Some radical changes in my health insurance [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Some radical changes in my health insurance


clancy
10-22-2012, 17:35
I had a meeting at work. Come the first of the year there are going to be some very radical changes in my work supplied health insurance. I pay $35 a week for single coverage, with that I get a $20 co-pay for doctor visits, $10-$20 co-pay of prescription drugs and dental and eyeglasses. All in all my coverage is pretty damn good.

Starting 1/1/2013, my premium jumps to $115 a week for a single plan, $275 a week for a family plan, with a $2000 a year deductible for single, $5000 deductible for family. No dental, no eyeglasses, and a $750 a year deductible for prescription drugs.

We were allowed to opt out of coverage should we choose, starting 1/1, we have no choice, should we want to stay employed, but to pay for the coverage. Even worse, we were told today that our insurance has to be counted as income, and we will have to pay taxes on it starting next year. That means instead of getting a tax refund, I will probably have to pay an additonal $2500 or so in taxes.

I feel sick. If I have to pay that kind of money each week for a plan that is virtually useless, I don't know what I am going to do.

GunAround
10-22-2012, 17:37
Welcome to Obama Care.

Sage46
10-22-2012, 17:39
Thanks to 0bamacare, another reason to vote a straight GOP ticket this November

Bring_it!
10-22-2012, 17:40
Welcome to Obama Care.

^this!

Ragnar
10-22-2012, 17:43
Hello Obamacare.

smokeross
10-22-2012, 17:45
I can't even buy health insurance. They turn me down.

G-19
10-22-2012, 17:46
Been telling people about this since before Obamacare became law. Anyone with Health Insurance is going to have to claim employers contribution as income.

RustyL
10-22-2012, 17:53
Yep, wife came home today and told me about her increased premiums for her and my daughter. I carry mine through work, I feel quite sure premiums will go up.
Lets all thank O for a job well done.

PaulMason
10-22-2012, 17:53
I had a meeting at work. Come the first of the year there are going to be some very radical changes in my work supplied health insurance. I pay $35 a week for single coverage, with that I get a $20 co-pay for doctor visits, $10-$20 co-pay of prescription drugs and dental and eyeglasses. All in all my coverage is pretty damn good.

Starting 1/1/2013, my premium jumps to $115 a week for a single plan, $275 a week for a family plan, with a $2000 a year deductible for single, $5000 deductible for family. No dental, no eyeglasses, and a $750 a year deductible for prescription drugs.

We were allowed to opt out of coverage should we choose, starting 1/1, we have no choice, should we want to stay employed, but to pay for the coverage. Even worse, we were told today that our insurance has to be counted as income, and we will have to pay taxes on it starting next year. That means instead of getting a tax refund, I will probably have to pay an additonal $2500 or so in taxes.

I feel sick. If I have to pay that kind of money each week for a plan that is virtually useless, I don't know what I am going to do.

Shop around - look at Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

Those rates sound very high. Are you sure the new rates aren't monthly? Monthly would make more sense considering the reduction in coverage.

Also, a company can not force you to buy health ins. to stay employed.

I'm 57 and pay $190/month - single with a 5K deductible, 3 dr visits/yr with a $35 co pay.

Health ins is not taxable.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-20/story/health-care-benefits-not-taxable-are-reportable

Flying-Dutchman
10-22-2012, 17:56
There are 2,000+ pages of evilness in Obama Care. Shazam! Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!

What happens if we all just quit working and get our free Obama Care?

Flying-Dutchman
10-22-2012, 18:01
Health ins is not taxable.

In a few years there will be a 40% non-deductible excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans.

clancy
10-22-2012, 18:02
Shop around - look at Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

Those rates sound very high.

I'm 57 and pay $190/month - single with a 5K deductible, 3 dr visits/yr with a $35 co pay.

Health ins is not taxable.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-20/story/health-care-benefits-not-taxable-are-reportable

Reread my post. I cannot shop around. According to HR, we are required to purchase the medical coverage provided by our employer. Also according to HR, it will be Federal law that we have to purchase the insurance. But, as the insurance rep said, at least those of us with 26 year old children who are living at home and unemployed will now have them covered. I guess I should feel better, but don't.

I get paid bi-weekly. My insurance premiums are going to be $230 each paycheck.
Both HR and insurance reps said that insurance coverage will be taxable.

ldn0125
10-22-2012, 18:08
Makes you wonder why most of the Obamacare things kick in AFTER the election. I'm not fooled by what has happened. I knew I voted the right way 4 years ago and will exercise my right again to hopefully defeat the person that was able to rush through this massive change to healthcare. Our enrollment packet came in today -- I haven't opened it yet. Last year, our deductible was over 4k. How much worse can it get? I hate to look!

El_Ron1
10-22-2012, 18:19
You're gonna be helping out with SSI a bit more too:

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/175309011.html

G36's Rule
10-22-2012, 18:28
Just got my enrollment packet from work this week. Cost is the same for my wife and I. No mention of it being taxed as income either.

devildog2067
10-22-2012, 18:34
Even worse, we were told today that our insurance has to be counted as income, and we will have to pay taxes on it starting next year.

The amount that an employer pays for your insurance benefit is a tax-free benefit to you, and anything that you pay is tax-deductible as well if you itemize.

devildog2067
10-22-2012, 18:35
Reread my post. I cannot shop around. According to HR, we are required to purchase the medical coverage provided by our employer.

Don't believe everything an HR drone tells you. Do your own research.

PaulMason
10-22-2012, 18:43
Reread my post. I cannot shop around. According to HR, we are required to purchase the medical coverage provided by our employer. Also according to HR, it will be Federal law that we have to purchase the insurance. But, as the insurance rep said, at least those of us with 26 year old children who are living at home and unemployed will now have them covered. I guess I should feel better, but don't.

I get paid bi-weekly. My insurance premiums are going to be $230 each paycheck.
Both HR and insurance reps said that insurance coverage will be taxable.

Obama care says you have to have health ins. or you pay a tax. It does not say you have to buy it from your company. Does it make any sense that an employee who makes minimum wage must pay your rates to stay employed?

Companies that do not provide health ins have to pay a tax per employee. You company is providing health ins.

It is complicated but it will be worth your time to go to a knowledgeable health ins. agent.

tryn2hrd
10-22-2012, 18:44
You aint seen nothing yet. Welcome to oboma care.

Drjones
10-22-2012, 18:48
I had a meeting at work. Come the first of the year there are going to be some very radical changes in my work supplied health insurance. I pay $35 a week for single coverage, with that I get a $20 co-pay for doctor visits, $10-$20 co-pay of prescription drugs and dental and eyeglasses. All in all my coverage is pretty damn good.

Starting 1/1/2013, my premium jumps to $115 a week for a single plan, $275 a week for a family plan, with a $2000 a year deductible for single, $5000 deductible for family. No dental, no eyeglasses, and a $750 a year deductible for prescription drugs.

We were allowed to opt out of coverage should we choose, starting 1/1, we have no choice, should we want to stay employed, but to pay for the coverage. Even worse, we were told today that our insurance has to be counted as income, and we will have to pay taxes on it starting next year. That means instead of getting a tax refund, I will probably have to pay an additonal $2500 or so in taxes.

I feel sick. If I have to pay that kind of money each week for a plan that is virtually useless, I don't know what I am going to do.


Hey that's great man, congratulations! Isn't that wonderful? Just remember, you'll be able to keep your current plan, your current doctor, your kids will be able to stay covered under you until they're 26...and I think you get free abortions & birth control...this is great news!













.



In all seriousness....wow....that's awful. I'm seriously dreading to see how much my plan is going to jump. I'm on a bare-bones plan that WAS $75/mo a few years ago (after zero took office but before hussein-care) it's now $113/mo.

Seriously; please send this message you posted here to the white house, with a big fat "THANK YOU &^%$HOLE"

Drjones
10-22-2012, 18:49
What happens if we all just quit working and get our free Obama Care?


Who Is John Galt?


I'm in......let's plan a day/week/whatever.

arclight610
10-22-2012, 18:53
Who Is John Galt?


I'm in......let's plan a day/week/whatever.

I think he's that dude from Atlas Shrugged

DanaT
10-22-2012, 18:53
I had a meeting at work. Come the first of the year there are going to be some very radical changes in my work supplied health insurance. I pay $35 a week for single coverage, with that I get a $20 co-pay for doctor visits, $10-$20 co-pay of prescription drugs and dental and eyeglasses. All in all my coverage is pretty damn good.

