U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [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 12-07-2013, 10:06 AM
 
Location: Sneads Ferry, NC
11,229 posts, read 19,679,122 times
Reputation: 5062

Advertisements

The New York Times ran a good article on the North Carolina situation, with examples like people here have experienced. I understand the unhappiness of the early retirees. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/07/us..._20131207&_r=0
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-12-2013, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ > Raleigh, NC
15,021 posts, read 18,874,120 times
Reputation: 24009
A warning to those using the Exchange to shop the plans in NC. The newest update gave me different rates than what I had obtained before. I did this on Tuesday afternoon, and the rate for the plan I selected from BCBS on the healthcare.gov side was about $469 - a good bit less than renewing my similar (slightly better) policy with BCBS.

I called BCBS to confirm, and they said no, that healthcare.gov was reporting incorrect "estimated premiums." The prices I posted earlier in this thread are accurate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2014, 06:25 AM
 
989 posts, read 1,645,949 times
Reputation: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBojangles View Post
Congrats on thinking?
Yup. I can't wait for commercials. "I voted for the ACA, and I'd do it again" "...If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2014, 08:22 AM
 
2,640 posts, read 6,063,899 times
Reputation: 3403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich6896 View Post
Yup. I can't wait for commercials. "I voted for the ACA, and I'd do it again" "...If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance."

Yeah, she might also mention people like me who can keep their kids covered past the age of 21 while waiting for them to get one of the many jobs that McCrory promised them. Or those whose pre-existing conditions are now covered when they have to switch insurance providers. Or those who will benefit from additional coverage for emergency care, mental health care, prescription drugs, etc., etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2014, 11:42 AM
 
2,640 posts, read 6,063,899 times
Reputation: 3403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich6896 View Post
I think you are confusing McCrory for President Obama. I would change the keeping 26 year old "kids" on 'rents insurance part. To if you are a kid that needs to be on your parents insurance you are a kid that can't vote and can't buy alchohol until you move out of your mom's basement.

That's a typically uninformed position. Perhaps you don't realize that 1) we do have to pay the additional premium for the kids, and 2) their age group is the most profitable for insurance companies as their incidence of health problems is much lower than any other population segment. So this benefit doesn't cost the taxpayer a dime, and helps line the pockets of the insurance companies. Why would conservatives be opposed to this? Would it have more to do with who championed this as opposed to the issue itself?

And believe it or not, there are kids out there who aren't deadbeats, yet for various reasons can't find a job that offers health insurance. I hope your kids aren't among them, but if they are, rest assured that you have options for providing them health care. You can thank Obama for that (if you have kids--I assume not given your position on this).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2014, 11:58 AM
 
814 posts, read 966,428 times
Reputation: 999
Quote:
Originally Posted by arbyunc View Post
Or those whose pre-existing conditions are now covered when they have to switch insurance providers. Or those who will benefit from additional coverage for emergency care, mental health care, prescription drugs, etc., etc.
And don't forget many lose their doctors when switching providers, some doctors aren't accepting patients or leaving entirely because government reimbursement is too low, some treatments are no longer paid for and many had costs that doubled or tripled so these "benefits" can be given to others. You know, wealth transfer. The reality is quite different than Hagan's talking points.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2014, 04:16 PM
 
989 posts, read 1,645,949 times
Reputation: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by arbyunc View Post
That's a typically uninformed position. Perhaps you don't realize that 1) we do have to pay the additional premium for the kids, and 2) their age group is the most profitable for insurance companies as their incidence of health problems is much lower than any other population segment. So this benefit doesn't cost the taxpayer a dime, and helps line the pockets of the insurance companies. Why would conservatives be opposed to this? Would it have more to do with who championed this as opposed to the issue itself?
1) You are wrong. Insurance companies have adjusted their premiums to cover the extra people. So now everyone gets to pay more whether they have 20 somethings on their plan or not.

2) What difference does it make if the money is coming from taxes or higher premiums?

Why would I oppose this? Kay Hagan mandating I buy a product that is not subject to market corrections.

And I have news for everyone who has company based health insurance. It is being taxed. Kay Hagan voted for a law that taxes the plan at the insurance company level to and hides the cost in the premiums from consumers.

This whole healthcare issue could have been fixed by allowing us to buy insurance across state lines. Why should North Carolina be allow to tell me the individual that I cannot buy insurance from a company in Utah? Market Solutions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2014, 06:30 PM
 
2,640 posts, read 6,063,899 times
Reputation: 3403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich6896 View Post
1) You are wrong. Insurance companies have adjusted their premiums to cover the extra people. So now everyone gets to pay more whether they have 20 somethings on their plan or not. No, my premium hasn't changed in the past 2 years. It's based on the number of kids included in the coverage, and for me that hasn't changed either. No one else is footing the bill to cover my children for a few extra years. That expense falls on me, if I choose to cover them.

2) What difference does it make if the money is coming from taxes or higher premiums? Because neither affects you, if you don't have children taking advantage of the additional years coverage.
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2014, 07:29 PM
 
989 posts, read 1,645,949 times
Reputation: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by arbyunc View Post
.
Arby you are not the only the only one bearing the cost. You and your family are in a risk pool. Everyone in the pool bears higher risk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2014, 08:40 PM
 
2,640 posts, read 6,063,899 times
Reputation: 3403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich6896 View Post
Arby you are not the only the only one bearing the cost. You and your family are in a risk pool. Everyone in the pool bears higher risk.

No, the point is, there is no increased risk to the pool by allowing the kids a few years of additional coverage. As I said earlier, this group is the most profitable for insurance companies because of the lower incidence of health problems. Including them in the pool does exactly the opposite--it lowers the overall risk of the pool, and the premiums paid for them helps cover the higher risk groups (adults and young kids, who have a much higher rate of incurring health costs).
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 > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:40 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top