases, injuries of all kinds even if they don;t do jackass-style stunts, and the sense of invulnerability displayed by this poster is just idiotic, and part the reason our Medicaid costs are so high paying for their irresponsibility.

Less than $1 per hour would give this person UNLIMITED ACCESS to supposedly the world's best healthcare system, and he thinks he will drink some algae milkshakes an take some vitamins to make that unnecessary! What is sad is by the time the Clueless One buys those "healthy drinks and pills", they would be well on their way to paying for the policy!

What is particularly sad is this Clueless One's INABILITY TO READ AND COMPREHEND! Is he making over $80,000 per year? No???

If he could read and comprehend, he would understand that his minimum wage job means he would pay more like a TOTAL of $25 or $50/month and a few hundred bucks per YEAR in deductibles and copays!!

But he comprehends NOTHING, and thinks about NOTHING, and is one more sheep in the Right Wing flock of "useful idiots" who campaigns against the very things that could save his life so the Koch Bros an have a few more billions as trophies in their money collections!.

 

About 6.4 million Americans eligible to buy insurance through the new health exchanges will pay $100 or less a month in premiums because of tax subsidies, according to a Department of Health and Human Services report to be released today and obtained by USA TODAY.

The report by the HHS office for planning and evaluation said the lower premiums would primarily apply to insurance customers who buy what are called "silver" plans on the exchanges that open Oct. 1.

"The health care law is making health insurance more affordable," HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said. "With more than half of all uninsured Americans able to get coverage at $100 or less, the health care law is delivering the quality, affordable coverage people are looking for."

The 2010 health care law, called the Affordable Care Act, requires Americans without health insurance from their employers, Medicare or Medicaid to buy insurance through websites called exchanges that were created for each state.

The law also allowed states to expand coverage under Medicaid, the federal-state program for low-income Americans.

Subsidies are available to Americans who make less than 400% of the poverty level, or $94,200 for a family of four. The rates were based on people buying silver plans through the exchanges, or the second-lowest-cost plan through the exchanges. Researchers looked at Census data to estimate costs.

Although not all of the states nor the federal exchange have announced their rates yet, researchers determined they could estimate payments without that information.

As an example, the Affordable Care Act states that someone making 150% of the federal poverty level, or $17,235 a year, would pay 4% of their income -- or $57 -- for the second-lowest-cost plan. So, that person's subsidy would be the difference between the $57 and the cost of the silver plan in that state.

"Consequently, it is not necessary to know the actual second-lowest-cost silver premium to determine how many people will pay $100 or less per person per month for a silver plan," the report states.

In addition to the subsidized insurance, a total of half of all uninsured Americans could pay less than $100 for insurance beginning in January because of other expanded programs. About 41.3 million people don't have insurance now, according to HHS.

In the 25 states that have decided to expand Medicaid, 12.4 million uninsured Americans will be eligible to pay less than $100 a month, the report found.

People in this group will pay either nothing or a small premium to participate in Medicaid.

 

This whole ObamaCare thing is unworkable..........how is the government going to force 20 somethings and Willie the Wino down on MLK Boulevard to buy health insurance by threatening to penalize them $95 on their tax returns........makes no sense.

 

This is completely ridiculous.

...and who pays the subsidies?

...and who pays the balance of that 'silver' plan?

...and who pays the balance of that premium so they can get a $100.00 or less?

Home Depot just eliminated coverage for part time employees, and are about to drop the ball on full time employees as well, sooo, when these people no longer have coverage and can't afford coverage on the minimum wages they are barely surviving on, and get signed onto the government plan, remind us again who will be paying the difference so they can be covered?

So who pays for those expansions?

No more need to go on with the list of other nifty stuff people are going to get whether they can afford it or not, so who exactly is going to absorb this burden of of cost for the new and improved part time/casual labor/minimum wage America, and the welfare/nanny dependency you have clearly outlined here?

Who's going to pay?

- - - Updated - - -

Corporate prisons, and concentration camps in undisclosed areas of the wilderness, silly.

 

Ya.. that is the point of (*)(*)(*)(*)ing health insurance. Welcome to the real world. Idiots who think they're indestructible then rely on the taxpayers to pay their hospital bills are one of the reasons we need to cover everyone.

 

Well, my mom brought me insurance at a very early age(a wise investment on her part) and I've been on that insurance plan ever since. I hope that as Lord Obama says, that I can keep it. But I think I can count twice on my hand how many appointments I've had(Hint: It's almost one for every year I've been born).

Maybe 20 appointments in 21 years, maybe I'll stretch it out to 30. But I've been unbelievably healthy in my life, and I thank my lucky stars for it. And I don't have any intentions or anticipations or "fear" of my health declining.