Starting 1/1/2013, my premium jumps to $115 a week for a single plan, $275 a week for a family plan, with a $2000 a year deductible for single, $5000 deductible for family. No dental, no eyeglasses, and a $750 a year deductible for prescription drugs.

We were allowed to opt out of coverage should we choose, starting 1/1, we have no choice, should we want to stay employed, but to pay for the coverage. Even worse, we were told today that our insurance has to be counted as income, and we will have to pay taxes on it starting next year. That means instead of getting a tax refund, I will probably have to pay an additonal $2500 or so in taxes.

I feel sick. If I have to pay that kind of money each week for a plan that is virtually useless, I don't know what I am going to do.

At least Muskogee and his mom have someone else to pay for their health care. You paying some extra is the morally right thing to do. Quit whining.

CaptCave
10-22-2012, 19:00
We are going to see health insurance get back to what it was suppose to be. Something to offset the cost of major medical.

devildog2067
10-22-2012, 19:04
At least Muskogee and his mom have someone else to pay for their health care. You paying some extra is the morally right thing to do. Quit whining.

Ouch.

Reissman
10-22-2012, 19:06
Shop around - look at Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

Those rates sound very high. Are you sure the new rates aren't monthly? Monthly would make more sense considering the reduction in coverage.

Also, a company can not force you to buy health ins. to stay employed.

I'm 57 and pay $190/month - single with a 5K deductible, 3 dr visits/yr with a $35 co pay.

Health ins is not taxable.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-20/story/health-care-benefits-not-taxable-are-reportable

I have blue cross blue shield. 191 per pay check X 26 times a year for my premiums. Thats 162 medical 29 dental. Plus 1500 per person deductible I have 4 kids. Basically we pay all of our office visits up to 1500 per person. My son's lung collapse last year it cost us 7500 out of pocket plus our premiums.

I guess I should be happy I have insurance....

G36's Rule
10-22-2012, 19:11
Clancy, something isn't right about what you are saying or what you were told. You will not be taxed on employer provided healthcare.

And you have every right to shop around or opt out if you wish.

NateHodge
10-22-2012, 20:10
Been telling people about this since before Obamacare became law. Anyone with Health Insurance is going to have to claim employers contribution as income.

I pay ~$200 a month for full med/dental/optical. I have long and short term disability, $250k of life insurance on me, $50K of life on my wife, and $10k on our son. My company is "self funded", meaning BCBS underwrites the policy but my money stays within the company and goes into a holding account. My company pays the medical bills after I pay my part. Technically, there is no "employer contribution" that I have to claim as income.

Some parts of my job are crappy, but this above makes it worth staying for. Screw ObamaCare. I'm glad to work for a major that has brilliant upper management.

cqb451
10-22-2012, 20:36
I had a meeting at work. Come the first of the year there are going to be some very radical changes in my work supplied health insurance. I pay $35 a week for single coverage, with that I get a $20 co-pay for doctor visits, $10-$20 co-pay of prescription drugs and dental and eyeglasses. All in all my coverage is pretty damn good.

Starting 1/1/2013, my premium jumps to $115 a week for a single plan, $275 a week for a family plan, with a $2000 a year deductible for single, $5000 deductible for family. No dental, no eyeglasses, and a $750 a year deductible for prescription drugs.

We were allowed to opt out of coverage should we choose, starting 1/1, we have no choice, should we want to stay employed, but to pay for the coverage. Even worse, we were told today that our insurance has to be counted as income, and we will have to pay taxes on it starting next year. That means instead of getting a tax refund, I will probably have to pay an additonal $2500 or so in taxes.

I feel sick. If I have to pay that kind of money each week for a plan that is virtually useless, I don't know what I am going to do.
The party's over. Welcome to the club.

dherloc
10-22-2012, 21:12
I think he's that dude from Atlas Shrugged

:rofl: :rofl:

Good one!

Clutch Cargo
10-22-2012, 22:34
Obama says, "you will buy your health insurance and you will like it"

SevenSixtyTwo
10-23-2012, 11:17
My BCBS health insurance has been over $1400 a month since long before Obamacare was even a thought.

OctoberRust
10-23-2012, 11:31
At least Muskogee and his mom have someone else to pay for their health care. You paying some extra is the morally right thing to do. Quit whining.


Is that the guy with the mullet on GT?:dunno:

muscogee
10-23-2012, 11:45
At least Muskogee and his mom have someone else to pay for their health care. You paying some extra is the morally right thing to do. Quit whining.

My mom has more money than you'll ever see short pants. My father bumped the cap on SSI at around 14.5% for many years and died before he ever got to draw anything from it. You quit whining.

Hicksville Kid
10-23-2012, 11:55
I'm stunned!






Stunned by the realization that there are people out there that didn't know that this would happen.

The information was there. But people just trusted Nancy and Company.

Next time they try to sell you something, do the research.

OctoberRust
10-23-2012, 12:11
Is that the guy with the mullet on GT?:dunno:

My mom has more money than you'll ever see short pants. My father bumped the cap on SSI at around 14.5% for many years and died before he ever got to draw anything from it. You quit whining.

:rofl: I guess that answers my question.

muscogee
10-23-2012, 22:31
I'm stunned!






Stunned by the realization that there are people out there that didn't know that this would happen.

The information was there. But people just trusted Nancy and Company.

Next time they try to sell you something, do the research.

Health care has been going up since Reagan. I'm stunned that people act like it just happened and blame it on Obama.

FLIPPER 348
10-23-2012, 22:35
I'm stunned!






Stunned by the realization that there are people out there that didn't know that this would happen.




I'm stunned folks believe the OP's claims.

Cali-Glock
10-23-2012, 22:38
The amount that an employer pays for your insurance benefit is a tax-free benefit to you, and anything that you pay is tax-deductible as well if you itemize.

It WAS a tax free benefit. This is one of the changes thanks to Obama care. I forget if it is this year or next that the employers contribution to our health are becomes taxable income.

Obamacare eliminates high deductible health care plans also.

Paul53
10-23-2012, 22:40
Sounds like a round about way to influence your votes.

mr00jimbo
10-23-2012, 22:42
Wow...that sounds...horrible. :(
I'd never be able to afford something like that.

jtmac
10-24-2012, 00:07
Is that the guy with the mullet on GT?:dunno:

Do what now?

SevenSixtyTwo
10-24-2012, 05:41
It WAS a tax free benefit. This is one of the changes thanks to Obama care. I forget if it is this year or next that the employers contribution to our health are becomes taxable income.

Obamacare eliminates high deductible health care plans also.

Even if Mitt wins, one of his tax overhauls is to include employer paid healthcare as taxable income. As much as I hate it, the fact is, it IS income like any other. So either way, it's coming. I'd like to see a flat tax and ALL deductions go away.

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 07:06
Health care has been going up since Reagan. I'm stunned that people act like it just happened and blame it on Obama.

Why do socialists like to rewrite history?

Healthcare inflation took off in 1965.

Guess what else started in 1965?

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 07:07
Obamacare eliminates high deductible health care plans also.

But, but, but he said I could keep my current plan! I'm confused............

The elimination of HSA's increases my cost $2000/year alone.

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 07:09
My mom has more money than you'll ever see short pants. My father bumped the cap on SSI at around 14.5% for many years and died before he ever got to draw anything from it. You quit whining.

Sure.

BTW, what is "bumping the cap on SSI at 14.5%"? What does that mean?

As for the whining, you seem to be the one that comes to every healthcare thread whining about how you're entitled to someone else's money because you've been a failure in life.

DanaT
10-24-2012, 07:49
My mom has more money than you'll ever see short pants. My father bumped the cap on SSI at around 14.5% for many years and died before he ever got to draw anything from it. You quit whining.

And yet you whine that she cant afford medical care.

And i even offered you an investment opportunity to employ middle class people. All you needed was $3M investment. When are you stepping up with mom's money?

It is quite funny that you claim to know how much money I have.

DanaT
10-24-2012, 07:50
Sure.

BTW, what is "bumping the cap on SSI at 14.5%"? What does that mean?
e
As for the whining, you seem to be the one that comes to every healthcare thread whining about how you're entitled to someonelse's money because you've been a failure in life.

I means that he doesnt even know what the cap is because it is not a percentage; it is a dollar amount.

