U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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 01-25-2017, 10:27 PM
 
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
22,529 posts, read 39,903,732 times
Reputation: 23634

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattie View Post
Unfortunately, states with good health plans are not states with otherwise low COL.
...I just accepted the offer of full-time employment because it comes with benefits (for me). ...
All of a sudden, retirement is looking pretty bleak.

Life throws curve balls, I hope new Trump Care restores affordable options, in the meantime...
  • treasure your weekends,
  • try to get a flex schedule,
  • take as much time as reasonable off without pay.
If we have to get a PT work gig... We fly / drive at least one weekend / month.

Mini-Honeymoons are nice, even (especially) after 40 yrs
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-25-2017, 11:37 PM
 
Location: Texas
202 posts, read 140,782 times
Reputation: 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by ansible90 View Post
Excuse me. We are in the 21st century. It would take a handful of programmers a week or three to write a program that would check your income and then determine what rate you should pay or if you should get Medicare at all. This vision of a vast bureaucracy shuffling papers in a big office is just not the way things work.
You do know that premiums for Medicare already vary according to income? They look at your tax returns to determine it....

As far as not getting Medicare at all, the problem with that is many people over 65 -- even if wealthy -- couldn't get a private policy if they were using underwriting since they would have preexisting conditions....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 04:56 AM
 
Location: Colorado Springs
4,830 posts, read 4,940,887 times
Reputation: 17284
Quote:
Originally Posted by matisse12 View Post
Seven years ago, Blue Cross refused to give me health insurance just because I had high blood pressure - which is always normal blood pressure because I take medication for it. And because I have osteoarthritis.

I could not believe Blue Cross refused over such common ailments which millions of people have, particularly the blood pressure.

I thought insurance companies would refuse just in the case of severe ailments. (although osteoarthritis can be severe) I thought pre-existing conditions meant things like cancer, advanced COPD, etc.
I returned to work at age 61 primarily to get group health insurance.

I had been turned down for individual insurance because I took prescription drugs for hay fever!

My wife was turned down because she suffers from chronic back pain.

Truth is that nobody makes it to age 60 without some health issues. The insurance companies really don't want to insure old people. It's a lousy bet. And I don't blame them. Their job is to maximize profits. Without any regulation, they would only insure healthy people who were least likely to ever make a claim.

This is why the Government has to step in. Health care is a basic human need. If commercial companies refuse to cover people, the government must regulate. That's what government is for.

The funny thing is that now that I'm retired and on Medicare, when I tease my conservative friends about their being on this "socialized Medicare", they all love it. They usually say, "I earned it"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 07:38 AM
 
10,604 posts, read 14,188,225 times
Reputation: 17199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vision67 View Post

The funny thing is that now that I'm retired and on Medicare, when I tease my conservative friends about their being on this "socialized Medicare", they all love it. They usually say, "I earned it"
They paid into the Medicare fund their working lives, since 1985 3.9% of wages are helping to fund this fund. So it's NOT exactly like other countries' socialized medicine. Boomers paid in for 20 years before eligibility.

When you can't find a Medicare doctor to take it, will you get a refund of your 1.45% portion?

I hope you do NOT have to use it because fewer doctors are accepting Medicare patients since the ACA and now people are going to the ER (just like I said before) and instead of being admitted, they're kept "for observation" - costing both the patient and the hospital more, as Medicare's payment ratio on observation patients is much lower - saving Medicare money. This just happened to my neighbor's sister last week. She belongs in Skilled Nursing but refuses to go so every week she's calling 911 and going to the hospital.

Billions in Medicare monies were shifted to Medicaid with the ACA. So the people who paid IN, are getting lesser service and the welfare people are getting their dollars. Of course, cost shifting had been going on for years at the state level - the ACA didn't invent that but they certainly never ADMITTED IT when they passed the law so you could [not even] see what was in the law. Of course, Paul Ryan was in on that too - thereby proving that this GOP versus DEM fantasy of massive differences in ideology is hogwash. But they still said Ryan was going to wheel granny off the cliff LOL.

