Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-02-2014, 12:08 AM
 
Location: Sputnik Planitia
7,829 posts, read 11,790,682 times
Reputation: 9045

Advertisements

Take a hypothetical situation. A 55 year old man is living in Los Angeles or San Francisco, he is able to earn $60,000/yr. works for a small company that does not offer health. He makes way too much money (over 400% of the poverty level) to qualify for any discount but $60k/yr is not a whole lot of money in LA. I see that even the Bronze plan is in the neighborhood of $450/month, is someone who makes $60k/yr mandated to spend $450/mo. on health insurance? The alternative is to pay the penalty but that's $1500 with nothing to show for it.

And with health insurance increasing at a rate of 10-15% annually what is going to happen in 5-10 years?

This idea sucks! The whole idea was cost control of health care and insurance and that is clearly not happening. The insurance is still ridiculously expensive.. and those that earn over $45k are required to buy it themselves and those under well, the taxpayer will cover it. LOL! What was expected is that insurance and health care become *AFFORDABLE* not subsidize and mandate purchase of ridiculously expensive and overpriced products and services.

Mandating someone who makes $60k in a super high cost area to buy $6000 worth of insurance yearly is asinine. As it is people can't get by or save for the future with escalating costs and stagnating wages... is this ridiculous requirement even feasible long term?

Even the employer mandate is a joke... employers are simply required to provide health insurance, not *affordable* health insurance. Yes, they can provide the same $450/mo. policy with employee paying 100%, what does that solve?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-02-2014, 01:28 AM
 
4,765 posts, read 3,733,181 times
Reputation: 3038
I believe it is simply to early to assess the full impact of Obamacare. While I am not necessarily optimistic, I do hope that the AHCA is a stepping stone to addressing the nations health care challenges. It would be nice if all concerned parties made an effort.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2014, 01:57 AM
 
106,680 posts, read 108,856,202 times
Reputation: 80164
i have a gold plan , i am paying 5k less a year for my wife and i then i did prior for health insurance and i get zero subsidy and i live in nyc. i like our new plan.

Last edited by mathjak107; 10-02-2014 at 02:29 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2014, 02:13 AM
 
4,765 posts, read 3,733,181 times
Reputation: 3038
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
i have a gold plan , i am paying 5k less a year for my wife and i then i prior for health insurance and i get zero subsidy and i live in nyc. i like our new plan.
Real world examples always trump rhetoric IMO!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2014, 02:31 AM
 
106,680 posts, read 108,856,202 times
Reputation: 80164
we were paying 14k for insurance through the private sector. now premiums are 6600 and obama plans are pay as you go up to the max out of pockets . your family doctor has very little out of pocket but if you use hospital services you will hit them.

figuring co-pays and out of pockets we will come in about 5k less this year.

personally i like it. let those who use the health system more pay more. there was no reason we should pay so much and use so little.

even if we maxed out the out of pockets it would still be cheaper then prior.

Last edited by mathjak107; 10-02-2014 at 02:49 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2014, 03:11 AM
 
4,765 posts, read 3,733,181 times
Reputation: 3038
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
we were paying 14k for insurance through the private sector. now premiums are 6600 and obama plans are pay as you go up to the max out of pockets . your family doctor has very little out of pocket but if you use hospital services you will hit them.

figuring co-pays and out of pockets we will come in about 5k less this year.

personally i like it. let those who use the health system more pay more. there was no reason we should pay so much and use so little.

even if we maxed out the out of pockets it would still be cheaper then prior.
This logic is why I changed from my workplace "enhanced" policy to the "standard" policy. After three years of saving approximately $2500 annually on premiums, I have saved enough already to offset the out-of-pocket maximum should something unexpected happen. I should have made the change even sooner.

I figure I am no longer subsidizing the folks at work who are in and out of the hospital monthly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2014, 03:22 AM
 
106,680 posts, read 108,856,202 times
Reputation: 80164
personally i should have never bought health insurance ha ha . for as much as i used it in 62 years i would have had a stash of millions to pay medical bills , but hindsite is great after you made it through okay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2014, 04:02 AM
 
12,547 posts, read 9,938,955 times
Reputation: 6927
As a retired person, Obamacare helped me save about $120-130/month compared to what I was previously paying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2014, 04:20 AM
 
106,680 posts, read 108,856,202 times
Reputation: 80164
with a subsidy i am sure ,and tax payers covering that difference for you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2014, 05:56 AM
 
12,547 posts, read 9,938,955 times
Reputation: 6927
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
with a subsidy i am sure ,and tax payers covering that difference for you
I make less than $46k/year so I receive a subsidy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:19 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top