Sharkey
10-24-2012, 07:59
It's called Taxageddon and it begins in Jan. after the election.

Who do you blame? O, Congress, and the people that voted for them.

See, they want you off your insurance and want to funnel people to O Care because apparently it is so great that the members of Congress have their own plan. The govt. will control 1/6 of the GDP (but hey we aren't socialists or anything).

This is what happens when you get a lot of freeloaders voting for more entitlements. Who knew we could destroy the Republic quicker than it took us to build it.

A govt. for the govt. by the govt. Now use that Constitution to wipe your a** from the diarrhea you have but can't see a Dr. because you don't have the money.

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 08:03
It's called Taxageddon and it begins in Jan. after the election.

Who do you blame? O, Congress, and the people that voted for them.

See, they want you off your insurance and want to funnel people to O Care because apparently it is so great that the members of Congress have their own plan. The govt. will control 1/6 of the GDP (but hey we aren't socialists or anything).

This is what happens when you get a lot of freeloaders voting for more entitlements. Who knew we could destroy the Republic quicker than it took us to build it.



You mean like Social Security and Medicare recipients?

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 08:04
I means that he doesnt even know what the cap is because it is not a percentage; it is a dollar amount.

Is that why the net on my paystub goes up every May?

meathead19
10-24-2012, 08:06
It's called Taxageddon and it begins in Jan. after the election.

Who do you blame? O, Congress, and the people that voted for them.

See, they want you off your insurance and want to funnel people to O Care because apparently it is so great that the members of Congress have their own plan. The govt. will control 1/6 of the GDP (but hey we aren't socialists or anything).

This is what happens when you get a lot of freeloaders voting for more entitlements. Who knew we could destroy the Republic quicker than it took us to build it.

A govt. for the govt. by the govt. Now use that Constitution to wipe your a** from the diarrhea you have but can't see a Dr. because you don't have the money.

Well put....unfortunately.

muscogee
10-24-2012, 08:12
And yet you whine that she cant afford medical care.I have never said anything about mo mother's medical care. It was my mother-in-law. The reason people like you can't have coherent conversations is that you don't listen. You decide what you want to believe and bend the facts to fit your point of view. As for whining, you whine all the time, when your not bradding. Of course, it's not whining when you do it. Grow up and stop being a hypocrite.

And i even offered you an investment opportunity to employ middle class people. All you needed was $3M investment. When are you stepping up with mom's money?

It is quite funny that you claim to know how much money I have. Bragging again short pants?

muscogee
10-24-2012, 08:14
I means that he doesnt even know what the cap is because it is not a percentage; it is a dollar amount.

It means you pay 14.5% of your income up to a certain dollar amount. You don't pay SSI on income over that amount. It's a tax break for the rich.

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 08:21
It means you pay 14.5% of your income up to a certain dollar amount. You don't pay SSI on income over that amount. It's a tax break for the rich.

The cap on SSI tax is $110,000.

If I pay 14.5% on $110,000 and you obviously pay far less than that, didn't YOU get a tax break?


Wait. Hold on a second.......!!!!!!!!!

SS is a tax? I thought it was a contribution?

Flying-Dutchman
10-24-2012, 08:30
Just got my enrollment packet from work this week. Cost is the same for my wife and I. No mention of it being taxed as income either.
The 40% excise tax on current health insurance policies kicks in in 2018.

By this time the evildoers figure Obama Care will be as firmly entrenched as Social Security. As this point they finish private health insurance.

And just like the income tax was originally supposed to hit only the extreme rich, Obama Care taxes will soon hit every working person hard. It will be too late then.

G36's Rule
10-24-2012, 08:40
Well away of what may be coming, if changes aren't made. That does not explain the OP's claims which are incorrect.

Flying-Dutchman
10-24-2012, 08:51
Well away of what may be coming, if changes aren't made. That does not explain the OP's claims which are incorrect.
If Obama wins or the Senate stays Democrat no changes will be made other than the needed higher taxes as it will be much more expensive than promised.

Ask people in the medical field. Medicare has been cut already; Obama Care is here.

Lots of really bad things with Obama Care; it is worse than you think.

There is a $125,000 fine against a hospital for a readmission within 30 days. Will you be readmitted even if you need to be? Fat chance.

DanaT
10-24-2012, 09:08
It means you pay 14.5% of your income up to a certain dollar amount. You don't pay SSI on income over that amount. It's a tax break for the rich.

And once again, you show you have no clue.

Employers pay HALF of the 14.5% up to $110,100 (FY2012) unless one is self employed. That HALF that the employer pays is money you dont get in your paycheck.

So is SS a TAX or is it a benefit? You seem to say it is a benefit that one pays into and gets something back out of. If it is a benefit, then the cap is appropriate because withdrawls are also capped.

DanaT
10-24-2012, 09:12
I have never said anything about mo mother's medical care. It was my mother-in-law.

Mother. Mother in law. Aunt. Dogs Babysitter. It doesnt matter to me. People need to be responsible for them selves. It is not my responsibility to take care of them.

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 09:24
Mother. Mother in law. Aunt. Dogs Babysitter. It doesnt matter to me. People need to be responsible for them selves. It is not my responsibility to take care of them.

But his life saving heart procedure cost him a whole 10 grand! That's outrageous! How can you expect life's losers to cover that?

However it does beg the question: if muscogee's life isn't worth $10,000 to him, why the hell should it be worth $10,000 to the taxpayer?

muscogee
10-24-2012, 11:23
And once again, you show you have no clue.

Employers pay HALF of the 14.5% up to $110,100 (FY2012) unless one is self employed. That HALF that the employer pays is money you dont get in your paycheck.

If you were a sole proprietor who pays the employer's half? You're the one who has no clue.

muscogee
10-24-2012, 11:24
Mother. Mother in law. Aunt. Dogs Babysitter. It doesnt matter to me. People need to be responsible for them selves. It is not my responsibility to take care of them.

Now you're changing the subject. Pay attention.

DanaT
10-24-2012, 12:23
If you were a sole proprietor who pays the employer's half? You're the one who has no clue.

Reading isnt what you are good at, is it?

Let me make it clearer...I have bolded and colored what I posted (and you quoted).

And once again, you show you have no clue.

Employers pay HALF of the 14.5% up to $110,100 (FY2012) unless one is self employed. That HALF that the employer pays is money you dont get in your paycheck.

So is SS a TAX or is it a benefit? You seem to say it is a benefit that one pays into and gets something back out of. If it is a benefit, then the cap is appropriate because withdrawls are also capped.

DanaT
10-24-2012, 12:23
but his life saving heart procedure cost him a whole 10 grand! That's outrageous! How can you expect life's losers to cover that?

However it does beg the question: If muscogee's life isn't worth $10,000 to him, why the hell should it be worth $10,000 to the taxpayer?

$1.97

Sharkey
10-24-2012, 14:11
You mean like Social Security and Medicare recipients?

Well kinda. I was really referring more to those on disability and food stamps but it isn't like SS and Medicare don't have their own fraud issues to deal with.

The old folks paid into it and should have access to it but we've known it is unsustainable for a long time. The Feds are good about putting those IOUs back in the file cabinet when they steal money from SS.

I remember some president who wanted individual retirement accounts but some party in Congress voted it down. :whistling:

Socialism is not a new idea as you know.

Glock&KimberLady
10-24-2012, 14:29
Is that why the net on my paystub goes up every May?

Screw it, TMI. Consider a doubletap.

Glock&KimberLady
10-24-2012, 14:34
It means you pay 14.5% of your income up to a certain dollar amount. You don't pay SSI on income over that amount. It's a tax break for the rich.

$110,000 in salary isn't rich. I am amused at how the definition of "rich" is constantly fluid these days.

I consider someone pulling in over $300k a year to be rich.

That extra $400 a month isn't helping out "the rich" all that much.

But by all means, let's perpetuate the disngenous class warfare bandwagon that everyone's jumping on this year.

You are doing poorly.
The rich are doing well.
It's the rich people's fault you are doing so poorly.

I can think of someone else who used that faulty logic.

IvanVic
10-24-2012, 14:54
But, but, but he said I could keep my current plan! I'm confused............

The elimination of HSA's increases my cost $2000/year alone.

HSAs haven't been eliminated. Our company just renewed ours in open enrollment a couple weeks ago. We pay $0 a month and our company contributes over half of our deductible, a deductible that's very reasonable. I believe about 90% of our employees chose the HSA over the other options.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

DanaT
10-24-2012, 15:07
$110,000 in salary isn't rich. I am amused at how the definition of "rich" is constantly fluid these days.