That might be how the Obamabots want to live, but not me and not at $200 a month. BTW, the link I provided didn't say those prices were "exclusive" to a set class(IE: The elite). Those are for everyone.

Screw $200, the government does not *pass go* when I'm 26. Hopefully, it's not an issue for me. I'll vote Republican to save my paycheck.

 

Woopty (*)(*)(*)(*)ing doo. It doesn't matter how healthy you been. You could get hit by a bus the day after your 26th birthday and we'll all be paying your emergency room bills. Worse yet, lets say you get cancer or some other illness that requires long term care... well you're either (*)(*)(*)(*)ed or your parents will be losing their home as they struggle to pay your medical bills. You really want to put that on them cause you're too cheap to pay for health insurance like a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing responsible adult? If $195 is so onerous that you would gamble you and you're parents future, then why not strive job that provides insurance benefits.

 

So you make over $80,000 per year (which is the only circumstance you would owe that $200), yet you will NOT buy health insurance?

Yeah, that's the "fiscal responsibility" of the Republicans, fer shure. Yeah, let's elect them to run our country! NOT!

 

its nice of you to let your mommy pay for you in the mean time

 

In case you did not realize this, thousands of people get sick weekly, too. Some really sick. Some were even in those car accidents you mentioned. In each case there are only two groups of people: Those with insurance and those without. If you don't have insurance and you cannot pay (and you clearly can't given that you think $195 is a lot of money), the costs of your care fall to those who could pay (via insurance or their own funds). That makes you a leach on the rest of us. My solution is simple. You either get insurance or show you can pay or we let you stay sick, stay injured and/or die. That way everyone wins. You rolled the dice and lost, so tough shiite. The hospital can care for someone who is not a leach and my money goes to pay for my own care. We will treat it like the car insurance you seem to like. If you don't have it and your car gets crushed, it's just gone. Just like you might be.

 

I'm with this. Can we deny 11 million illegals access to our emergency rooms while we're spitballing here?

 

It is a little tough to get proof of legal residency from people bleeding, unconscious, or sick.

In fact, very few people I know carry their proof of legal residency like a passport or birth certificate (a drivers license does not do that), I would see many Americans dying while because they can;t get treated in the ER.

 

Nice deflection fiddy. It's a little tough getting proof of insurance when all of that is happening too. And no, ObamaCare doesn't guarantee being insured if someone elects to pay the fine.

 

Well, Piscy, the absurdity of trying establish residency at the ER is EXACTLY why that policy is opposed by many who would otherwise welcome restrictions on ER use by illegals. There is no practical way to implement that will work.

Of course, absurd suggestions like residency checks at the ER and 2000 mile long "walls" and other absolutely guaranteed budget-busting FAILS are the hallmarks of Rightie immigration ideas. We can do ANYTHING and spend ANYTHING on ideas that will NOT work so we do not deprive Republican businessmen of their cheapo subservient labor pools.

 

I'm not clear on the details on this. Let's say you decide to pay the fine rather than the bronze level insurance. Do you have any coverage if you do that? What are the details in this case?

As far as I can tell, you're just uninsured entirely.

 

Once this Socialistic system is in place... We will be like the British and Russians, et al ... Looking for countries with excellent health care. Doctors will find another profession.

- - - Updated - - -

Once this Socialistic system is in place... We will be like the British and Russians, et al ... Looking for countries with excellent health care. Doctors will find another profession.

 

Exactly. This is why I know this thing will blow up and fail. It's going to be a logistical nightmare. Imagine being denied because your monthly payment gets lost or you couldn't afford to pay it this month because you just got laid off and you haven't filed the necessary paperwork yet. You think the DMV is a nightmare?

So if you are uninsured and something happens, will they now turn you away? Or will this over-bloated legislation be no better than the current condition where uninsured people basically get covered by the taxpayer?

 

"WE" pay for it. all of us. the same way we pay for things like Medicare. welcome to the ways things work. companies like Home Depot started doing this when the recession hit & the ACA had jack (*)(*)(*)(*) to do with it.

 

The liberals and Democrats and otherwise Obamacare supporters have this attitude, it's like they're telling rape victims, hey, if you just spread your legs open a little bit wider, the rape wouldn't be so bad.

 

BS. The first thing they ask you is if you are insured. If you are a US citizen, you usually are. Either by an HMO, a Co-op or through welfare. If you are not, you still get helped. There are indications, however, that you might not be a legal resident when you continuously use the ER for non-emergency visits. Most of us tend to email our doctors or call an advice nurse to set up an appointment with our doctor. If it is a true emergency, they will administer aid regardless, then worry about the logistics later.

I deleted the rest of your post because it was the usual partisan hackery.

