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.
Do you even know a dam thing about Obamacare? Its a subsidy, which comes from the taxpayers..
The subsidies are a tax credit that helps middle and lower income people purchase insurance coverage privately. That's not the same as the rebate program, which is tied to your insurance company not providing reasonable services for the premium you pay.
That's laughable, as you've proved over and over in this thread.
yeah, says the person who didnt know government contracted out healthcare to the private sector..
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
Our company uses Cigna, and if we stay in network it's a $10 copay for pretty much everything, period. If we go out of network it's an 80/20 split. We've found that offering great benefits is more likely to help us retain great staff vs. offering higher salaries. We pay a pretty price for it, but we get good coverage in return. We added staff this year and we were able to negotiate prices down with them because our pool became bigger. In the businesses that we're in, staff retention is huge, because turnover is so costly. I'm not getting a refund from my insurer. .
So? The discussion is about those who are...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
I feel like I'm talking to a four year old. If consumers can see side by side just what they're getting from each company for their premium price, then consumers are going to pick the companies with the best deal.
Then you think 4 year olds are smarter than you, thats not something I'd be broadcasting. Consumers dont often get to choose what companies offer the best deals with health insurance, employers do
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
It takes the mystery and guesswork out of the process for consumers. If an insurance company isn't competitive with prices and service delivery, they're not going to stay in business. That's business 101--competition in the market. The trade off to make this work for insurance companies is that although they'll be forced to lower premium costs and provide better services, the mandatory coverage lowers their risk by putting more healthy people in the market--they'll be getting premiums from more people who don't have health care problems.
Insurance costs climbed $1975 on average, so what exactly is forcing costs to drop?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
You crack me up. You say you're paying for supplemental coverage to boost the payout on a $132K home to $1.5M (what are planning on doing-- burning it down for the insurance?) but you don't want to pay for health care insurance (a more realistic need) beyond a catastrophic care policy. In fact, you went on to say that you're going to go without health insurance entirely and just pay the fine. Either you're completely full of crap, or you have no business telling anyone, ever, how to do anything.
Um no.. Do you even have a home either because you dont seem to know what the hell you're talking about here as well.
Insurance costs are priced per square foot, no supplimental coverage required on a 6K sf home.. $1.5M is the MINIMUM they would insure it for because homes arent cheap to rebuild...
Quiz for leftists: Will this drive up or drive down premium prices?
Why do you think the labor force participation rate has cratered?
Why would someone have to be a "leftist" to answer questions about the ACA--a health care reform program developed by conservatives at the Heritage foundation?
It drives prices down through competition in the market, and reduced risk to insurance companies because of the broad pool of people covered.
The subsidies are a tax credit that helps middle and lower income people purchase insurance coverage privately. That's not the same as the rebate program, which is tied to your insurance company not providing reasonable services for the premium you pay.
Why would someone have to be a "leftist" to answer questions about the ACA--a health care reform program developed by conservatives at the Heritage foundation?
It drives prices down through competition in the market, and reduced risk to insurance companies because of the broad pool of people covered.
We already have competition in the market place..
Answer me this, how does increasing taxes on medical items, equate to lower costs?
Actually, I did receive a check with a letter stating this was conforming with the new law or whatever. Sorry, i didn't really read it all, I was just glad to get the money
Yeah, says the person who didnt know government contracted out healthcare to the private sector..
Are you serious? ACA is NOT medicare or medicaid. They're completely different programs. Of course I know that the government contracts out services for medicare and medicaid. That has nothing to do with the ACA, which is a market place for private insurance policies vs. direct government care. Are you really this slow?
Quote:
Then you think 4 year olds are smarter than you, thats not something I'd be broadcasting. Consumers dont often get to choose what companies offer the best deals with health insurance, employers do
The health care exchanges are for people who don't have coverage through an employer. Lots and lots of people aren't covered by insurance through an employer. Good grief...
Quote:
Insurance costs climbed $1975 on average, so what exactly is forcing costs to drop?
Again--this is like talking to a 4 year old, and certainly someone who has never, ever been in business, as you claim to be. If consumers are able to clearly see what they're getting, and they can compare what they're paying through different companies side by side, they're going to pick the company that provides the best benefits for the lowest price. That forces other companies to lower their costs and increase services to stay competitive.
Quote:
Um no.. Do you even have a home either because you dont seem to know what the hell you're talking about here as well.
Insurance costs are priced per square foot, no supplimental coverage required on a 6K sf home.. $1.5M is the MINIMUM they would insure it for because homes arent cheap to rebuild...
Your 6K square foot home is only worth $135K? You said the VALUE of your home is $135K--not the purchase price years ago. Now you're just being slippery and playing games (typical for you) because you're insuring it for the replacement value, as I outlined above--you argued with me about it, but now that you're caught, you're trying to change your tune. And as for as how homeowners insurance works, if your home is VALUED at $135 K, and it's a 6K square foot home, I DON'T know how that works, because I don't live in a dump. We've been homeowners for the past 30 years.
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.
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.
.