Rich is anyone who makes more than you. They should be supporting you if they make more. Dont you read GT?

DanaT
10-24-2012, 15:08
You are doing poorly.
The rich are doing well.
It's the rich people's fault you are doing so poorly.

Don't forget the elitists. Its their fault too.

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 15:20
HSAs haven't been eliminated. Our company just renewed ours in open enrollment a couple weeks ago. We pay $0 a month and our company contributes over half of our deductible, a deductible that's very reasonable. I believe about 90% of our employees chose the HSA over the other options.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Law isn't fully implemented yet

certifiedfunds
10-24-2012, 15:23
$110,000 in salary isn't rich. I am amused at how the definition of "rich" is constantly fluid these days.

I consider someone pulling in over $300k a year to be rich.

That extra $400 a month isn't helping out "the rich" all that much.

But by all means, let's perpetuate the disngenous class warfare bandwagon that everyone's jumping on this year.

You are doing poorly.
The rich are doing well.
It's the rich people's fault you are doing so poorly.

I can think of someone else who used that faulty logic.

Consider the perspective. To the muscogee's of the world $110,000 is unimaginable wealth.

Glock&KimberLady
10-24-2012, 15:28
Rich is anyone who makes more than you. They should be supporting you if they make more. Dont you read GT?

Yeah, I keep forgetting that.

When you make $25k, then $110k is rich.

When you make $110k, then $300k is rich.

Guess it's relative.

DanaT
10-24-2012, 15:52
Yeah, I keep forgetting that.

When you make $25k, then $110k is rich.

When you make $110k, then $300k is rich.

Guess it's relative.

My definition of rich starts with a private jet. And no. I am not rich.

railfancwb
10-24-2012, 16:25
We are going to see health insurance get back to what it was suppose to be. Something to offset the cost of major medical.

Don't bet on it. Medical insurance costs got where they are because Feds and states continued to add mandates to what was once coverage for catastrophic events. If the Flukes of the nation - male and female - are to have their birth control and bedroom fun and games costs mandated to the insurance companies everyone's premiums go up.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

SevenSixtyTwo
10-24-2012, 16:52
I wonder if the cost of rubbers and BC pills would eventually be offset by less welfare babies? Nah... Too profitable to keep havin' them babies. So we get to pay for both. I think we should scratch BC and welfare and supplement unwanted pregnancy termination.

volky
10-24-2012, 17:49
Mine went up by $50/month. New additions were spelled out in a letter, specifically linking these to Obamacare.

clancy
10-24-2012, 19:25
I'm stunned folks believe the OP's claims.

I guess anything that might be construed as negative about the Mighty O and his policies can't possibly be true.

IvanVic
10-25-2012, 04:58
Law isn't fully implemented yet

The law does not eliminate HSAs.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Backfire_Tx
10-25-2012, 22:20
For the 1st time in my married working life, I now have to pay 150/month for my working spouse. So...Anyone who's wife has insurance - and you cover her. You pay 150/month for that. 25% of companies in the us started doing that due to obama care "uncertainty" - per ABC money and CNN money google searches i did. According to the articles 25% of companies this year do this and additional 25% are considering it. If she goes on her plan and i go on mine - then we both have whopper deductibles to pay for. I am so hacked off - i wonder if I'm at my "fair share yet?

http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/10/news/economy/health_insurance_changes_by_employers/index.htm

RenoF250
10-25-2012, 23:04
We are going to see health insurance get back to what it was suppose to be. Something to offset the cost of major medical.

What is that supposed to mean? What about people that have constant medical? I guess they should crawl in a hole and die eh?

I don't like ocare nor do I think anyone is owed health insurance but I do think it needs to cover those that have problems.
I am looking at my 2013 benefit packet and it looks like we are going up $20 every 2 weeks.

There is also a page titled "Health Care Reform" which says HSAs are now limited to $2,500 and then a long section on "Women's Preventative Care" that is paid 100%. Screw men's preventative care I guess..

Drjones
10-26-2012, 08:56
I am so hacked off - i wonder if I'm at my "fair share yet?



Do you have enough money for food and guns? If so, then you're a greedy 1%'er who's not paying his fair share.*


*This message brought to you by Obama 2012.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 09:11
What is that supposed to mean? What about people that have constant medical? I guess they should crawl in a hole and die eh?



Yes, and no.

1. Why should someone be given $50,000 / year in healthcare when they pay $6,000 per year in premiums?

2. You make the false assumption that under catastrophic-only coverage that prices would remain static. They won't. The market would be re-engaged and prices would fall, making chronic conditions more easily managed.

I don't like ocare nor do I think anyone is owed health insurance but I do think it needs to cover those that have problems.


There is a complete contradiction here. You're saying that those with chronic conditions are owed health insurance. Does it matter if you give a healthy person $6000 worth of health insurance free and clear or give a sick person $44,000 free and clear and they pay $6000?

I am looking at my 2013 benefit packet and it looks like we are going up $20 every 2 weeks.



Well, YOU'RE the one who wants pre-existing conditions covered per your post above. Guess you shouldn't mind that $520 per year.

devildog2067
10-26-2012, 09:13
What is that supposed to mean? What about people that have constant medical? I guess they should crawl in a hole and die eh?


If they can't cover the cost of their own care... who should?

I'm not saying they should crawl in a hole and die. I think we as a society do have an obligation to help them. But we also have a responsibility to ourselves to be honest about it.

If a person can't cover the cost of their own care, but expect to receive that care anyway, what that means is that they're asking someone else to pay for them. Nothing wrong with that, but we have to understand that's what it is.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 09:23
If they can't cover the cost of their own care... who should?

I'm not saying they should crawl in a hole and die. I think we as a society do have an obligation to help them. But we also have a responsibility to ourselves to be honest about it.

If a person can't cover the cost of their own care, but expect to receive that care anyway, what that means is that they're asking someone else to pay for them. Nothing wrong with that, but we have to understand that's what it is.

Asking and forcing are two different things.

"I'm sick. You pay for it."

vs

"I'm sick. Can you help me?"

kensb2
10-26-2012, 09:30
Yes, and no.

1. Why should someone be given $50,000 / year in healthcare when they pay $6,000 per year in premiums?



Isn't that the point of insurance? You pay $XXX/year for car insurance, but if you get into an accident and it costs the insurer $15k to fix your car, then they're losing money. If not, then they're making money. Also, safer drivers pay less.

Health insurance is still a 'bet', so to speak, that the insurer will make more money in premiums off of you than they'll spend in claims. if you're healthy, better premiums. Unhealthy, you pay more. At least, that's how I see it.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 09:38
Isn't that the point of insurance? You pay $XXX/year for car insurance, but if you get into an accident and it costs the insurer $15k to fix your car, then they're losing money. If not, then they're making money. Also, safer drivers pay less.



No. If your car insurer was guaranteed to spend $15,000 per year or more to fix your car every year, your premium wouldn't be $200/month.

Health insurance is still a 'bet', so to speak, that the insurer will make more money in premiums off of you than they'll spend in claims. if you're healthy, better premiums. Unhealthy, you pay more. At least, that's how I see it.

No, it really has become healthcare financing. Since you used the car analogy, it is very similar to if we had gasoline insurance that covered a $100 fillup for a $20 copay.

Health insurance today has become the rationing mechanism. It should be indemnity against catastrophic loss, like every other insurance.

RenoF250
10-26-2012, 10:33
Yes, and no.

1. Why should someone be given $50,000 / year in healthcare when they pay $6,000 per year in premiums?

2. You make the false assumption that under catastrophic-only coverage that prices would remain static. They won't. The market would be re-engaged and prices would fall, making chronic conditions more easily managed.



There is a complete contradiction here. You're saying that those with chronic conditions are owed health insurance. Does it matter if you give a healthy person $6000 worth of health insurance free and clear or give a sick person $44,000 free and clear and they pay $6000?



Well, YOU'RE the one who wants pre-existing conditions covered per your post above. Guess you shouldn't mind that $520 per year.

As kensb2 pointed out, that is the point of insurance. Why give $6k for $6k? It would actually be less because they would have to charge to handle the paperwork.