THAT was the "problem" with the ACA. They presumed the cost shift from Medicare to Medicaid expansion would be 100% by the states but the Supremes ruled it illegal. So the subsidies they THOUGHT would keep it afloat were lesser (not that they were ever enough to begin with).

Politicians made a mess of it because the ONLY thing they care about is their re-election and horse trading. Nixon being one of the worst (after Johnson) borrowing against surplus for other programs. There was supposed to be a CAP on costs but you can remember an aspirin being billed back at $7.00 per PILL.

Then we had BUSH extending the program which OBVIOUSLY was to keep the Democrats somewhat at bay because of his disaster in the Middle East.

And of course McCain (not in the least bit conservative) tried that trick too when he ran. Mumbo jumbo cost shifting.

There was one party - the Uniparty. (until 2016).

At least the Democrats are HONEST about wanting universal/single payer whereas the fake "GOP Conservatives" were arguably just as bad spenders as Dems. And certainly NOT Conservatives in any way. Of course, people who don't have anything are super happy to get "something" regardless of the quality and cost to other people.

Government's job was defined Constitutionally as being solely to protect the country militarily and enforce laws. Clearly spelled out as "limited government". But people will always vote for financial personal gain, just as Franklin predicted.

Your friends being illustrative of that point. If they were "Conservatives" they would not be so cavalier on that point. Unless you're omitting half of the conversation.

APATHY and willful ignorance of 330 Million citizens is why we have a healthcare problem in America.

Last edited by runswithscissors; 01-26-2017 at 08:14 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
23,541 posts, read 17,525,434 times
Reputation: 27576
A key phrase to remember from Trump's campaign is "repeal and replace."

The traditional Republican point of view has simply been to repeal it, but what Trump appears to want to do is to replace Obamacare with some form of Trumpcare, another government run or at least facilitated health insurance scheme.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 09:16 AM
 
Location: NYC
2,896 posts, read 1,580,961 times
Reputation: 7908
The problem with that "key phrase" is that Trump is continually contradicting his positions, saying one thing one day & reversing it the next or just doing the opposite to what he claims he believes, no need to go into particulars here. So with the Republicans introducing bills to overhaul Social Security & Medicare within days of the November election it will be interesting to see if he stays firm on his stated position of "no changes" to SS/MC or if horse trading goes on within the GOP leaders & he starts talking about "improvements" or "enhancements" the same way he is talking about replacing Obamacare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 11:13 AM
 
Location: SW Florida
9,743 posts, read 7,022,649 times
Reputation: 14219
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMKSarah View Post
I am curious....

I am 61 years of age and work a part time job. I took early retirement since my field does not want me.

With healthcare on subsidy I can make it to Medicare. Without it I will spend down my retirement savings to early into a forced retirement and for a chronic condition that I inherited from my father at 10 years of age and it has progressively worsened and has precluded me from many jobs. I do not qualify for disability nor do I seek it. I will take SS in 8 months and counting because I am going to need it.

Do any of you have plans "after" Obamacare.

Please do not give me any rhetoric on "poor choices." This is not a question about judgement of one person's life.

I am looking for straight forward, realistic information as to how to get medical care once Obamacare has been gutted.

Thank you for down to earth thoughts on this matter.
It looks like Congress is working on replacements for Obamacare, but they will take a while to be put in place. But they've introduced bills that would give more responsibilities for insurance regulation to the states. Some of the proposals include allowing states that prefer to keep Obamacare to do so, and the replacement laws are said to encourage states to keep the subsidies and help to lower income people in place, expanding Medicaid as needed, keeping kids on parents' plans to age 26.

Congress has said they're moving slowly with replacing Obamacare as they don't want to leave people without insurance. That would include people who need help with paying for their insurance. I read somewhere that they said it may take a while, up to 3 yrs to get a new healthcare reform act in place. (See links below).

So it's a work in progress, now, and in the meantime, I would think a lot of the status quo (at least related to subsidies and people being able to have health insurance) would remain in place. In your shoes, I'd maybe keep tuned to what is happening, look to your state department to see what laws for health insurance are in place, or proposed, and do your best not to worry about having the rug pulled out from under you and finding yourself with no health insurancd, IMO that is not likely to happen.

