U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
View Poll Results: Did you lose your HC?
Yes 13 18.31%
No 54 76.06%
I never had HC 4 5.63%
Voters: 71. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:01 AM
 
10,333 posts, read 10,358,421 times
Reputation: 4014

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoD Guy View Post
They can't. Not without lying. Proof is in the dims scrambling to distance themselves from this abortion.

Before the ACA MY AETNA PREMIUMS KEPT RISING WENT FROM $604 PER MONTH UP TO $708. darn caps. With my new Coventry plan i pay $159.07 per month and i used it recently for a bowel resection and it all worked just fine.

It was legal for me to use the insurance so why not? Aetna was just milking me. When i started with aETNA THE PREMIUM WAS $494 AND WENT UP TO $648 AND THEN 708.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
15,202 posts, read 18,263,970 times
Reputation: 8032
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDWILLY View Post
... our outrageous unregulated insurance system ...
Unregulated?



Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:08 AM
 
10,937 posts, read 6,110,956 times
Reputation: 5921
Quote:
Originally Posted by Versatile View Post
Before the ACA MY AETNA PREMIUMS KEPT RISING WENT FROM $604 PER MONTH UP TO $708. darn caps. With my new Coventry plan i pay $159.07 per month and i used it recently for a bowel resection and it all worked just fine.

It was legal for me to use the insurance so why not? Aetna was just milking me. When i started with aETNA THE PREMIUM WAS $494 AND WENT UP TO $648 AND THEN 708.
I experienced the same kind of increases back when I had insurance 10 years ago. And I'm in good health, no preexisting conditions, and never once made a claim. Yet every six months it went up like clockwork until it was inching up to $900 a month for really crappy coverage and I was finally priced out of the market entirely. Yet there was no ACA to blame for the ever increasing rates then.

This meme that insurance rates are suddenly rising when they never did before is BS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:14 AM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
15,202 posts, read 18,263,970 times
Reputation: 8032
Quote:
Originally Posted by pch1013 View Post
Before the ACA, I had an employer-paid HMO.

Now I have exactly the same employer-paid HMO.
I doubt that.

If you're male, it's 100% guaranteed that you don't have the same plan, because you didn't have maternity coverage before, but you do now. You also have "baby wellness" and pediatric dental. (Thank God, too! Who knows when a man might end up preggers!)

If you're female with no kids, you likely don't have the same plan, as whatever you have now includes pediatric dental and baby wellness.

These BS "I have the same plan!" claims are pure nonsense. It's nearly impossible for someone to have the exact same plan they had last year and still be in compliance. Please do us all a favor and stop lying, and if you actually think you're telling the truth, educate yourself about the coverage you HAD vs. what you HAVE now, and then come back and correct yourself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:19 AM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
15,202 posts, read 18,263,970 times
Reputation: 8032
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Actually this was never a plan to cover all Americans because the public option was removed from the bill. Had that been included this healthcare plan would have been able to cover all Americans.
Had that been included, it never would have become law. Heck, even the disaster they DID pass almost didn't become law. Took a few extra parliamentary tricks, bribes and promises [later to be broken] to get the monstrosity through.

History is going to look back on how this law was passed - against the will of the people - and it will be seen as a dark moment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:20 AM
 
10,333 posts, read 10,358,421 times
Reputation: 4014
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
Had that been included, it never would have become law. Heck, even the disaster they DID pass almost didn't become law. Took a few extra parliamentary tricks, bribes and promises [later to be broken] to get the monstrosity through.

History is going to look back on how this law was passed - against the will of the people - and it will be seen as a dark moment.
I don't see it that way at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,538,049 times
Reputation: 7830
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
Had that been included, it never would have become law. Heck, even the disaster they DID pass almost didn't become law. Took a few extra parliamentary tricks, bribes and promises [later to be broken] to get the monstrosity through.

History is going to look back on how this law was passed - against the will of the people - and it will be seen as a dark moment.
That is a shame, healthcare insurance would have been much better in this country if it included a public option.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:34 AM
 
10,937 posts, read 6,110,956 times
Reputation: 5921
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
I doubt that.

If you're male, it's 100% guaranteed that you don't have the same plan, because you didn't have maternity coverage before, but you do now. You also have "baby wellness" and pediatric dental. (Thank God, too! Who knows when a man might end up preggers!)

If you're female with no kids, you likely don't have the same plan, as whatever you have now includes pediatric dental and baby wellness.

These BS "I have the same plan!" claims are pure nonsense. It's nearly impossible for someone to have the exact same plan they had last year and still be in compliance. Please do us all a favor and stop lying, and if you actually think you're telling the truth, educate yourself about the coverage you HAD vs. what you HAVE now, and then come back and correct yourself.
I am a female with no dependent children, and my plan right now is more than $700 a month less than the last time I had coverage. And it's a better overall plan, even if it does include things I'll never use, like maternity and baby wellness. It also probably includes vasectomies and penile implants that I'll also never use, but I'm okay with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:45 AM
 
3,576 posts, read 6,066,916 times
Reputation: 1432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Anyone who thinks that health care financing didn't need to be reformed really has another think coming! This system is not perfect, not by a long shot. But we do have some standardization of plans now. No thinking you were covered for something and finding out you're not. No more pre-existing condition exclusions. These are good things.
I beg to differ. There will be many iffy insurance that signed up in the last 6 months since the rollout. They may think they have insurance but as the example in the man with the $400K hospital bill showed. No one knows for sure, how many people are affected by computer glitches.

If Obama is still extending the March 31st deadline due to computer glitches, than it's still a problem whether you have insurance or no insurance. You get one big bill like the $400K hospital bill. No insurance company will clamor to accept those claims (even though it will eventually be downgraded to around a $60K bill because $400K is the master bill).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2014, 10:45 AM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
15,202 posts, read 18,263,970 times
Reputation: 8032
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
Perhaps you can back that claim up with something a bit more credible than "from what I have seen"?
That would be great - maybe if you try, you'll have better luck getting the relevant data from the administration than congress has had. Why do you think they've held off on releasing it?
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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