Health insurance is different than other insurance, you could relate them by looking at the diagnosis of the chronic problem as the claim on regular insurance only rather than a 1 time payout of $200k for a house burning down it will be $40k/year for the rest of the patient's life. It is not realistic to expect the person to stay with one insurance co their whole life of for them to be able to afford a $40k premium.

You are lucky enough to be healthy now so you do not want to pay for the leaches that are stealing your money so they can hang out with the doctor and feel like $#%@. I wonder if you would think "asking" for help would be acceptable to you if you had a chronic problem.

Their are other solutions to handle this besides ocare.

The reality is most people (you are obviously excepted) are not willing to stand there and watch someone die from a treatable condition. That means they will be treated and that has to be paid for somehow.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 10:50
As kensb2 pointed out, that is the point of insurance. Why give $6k for $6k? It would actually be less because they would have to charge to handle the paperwork.



You can't be serious at this point. Do you honestly think that if a person has a chronic medical condition requiring $50,000 worth of care that they should be sold a policy covering that for $6000?

Insurance is supposed to be indemnity. What you're asking for here is to transfer the burden to someone other than the patient. You're SUPPOSED to transfer the risk to the insurance company in exchange for the premium. In this case the risk is known.

Health insurance is different than other insurance, you could relate them by looking at the diagnosis of the chronic problem as the claim on regular insurance only rather than a 1 time payout of $200k for a house burning down it will be $40k/year for the rest of the patient's life. It is not realistic to expect the person to stay with one insurance co their whole life of for them to be able to afford a $40k premium.



Yes, no and no.

Yes, what we have really isn't insurance. Again, it is medical financing.

No, you can't do it that way. If the insurance company knew your house was going to burn down your premium would be adjusted to meet that. The insurance company is betting your house won't burn down.

It is amazing that on one hand you think no one should be given health insurance but on the other hand you think that someone with a chronic condition should be given health insurance. It is clear you really haven't thought this through.

You are lucky enough to be healthy now so you do not want to pay for the leaches that are stealing your money so they can hang out with the doctor and feel like $#%@. I wonder if you would think "asking" for help would be acceptable to you if you had a chronic problem.



"asking" for help is different than demanding it. Just because someone is sick means they're entitled to your money?




Their are other solutions to handle this besides ocare.



You haven't proposed any yet. Any way you cut it their care is going to have to be paid for by someone else if they are to get care. There is no magic money machine. Either they get voluntary charity or someone has to be forced to pay for it.

I'm all ears.

The reality is most people (you are obviously excepted) are not willing to stand there and watch someone die from a treatable condition. That means they will be treated and that has to be paid for somehow.

So I can assume that you will be visiting a hospital today to offer to pay for some poor person's cancer treatments, right? I'm assuming you aren't a hypocrite. Or are you?

Or, is it that you just want OTHER PEOPLE to pay for it because YOU think its right.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 11:01
"asking" for help is different than demanding it. Just because someone is sick means they're entitled to your money?

I have this mental impairment (as if anyone hasn't noticed) that I generally need about $40-50k a year to keep in check. I think some of you should be sending me money to help keep my mental impairment in check. I get all OCD when I start looking at expensive sports cars and become mentally incapable of doing anything else. If you all would finance the object of my OCD, then I would not be all OCD and could actually work and be productive.

I am accepting donations to help with my OCD. Who is going to help me out? I am hoping Muskogee steps up to the plate and writes a check to help me with my OCD.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 11:06
I have this mental impairment (as if anyone hasn't noticed) that I generally need about $40-50k a year to keep in check. I think some of you should be sending me money to help keep my mental impairment in check. I get all OCD when I start looking at expensive sports cars and become mentally incapable of doing anything else. If you all would finance the object of my OCD, then I would not be all OCD and could actually work and be productive.

I am accepting donations to help with my OCD. Who is going to help me out? I am hoping Muskogee steps up to the plate and writes a check to help me with my OCD.

Ill match whatever muscogee sends

RenoF250
10-26-2012, 11:10
You haven't proposed any yet. Any way you cut it their care is going to have to be paid for by someone else if they are to get care. There is no magic money machine. Either they get voluntary charity or someone has to be forced to pay for it.

I'm all ears.



So I can assume that you will be visiting a hospital today to offer to pay for some poor person's cancer treatments, right? I'm assuming you aren't a hypocrite. Or are you?

Or, is it that you just want OTHER PEOPLE to pay for it because YOU think its right.

Yes, I have offered a solution. The government would require that health care insurance providers insure everyone at the same rate. The only thing that would affect their premiums are: age, sex, smoker, and coverage selected.

Yes, this would require healthy people pay more to cover unhealthy people. Just like good drivers pay more to cover poor drivers.

I am paying for poor people's care through my taxes and higher health care costs. We are all paying. Me much more than you because I have to pay more into the healthcare system for my wife's problems.

You are the one that has not thought this through. There is no "no care for the poor" option. It just is not going to happen. You are being highly naive to even consider it or imply it could exist. I think you have been convinced by the democrats that is what we have now. It is not. The poor are currently getting care and we are paying for it in the most inefficient and ineffective way conceivable.

devildog2067
10-26-2012, 11:17
Yes, this would require healthy people pay more to cover unhealthy people. Just like good drivers pay more to cover poor drivers.


Good drivers *don't* pay more to cover poor drivers. That's why your driving record affects your insurance premiums.

It's an inexact science to be sure, which is why all young people are lumped together in an "increased risk" bracket, but the idea is that insurance is priced based on your risk.

You're saying that health insurance shouldn't be priced based on health risk, except for smoking and gender.

The problem there is, why smoking? Why not add to the premium if you enjoy extreme sports, or drink, or are fat?

Why discriminate against smokers? Why price insurance differently for women and men?

And when you answer "because those populations, statistically, cost different amounts to insure" you're back at square one. You're saying "these factors are things that people need to cover their own costs for" but "these other factors are ones we'll spread the risk on."

DanaT
10-26-2012, 11:23
Ill match whatever muscogee sends

You know what my OCD is doing at this moment with that statement???

(*&^*%%^&$$%##@&**)(#@ !!!!!!!!!!!

devildog2067
10-26-2012, 11:24
Ill match whatever muscogee sends

Call Donald Trump, I hear he has some money he wants to give away.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 11:25
The only thing that would affect their premiums are: age, sex, smoker, and coverage selected.

So crack addict is OK? What about alcoholic. I suspect they may have issues.

What about people with OCD? Should my OCD treatment be included?

DanaT
10-26-2012, 11:26
Call Donald Trump, I hear he has some money he wants to give away.

For $5M I will give out my passport information and college application records. Hell. I will do it for $4.5M since I am not greedy.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 11:29
Y
You are the one that has not thought this through. There is no "no care for the poor" option. It just is not going to happen. You are being highly naive to even consider it or imply it could exist. I think you have been convinced by the democrats that is what we have now. It is not. The poor are currently getting care and we are paying for it in the most inefficient and ineffective way conceivable.

I dont think he will argue that "care for the poor" doesnt exist. I think the statement is that it morally SHOULDNT exist.

That is like saying rapists shouldnt exist, but they do, so its OK to have rapists.

What is and what should be are not always one and the same.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 11:30
Yes, I have offered a solution. The government would require that health care insurance providers insure everyone at the same rate. The only thing that would affect their premiums are: age, sex, smoker, and coverage selected.

Yes, this would require healthy people pay more to cover unhealthy people. Just like good drivers pay more to cover poor drivers.

I am paying for poor people's care through my taxes and higher health care costs. We are all paying. Me much more than you because I have to pay more into the healthcare system for my wife's problems.

You are the one that has not thought this through. There is no "no care for the poor" option. It just is not going to happen. You are being highly naive to even consider it or imply it could exist. I think you have been convinced by the democrats that is what we have now. It is not. The poor are currently getting care and we are paying for it in the most inefficient and ineffective way conceivable.

I'm going to assume again that you haven't thought this through, either that or you aren't very bright because in your first paragraph you're insisting everyone pay the same. Then in your second paragraph you say healthy people will pay more. Then, you offer no solution for who will pay premiums for the poor so I can only assume they will be very, very low so that the poor can afford them. Under your plan the rich make out like bandits....paying the same low rates as the poor and getting more coverage in turn.

I'd say count me in. It's a perfect plan except that you will immediately run out of money to pay claims.


And, as dd said, you've completely negated the very mechanism that allows insurance to exist: properly pricing risk.