Best of luck!

GOP senators unveil ObamaCare replacement bill | Fox News

GOP Senators Introduce Obamacare Replacement Plan | Health Care News | US News
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,213,572 times
Reputation: 6866
Quote:
Originally Posted by runswithscissors View Post
They paid into the Medicare fund their working lives, since 1985 3.9% of wages are helping to fund this fund. So it's NOT exactly like other countries' socialized medicine. Boomers paid in for 20 years before eligibility.

When you can't find a Medicare doctor to take it, will you get a refund of your 1.45% portion?
<snip>

APATHY and willful ignorance of 330 Million citizens is why we have a healthcare problem in America.
Hardly. Boomers paid for Medicare Part A only. IOW, catastrophic coverage. Good try, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 11:25 AM
 
Location: Denver 'burbs
21,873 posts, read 23,136,786 times
Reputation: 37275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travelassie View Post
It looks like Congress is working on replacements for Obamacare, but they will take a while to be put in place. But they've introduced bills that would give more responsibilities for insurance regulation to the states. Some of the proposals include allowing states that prefer to keep Obamacare to do so, and the replacement laws are said to encourage states to keep the subsidies and help to lower income people in place, expanding Medicaid as needed, keeping kids on parents' plans to age 26.

Congress has said they're moving slowly with replacing Obamacare as they don't want to leave people without insurance. That would include people who need help with paying for their insurance. I read somewhere that they said it may take a while, up to 3 yrs to get a new healthcare reform act in place. (See links below).

So it's a work in progress, now, and in the meantime, I would think a lot of the status quo (at least related to subsidies and people being able to have health insurance) would remain in place. In your shoes, I'd maybe keep tuned to what is happening, look to your state department to see what laws for health insurance are in place, or proposed, and do your best not to worry about having the rug pulled out from under you and finding yourself with no health insurancd, IMO that is not likely to happen.

Best of luck!

GOP senators unveil ObamaCare replacement bill | Fox News

GOP Senators Introduce Obamacare Replacement Plan | Health Care News | US News
Why would you think that is unlikely to happen?

They have started efforts to repeal Obamacare, and by your own admission it could be years before a replacement is in place. What would you expect to happen in between those 2 events?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 12:43 PM
 
6,604 posts, read 3,736,021 times
Reputation: 13655
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
I can understand the worry but it is possible your costs won't change too drastically.

Most of GOP replacement proposals have tax credits to offset costs of premiums that are based on age or a combination of age/income (as opposed to just income with ACA), and at age 61 you'll surely be in the tier with the most advantageous tax credits. For example under Senator Hatch's plan back in 2014 an individual your age would receive tax credits of $4,690 annually. Another upside (financially) is mandate will likely change where insurance plans won't be required to have things like prenatal care that you don't need so there might be plans with lower premiums that suit your needs.

The biggest downside for you is that the proposals widen the band on how much more insurers can charge for age, it is currently 3x but GOP proposals are 5x or 6x. Whether that is offset by age based tax credits and cheaper plans remains to be seen since final numbers are still unknown.
That's only helpful for wealthier people.

Tax credits don't help the working class much, if at all. A person earning $20k a year doesn't pay 23% income tax, which is what $4,690 is of $20k.

That's a typical "solution" that wealthy people create for wealthy people, and then check to make sure that at least some middle class people get a benefit, too, although to a much smaller degree.

That is backwards of our country's history and progressive tax system. The more you earn, the higher your percentage of fair share, and vice versa. When they do tax credits, it's the reverse: the more you earn, the bigger percentage of a tax break you get....and that's not who has trouble with the insurance premiums, in the first place. The more you need a break on the cost because of lower income, the less of a break you get.

Wealthy people (almost all national politicians) don't understand the America that the working class lives in, and their finances. At least I prefer to think that, than to think they do understand but just don't care.
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 > Retirement
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