 

For a while, this is guaranteed to be the case. Nobody will really have all their procedures down - the paperwork will lag, the computer programs to handle the insurance will lag, lots of "fall through the cracks" cases will come up and protocols will need to be refined. Of course, this would be somewhat true even if the ACA weren't a bunch of unrelated GOP ideas mashed together by the insurance industry, which wrote the bill. But I'm well aware that the ACA is a convoluted attempt to accommodate conflicting special interests, as necessary to get passed at all. Bumpy ride for a couple years, for sure.

I think the degree to which this is true will be much smaller, but not zero by any means. Still, the whole idea is, like any insurance program, that low-risk people subsidize high-risk people. One way or another. The goal is to get as many low-risk people on board as possible, to spread the risk as much as possible.

My main concern here is, while taxpayers have been subsidizing emergency rooms, most people do not GO to emergency rooms for anything less than an emergency. There are exceptions, but for most poor uninsured people that's a last resort. I'm expecting that the load on the national medical care delivery system as a whole will increase rapidly. Enough more people will take advantage of their insurance enough more often, that the medical infrastructure will be swamped. After all, the current medical professionals, equipment, floor space, etc. is a close match for the demand. Increase the demand and, well, how long will it take to produce another 30% more qualified doctors and nurses? I wonder if this will be the main problem, at least for a while.

 

I didn't realize Max Baucus was a GOPer or an insurance industry professional.

That aside, I think you are delusional in your belief that it will be a bumpy ride for a couple of years. How long has the DMV been around? If that is your representation of having the kinks worked out, we are doomed.

This is what I perceive is one of the big problems. The group less likely to have insurance has always been the low-risk "invincible" younger generations. If the fine is less than the cost of insurance, they will opt to pay the fine and won't be bankrolling the high-risk people. They will hardly feel the pinch either. The penalty will only get assessed yearly as part of their tax returns. There is a preponderance of young people who tend to file S-0, so they get a bigger tax return. Writing off a few hundred dollars when you would be getting $500-$700 back is a lot smaller impact then writing a $144 check on average for a bronze plan in Minnesota. [The same plan will cost you $440 in Wyoming]. That $144 is per month or $1728 for the year. Even if you make $100,000 per year you would only pay a 1% penalty and save $728. Granted, someone making that amount of money can afford healthcare, but young people generally can't part with the extra money. Caveat: This is average. A single young adult may only pay $50 a month depending on wages. If they do sign up, they may still be the recipients of subsidization which might be good for them but defeats the argument that they will be adding to the largesse trying to underwrite the high-risk people.

I think our healthcare professionals will be overwhelmed. It's no mystery that for the past 5 years that the medical professions have all been at the top of the lists for the best fields to enter. If wages are affected by the legislation, fewer people will opt for the profession. This is the impetus for California legislators mulling over the possibility of allowing RNs to take over more procedures from doctors.

 

Most of the ACA provisions started out as GOP recommendations. They suggested keeping parental coverage until later, and covering pre-existing conditions.

Wow. The only problem I've encountered with DMV is not enough people to hand the workload during some times of day, leading to long lines. I didn't realize we were suffering doom because of these lines.

Except insofar as the fines will substitute for the premiums.

You will notice that the fines go up severely after one and then two years. After which, the fines exceed any rational premiums.

I suspect you are correct here. For most people, getting $300 back rather than $800 back LOOKS great - hey, look, the government "gave me" $300! Most people WOULD rather get $300 back, than get $800 back but actually have to PAY $144.

We're back to the nature of insurance, I think. I agree young people can't part with even the subsidized premiums - UNTIL something happens to them. As others have pointed out, many of these young people are pretty strapped, buying a house and raising young children, and suddenly they lose everything.

Again, we need to back up a bit, I think. IF the goal here is a healthy population, how should national resources best be allocated so as to maximize public health generally? And we're into traditional economic analysis: SHOULD we spend our money on wars or on health? Should we spend it on multi-million dollar bonuses for CEO's whose companies lose money, or should we spend it on (pick one - better roads and bridges, more national parks and park maintenance, etc.) Given that resources are finite, what is the optimum way to collect them, and what is the optimum way to expend them?

When we clear away all the noise, what we find is a battle here between those who don't need insurance and can afford medical care, and those who need medical care but can't afford it. And ironically, the battle's results will be determined by all those people who have no clue what the fighting is really about, and buy into whatever propaganda they find most trustworthy.

For a while, I think this is unavoidable.

Which is, I think, almost sensible (at least for politicians). Most nurse practitioners, and even RNs are competent to handle nearly every case they see (which tend to be simple injuries and common bugs). And most GP doctors are just traffic cops, deciding which specialist to refer you to - which these nurses could do as well. I have yet to have a yearly physical which couldn't have been handled by a paramedic - take my blood pressure, look at my blood test results, write down my weight. Hell, I could do these things myself.