The actuarial exam is one of the most rigorous professional licensure exams out there. I'd suggest you not only take the exam but also lobby to get a spot on the board of examiners so that you can have a hand in revamping the test to match your fantasy.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 11:31
Call Donald Trump, I hear he has some money he wants to give away.

Wait. Wait. Wait.

I have reconsidered.

I will give out my passport and college application information for either a 918 or a Carrera GT.

RenoF250
10-26-2012, 11:37
So crack addict is OK? What about alcoholic. I suspect they may have issues.

What about people with OCD? Should my OCD treatment be included?

Yes I agree. You could argue that age is not their fault either and should not be included. There is no clean solution.

I suppose in a perfect world you could raise rates for expenses that were deemed under the persons control - weight, smoking etc. That is another can of worms though. Smoking, fat, skydivers premiums would be so high they just would not buy insurance.

There is no easy answer. Healthcare is expensive because it requires extensive training, has high liability, and is constantly being researched/improved. It is also something society seems at all willing to deny anyone. As a result the homeless guy gets an MRI and we pay for it.

nursetim
10-26-2012, 11:46
This whole insurance problem has been good for me I think. I am so frustrated that I am radically changing my diet to eliminate the need for most, if not all, my medications. Not on the low carb diet BTW.

You want cheap insurance for chronic disease? Get a vitamix, or some kind of auger juicer and consume only veggies for 3 months, then restart eating mostly veggies. Don't get me wrong, I dearly love meat, especially Bacon, but it's not worth pay most of my income for or dying for. Well maybe Bacon is worth dying for. This is my new insurance plan as my cobra ran out and my medicines would cost me $1000+ per month. I'm done with it.

muscogee
10-26-2012, 11:59
I'm not saying they should crawl in a hole and die.

Yes, you are. Greed is one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 11:59
Yes, you are. Greed is one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

When is my check coming to help with my OCD?

devildog2067
10-26-2012, 12:02
Yes, you are. Greed is one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

Do you own property?

Why is it that you have a right to other peoples' stuff, but no one has a right to yours?

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 12:08
Care for the poor should exist but forcing it is pure unadulterated evil.

Boil it down to what it fundamentally is: forced labor.

Instead of a fancy plan why not give all healthcare workers a modest stipend and force workers to care for them? Problem solves.

engineer151515
10-26-2012, 12:14
Yes, you are. Greed is one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

Pretend you are the President working on Health Care legislation.

In a limited resource would, what's the dollar limit of health care expenses you would set for care to the indigent?

DanaT
10-26-2012, 12:15
C
Instead of a fancy plan why not give all healthcare workers a modest stipend and force workers to care for them? Problem solves.

Or maybe give Muskogee $7.25/hr and make him do whatever, whenever (available 24/7) the hospital needs. No choice. He has to show up. Grandpa messes himself at 2am and needs cleaned. Muskogee to the rescue for $7.25/hr.

I like this new system!!

tantrix
10-26-2012, 12:17
I'd drop it like a wet rag and just use the ER for that price. Health insurance is good but I damn sure ain't paying $115 a week for it.

RenoF250
10-26-2012, 12:24
Care for the poor should exist but forcing it is pure unadulterated evil.

Boil it down to what it fundamentally is: forced labor.

Instead of a fancy plan why not give all healthcare workers a modest stipend and force workers to care for them? Problem solves.

I don't think it is evil but it is essentially forced labor. Not any different than any tax. I feel much better about paying for the poor's healthcare than I do paying for their cell phone.

Wake_jumper
10-26-2012, 12:24
It's called Taxageddon and it begins in Jan. after the election.



So, when the public uses up their disposable income on taxes, health care/insurance, gasoline and utilities, where will the money come from to keep our consumer based economy running?

DanaT
10-26-2012, 12:25
I don't think it is evil but it is essentially forced labor.

So slavery is not evil?

DanaT
10-26-2012, 12:25
So, when the public uses up their disposable income on taxes, health care/insurance, gasoline and utilities, where will the money come from to keep our consumer based economy running?

It called Circling the Drain...or CTD for short....

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 12:31
Wait. Wait. Wait.

I have reconsidered.

I will give out my passport and college application information for either a 918 or a Carrera GT.

No. If everyone can't have a carrera gt, no one gets a carrera gt

kensb2
10-26-2012, 12:32
No. If your car insurer was guaranteed to spend $15,000 per year or more to fix your car every year, your premium wouldn't be $200/month.

Correct. What if I only go to see a doctor once a year because I'm relatively healthy? Then the insurance company is making money off of my premiums.


No, it really has become healthcare financing. Since you used the car analogy, it is very similar to if we had gasoline insurance that covered a $100 fillup for a $20 copay.

Isn't that what an EBT card is, only you don't have to pay the co-pay, some poor tax payer with a job does! :tongueout:

Health insurance today has become the rationing mechanism. It should be indemnity against catastrophic loss, like every other insurance.

I agree with you. Which is why, if you have serious existing health problems: you either pay out of pocket, or pay a much higher premium. Or should.


I can't say for sure how or why health insurance has gotten to be the rationing mechanism vs catastrophic care it should be, but shouldn't the onus be on the insurers to get back to that? I'd suspect that the .gov getting involved has a lot to do with it.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 12:33
Yes I agree. You could argue that age is not their fault either and should not be included. There is no clean solution.

I suppose in a perfect world you could raise rates for expenses that were deemed under the persons control - weight, smoking etc. That is another can of worms though. Smoking, fat, skydivers premiums would be so high they just would not buy insurance.

There is no easy answer. Healthcare is expensive because it requires extensive training, has high liability, and is constantly being researched/improved. It is also something society seems at all willing to deny anyone. As a result the homeless guy gets an MRI and we pay for it.


Wrong on all counts. And there is a ridiculously easy answer.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 12:33
No. If everyone can't have a carrera gt, no one gets a carrera gt

So I must suffer with OCD??

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 12:34
I don't think it is evil but it is essentially forced labor. Not any different than any tax. I feel much better about paying for the poor's healthcare than I do paying for their cell phone.

Well I nominate you to be my slave.

It is most definetly different than most taxes. It is wealth redistribution, a far cry from building a highway.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 12:37
I have an idea!

I think I am a pretty good surgeon. No patients have ever complained about my technique.

So, I can offer discounted surgical services (well..we must fly to a 3rd world country that doesnt have those silly licensing laws) and even discounted prices on device seconds (again, we need to do this in a country that doesnt mind). I mean, come on, the rejected parts were going in the trash before, so maybe you only pay 10% of the price of a good product? For like $1000 I will perform the implantation (again, in a country that doesnt have any licensing requirements). So, for like under $2k you can have a pacemaker installed.

devildog2067
10-26-2012, 12:38
Correct. What if I only go to see a doctor once a year because I'm relatively healthy? Then the insurance company is making money off of my premiums.

No.

The pricing of insurance is supposed to be: "for the average kensb2, what is the chance that he will need care this year and how much will it probably cost?"

But you're not "an" average kensb2--you're just you. You put your money in a pool with everyone whose health care risk profile is similar to yours, and that pool pays for whoever got unlucky this year. You spread the risk among people whose risk/cost are similar to yours.

The problem comes when you start adding people who have a higher risk to the same pool at the same price: they start using the resources up faster than they're getting paid in. Then premiums have to go up. Then the healthy people decide they're not getting their money's worth from the insurance, and they drop out of the system. Prices go up more. Eventually the only people buying insurance are the ones who use far more than they pay, and the whole system runs out of money.

rgregoryb
10-26-2012, 12:42
My definition of rich starts with a private jet. And no. I am not rich.

My King Air doesn't count?

nursetim
10-26-2012, 12:47
No.

The pricing of insurance is supposed to be: "for the average kensb2, what is the chance that he will need care this year and how much will it probably cost?"

But you're not "an" average kensb2--you're just you. You put your money in a pool with everyone whose health care risk profile is similar to yours, and that pool pays for whoever got unlucky this year. You spread the risk among people whose risk/cost are similar to yours.

The problem comes when you start adding people who have a higher risk to the same pool at the same price: they start using the resources up faster than they're getting paid in. Then premiums have to go up. Then the healthy people decide they're not getting their money's worth from the insurance, and they drop out of the system. Prices go up more. Eventually the only people buying insurance are the ones who use far more than they pay, and the whole system runs out of money.

Like our government, right?

kensb2
10-26-2012, 12:48
No.

The pricing of insurance is supposed to be: "for the average kensb2, what is the chance that he will need care this year and how much will it probably cost?"

But you're not "an" average kensb2--you're just you. You put your money in a pool with everyone whose health care risk profile is similar to yours, and that pool pays for whoever got unlucky this year. You spread the risk among people whose risk/cost are similar to yours.

The problem comes when you start adding people who have a higher risk to the same pool at the same price: they start using the resources up faster than they're getting paid in. Then premiums have to go up. Then the healthy people decide they're not getting their money's worth from the insurance, and they drop out of the system. Prices go up more. Eventually the only people buying insurance are the ones who use far more than they pay, and the whole system runs out of money.

Again, that's why I agree with multiple risk pools. The higher your risk, the higher your premiums. I don't think I have a problem with insurance companies having to offer insurance to people with pre-existing conditions, but they should have to right to base the premiums on their analysis of risk and free market competition.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 12:49
My King Air doesn't count?

No it does not

tarpleyg
10-26-2012, 13:08
I have not read all 4 pages of this thread but I was a little worried about the claim that the OP would be required to pay income tax on the company paid amount of insurance so I looked up what my company says about it and I think maybe his HR people are either not understanding what's required or he's getting the shaft. Here's what's in our new benefits package starting 1/1/2013


W-2 reportingBeginning with the W-2 you receive from xxxxxxxx in January 2013, the value of your health coverage will be reported on an annual basis. This won't raise your taxes, but it will show you—in exact dollars—how valuable your health benefits really are.

Also;

Medicare tax on earnings.
The Medicare tax on earnings will increase from 1.45% to 2.35% (an additional 0.9%).

wjv
10-26-2012, 14:25
Some radical changes in my health insurance

Title should have read:

Some radical changed my health insurance

No surprise that they purposely postponed the date when this law kicked in till AFTER the election.

muscogee
10-26-2012, 16:09
Do you own property?

Why is it that you have a right to other peoples' stuff, but no one has a right to yours?

I pay taxes and don't whine about it. I don't like it and I don't like the government telling me what to do with my money, but I don't whine. Someone has to pay for the government. It's my patriotic duty. It's yours too. It's our humanitarian duty to take care of those less fortunate than us as well. Spoiled brats can't grasp that.

podwich
10-26-2012, 16:17
I pay taxes and don't whine about it. I don't like it and I don't like the government telling me what to do with my money, but I don't whine. Someone has to pay for the government. It's my patriotic duty. It's yours too. It's our humanitarian duty to take care of those less fortunate than us as well. Spoiled brats can't grasp that.

Government is too expensive. Cut out tons of it. It's my patriotic duty (yours too) to not spend so much on government that it bankrupts our country.

It is each person's duty to take care of himself. Parasites can't grasp that.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 16:19
I pay taxes and don't whine about it. I don't like it and I don't like the government telling me what to do with my money, but I don't whine. Someone has to pay for the government.

Based on your posting history, you pay very little if any income tax. You certainly don't pay your fair share.

It's my patriotic duty. It's yours too. No it isn't. There is NOTHING patriotic about paying taxes. Given the current state of affairs, it is far more patriotic to evade taxes.

Is it patriotic to burden unborn generations with mountains of debt?

It's our humanitarian duty to take care of those less fortunate than us as well. Spoiled brats can't grasp that. Whiney marxists can't understand that it isn't the GOVERNMENT'S duty or role to take care of the poor.

Socialists truly are scum of the earth. Parasites.

RenoF250
10-26-2012, 16:21
Well I nominate you to be my slave.

It is most definetly different than most taxes. It is wealth redistribution, a far cry from building a highway.

How is it different? Taxes take your money (work) and use it in ways decided by your master. Do you believe most are for your benefit and so it is not slavery? I don't mind being the one to break it to you - most of your tax money (work) is pissed away. All the work you did to pay your taxes this year went to pay for michelle's vacations. That is better than slavery.


Your easy answer is people pay for the healthcare they use. That works great for healthy people others get left to die in a hole.

devildog2067
10-26-2012, 16:21
I pay taxes and don't whine about it.

Sure you do. There are pages and pages of your whining about how the rich get tax breaks and you don't.

I don't like it and I don't like the government telling me what to do with my money, but I don't whine. Someone has to pay for the government. It's my patriotic duty. It's yours too.

Yep. I pay my taxes too, and probably pay more than you do. On the other side of the coin, I've drawn a paycheck from Uncle Sam more than once. I fully understand that government is something we need to pay for.

But it's equally our patriotic duty to ensure that the things our government spends money on are the important things, the necessary things, and that the government is spending money in an intelligent way.

It's our humanitarian duty to take care of those less fortunate than us as well. Spoiled brats can't grasp that.

You think I'm spoiled? Interesting. I think I probably work harder than you ever have for the things I have in my life.

I agree it's our humanitarian duty to take care of those "less fortunate" than us. I even agree that we, as America, shouldn't allow people who can't afford their own health care to die in the streets.

Having said that, I recognize the reality that health care costs money, and money that the government spends must be taken from someone who earned it. The government spent a couple of million dollars of someone else's money on the last few years of your mother-in-law's life. Why? What benefit did society get from it? Will we ever see a return on our two million bucks?

More to the point--what gives you the right to take someone else's money to pay for your mother-in-law? Maybe that someone else is saving because they know they'll have to pay for their own mother-in-law's care.

Paying for the health care of those who can't afford to pay for it themselves is a difficult issue with no easy answers, but we simply cannot pay for everything that everyone wants. There isn't enough money. When the government pays for care, it has to decide what people can have.

Wouldn't you rather decide for yourself what care you can have? That's what you get to do if you pay your own way.

I make money, I pay taxes, I donate my money and my time to the causes I believe in. I personally feel that I do my part to help those less fortunate than me. It's not up to you to decide I'm not. You can only give of what you have, not of what I or anyone else has.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 19:00
Current data shows very clearly that virtually 100% of fed tax revenue is spent on welfare. Money taken from one person and given to another.

Are these the taxes that you say I have a patriotic duty to pay?

JohnBT
10-26-2012, 19:47
See for yourself.

www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258 (http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258)

harlenm
10-26-2012, 20:37
Mine went from $3100 per year, 4 people including 2 kids, to $5200 per year. My current plan was no longer offered, so I was forced to choose a plan with a lower deductible($900 per person) or switch to a high deductible plan with an HSA and no coverage for anything, including prescriptions, until deductible is met.

No thanks, I chose the standard plan even though it was more expensive so i actually have coverage should I need it.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 21:02
See for yourself.

www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258 (http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258)

I'd much rather welfare be like one of those adopt a 3rd world child ads on tv. That way at least I'd get a name and a photo of the person I'm working till June each year to support and muscogee's family would send me an annual thank you note.

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 21:03
Mine went from $3100 per year, 4 people including 2 kids, to $5200 per year. My current plan was no longer offered, so I was forced to choose a plan with a lower deductible($900 per person) or switch to a high deductible plan with an HSA and no coverage for anything, including prescriptions, until deductible is met.

No thanks, I chose the standard plan even though it was more expensive so i actually have coverage should I need it.

The high deductible is almost always the better deal.

DanaT
10-26-2012, 21:07
I'd much rather welfare be like one of those adopt a 3rd world child ads on tv. That way at least I'd get a name and a photo of the person I'm working till June each year to support and muscogee's family would send me an annual thank you note.

You must be another shortpants. He is worth 193 times what you are....oh wait...his mom is....

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 21:13
You must be another shortpants. He is worth 193 times what you are....oh wait...his mom is....

Well his dad did max out the social security tax a few years.....

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 21:14
You must be another shortpants. He is worth 193 times what you are....oh wait...his mom is....

All that money and she wouldn't even pay the $10,000 for his heart procedure.

M&P Shooter
10-26-2012, 21:18
If you think that hurts just wait and see what he does to this country with 4 more years:crying::crying::crying::crying::crying:

DanaT
10-26-2012, 21:31
I can't believe this thread.

I ask people for monetary contributions to help with my OCD problems. No-one has offered me any money.

In return, I offer up highly discounted cardiac procedures, and no-one takes me up on it. Hell, I have access to plenty of stents. I could take one that fell on the floor or wasn't laser cut correctly and has been thrown in the scrap bin. What does that cost me? Practically nothing. I have plenty of scalpels and even brand new sterile blades. We just find a country that allows me to implant, and I could save our friend $9500 on what he paid for stent surgery. I suspect we could do this in Venezuela.

I could probably even borrow an engineering sample of a stent introducer. Those are just laying around.

I mean look at the cost savings I am achieving for people, and no-one takes me up?

certifiedfunds
10-26-2012, 22:31
I can't believe this thread.

I ask people for monetary contributions to help with my OCD problems. No-one has offered me any money.

In return, I offer up highly discounted cardiac procedures, and no-one takes me up on it. Hell, I have access to plenty of stents. I could take one that fell on the floor or wasn't laser cut correctly and has been thrown in the scrap bin. What does that cost me? Practically nothing. I have plenty of scalpels and even brand new sterile blades. We just find a country that allows me to implant, and I could save our friend $9500 on what he paid for stent surgery. I suspect we could do this in Venezuela.

I could probably even borrow an engineering sample of a stent introducer. Those are just laying around.

I mean look at the cost savings I am achieving for people, and no-one takes me up?

I offered to match muscogee's donation for your OCD tx dammit

Boot Stomper
10-27-2012, 03:45
Obama's goal is to collapse the private healthcare system forcing all consumers into a one payer government controlled system. The government will then control much of how you live your life. From your diet, to reproduction to treatment of disease.

Eventually the government will determine who lives, who dies and even who is born.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." Thomas Jefferson

airmotive
10-27-2012, 04:53
If they can't cover the cost of their own care... who should?

I'm not saying they should crawl in a hole and die. I think we as a society do have an obligation to help them. But we also have a responsibility to ourselves to be honest about it.

If a person can't cover the cost of their own care, but expect to receive that care anyway, what that means is that they're asking someone else to pay for them. Nothing wrong with that, but we have to understand that's what it is.

Sure...I'll be the cold heartless bastard here.

If not being able to afford dialysis, insulin or AIDS treatments meant you would die because of otherwise treatable conditions, people would:
a) Take better care of themselves.
b) Stay in school; plan their lives; stay out of jail; stay off drugs; manage their money and in general...make better decisions throughout life and learn from the poor decision-making of others.

Instead, we want to live in a consequence-free society and blame some mythical 'fat-cat' for whatever interferes with our fancy-free little dream world.

Insurance is only something that's meant to file down the sharp edges on some of life's pointy sticks. Somewhere along the line, that's been forgotten.

certifiedfunds
10-27-2012, 06:36
Well Done, Air!

engineer151515
10-27-2012, 10:14
Sure...I'll be the cold heartless bastard here.

If not being able to afford dialysis, insulin or AIDS treatments meant you would die because of otherwise treatable conditions, people would:
a) Take better care of themselves.
b) Stay in school; plan their lives; stay out of jail; stay off drugs; manage their money and in general...make better decisions throughout life and learn from the poor decision-making of others.

Instead, we want to live in a consequence-free society and blame some mythical 'fat-cat' for whatever interferes with our fancy-free little dream world.

Insurance is only something that's meant to file down the sharp edges on some of life's pointy sticks. Somewhere along the line, that's been forgotten.

This is true.
Which is one of the reasons Libertarianism fails in this country.

Our society will not (politically) allow a person to perish as the result of their own poor choices or self destructive behaviors. As a result, some people get on the moral "high horse" demanding the best care for everyone in spite of the circumstances which may have got them there.

With deference to truly innocent people that fall in the category of indigent and needing extra help. We should always help them to the best of our ability.

We are a generous nation. We've just run out of money because no political leadership has been offered (or condoned by the voting public) as to where the financial and moral limits of generosity lie.

When the US dollar collapses and $10,000 surgeries cost $1,000,000, people will perish.

droidfire
10-27-2012, 10:51
...

When the US dollar collapses and $10,000 surgeries cost $1,000,000, people will perish.

I hope it happens soon. It'll suck to live through, the riots and raging and all that, but once it all settles down a smarter nation of people on the other side of it will live a lot better, with a higher quality of life in general.

I would rather live through the disaster and take the chance of not making it to the rewards on the other side, then to hang on the precipice of it just waiting for impending doom.

Someone give it a push.

SevenSixtyTwo
10-27-2012, 11:04
I'd much rather welfare be like one of those adopt a 3rd world child ads on tv. That way at least I'd get a name and a photo of the person I'm working till June each year to support and muscogee's family would send me an annual thank you note.

That or make them work for it like they do in Japan. Sooner or later they'll figure out they can work a real job for more money. Or not...

SevenSixtyTwo
10-27-2012, 11:07
Sure...I'll be the cold heartless bastard here.

If not being able to afford dialysis, insulin or AIDS treatments meant you would die because of otherwise treatable conditions, people would:
a) Take better care of themselves.
b) Stay in school; plan their lives; stay out of jail; stay off drugs; manage their money and in general...make better decisions throughout life and learn from the poor decision-making of others.

Instead, we want to live in a consequence-free society and blame some mythical 'fat-cat' for whatever interferes with our fancy-free little dream world.

Insurance is only something that's meant to file down the sharp edges on some of life's pointy sticks. Somewhere along the line, that's been forgotten.

You would think the suffering of illness alone would entice them to take care of themselves but it doesn't.

certifiedfunds
10-27-2012, 11:21
That or make them work for it like they do in Japan. Sooner or later they'll figure out they can work a real job for more money. Or not...

I could certainly put some social security recipients to work around my house.

But I doubt muscogee has any worthwhile skills.

Cali-Glock
10-27-2012, 11:47
Mine went from $3100 per year, 4 people including 2 kids, to $5200 per year. My current plan was no longer offered, so I was forced to choose a plan with a lower deductible($900 per person) or switch to a high deductible plan with an HSA and no coverage for anything, including prescriptions, until deductible is met.

No thanks, I chose the standard plan even though it was more expensive so i actually have coverage should I need it.

My understanding is high deductible HSA plans will be a thing of the past under Obamacare.

I truly don't understand why. High deductible HSA plans are the only form of health insurance that makes any sense.

There is no free lunch. Period. Why should anyone pay for something they don't use or need: health insurance, like any insurance should not be for the every day expenses but rather for the unexpected high cost expenses.

High deductible or low deductible; do you think you are not paying for your doctors visits and for your prescriptions? If not you then who? The tooth-fairy?

I love my high deductible program; I pay a few grand in premium for catastrophic medical issues and pay for the first $4k of all my every day medical care (including prescriptions lab work etc). It makes sense and is easy to manage, and yes my wife and I have regular prescriptions; I think we have at least four regular maintenance prescriptions we pay for out of our own pockets (our HSA) - as it should be.

Ummagumma
10-27-2012, 13:29
One problem with American medical system that neither party even tired to address is waste and fraud - estimated at about 30 percent of our already highest in the world medical costs. We are getting overcharged every step of the way. Create a single billing standard and you would see costs going down. Funny how neither Obama nor Romney or McCain would even touch it.

harlenm
10-27-2012, 13:40
My understanding is high deductible HSA plans will be a thing of the past under Obamacare.

I truly don't understand why. High deductible HSA plans are the only form of health insurance that makes any sense.

There is no free lunch. Period. Why should anyone pay for something they don't use or need: health insurance, like any insurance should not be for the every day expenses but rather for the unexpected high cost expenses.

High deductible or low deductible; do you think you are not paying for your doctors visits and for your prescriptions? If not you then who? The tooth-fairy?

I love my high deductible program; I pay a few grand in premium for catastrophic medical issues and pay for the first $4k of all my every day medical care (including prescriptions lab work etc). It makes sense and is easy to manage, and yes my wife and I have regular prescriptions; I think we have at least four regular maintenance prescriptions we pay for out of our own pockets (our HSA) - as it should be.

While that may work for you, I have a 3 year old and am 8 month old. One trip to the hospital for something and I'll be broke.

I'd prefer a higher deductible with a standard insurance, but it's not available anymore.

certifiedfunds
10-27-2012, 13:52
While that may work for you, I have a 3 year old and am 8 month old. One trip to the hospital for something and I'll be broke.

I'd prefer a higher deductible with a standard insurance, but it's not available anymore.

I have young kids too. Having purchased my own insurance a number of years, high deductible is best deal financially assuming you have cash reserves to cover.

Otherwise you're just paying over time for coverage umsy not use.

Gunhaver
10-27-2012, 14:09
What happens if we all just quit working and get our free Obama Care?

If that happens then it's going to be very easy to find a job.