Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 09-27-2013, 06:42 PM
Status: "It Can't Rain All The Time" (set 29 days ago)
 
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by krieger00 View Post
I think you are right on that .

That is why I say make Senators, Congress, President and anyone with a state job pay for there own heath insurance . If it good enough for American it should be good enough for are Senators, Congress, and President.
I'll go one farther. They should work receiving a stipend. So we can get people in there that are really dedicated to the American people and not there just to receive that nice salary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-27-2013, 06:45 PM
Status: "It Can't Rain All The Time" (set 29 days ago)
 
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
The Senators and Congress will not be covered through government insurance starting January 2014. This is part of the ACA. They and their staffers are required to shop on the exchanges instead. It's the law.
Show were they have to carry their own insurance and I'll believe you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 06:53 PM
 
Location: California
37,135 posts, read 42,203,740 times
Reputation: 35012
Some federal employees will shop the exchange and be subsidized by the same amount their employer (ie: government) paid when it was a straight forward employee benefit. It's not the same as the low income subsidies. In fact, it's pretty stupid to do it at all since no other business has to kick employees off the company plan and then pony up the same amount of money for the exchange. It sort of mucks things up actually. They should have just kept what they had since it met the requirements of the ACA, like many company plans currently do.

Although, in a perfect world they and every other business would just give the money they spend on employee health insurance directly to the employee to do with what they wish. Including buying health insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 06:57 PM
Status: "It Can't Rain All The Time" (set 29 days ago)
 
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
Some federal employees will shop the exchange and be subsidized by the same amount their employer (ie: government) paid when it was a straight forward employee benefit. It's not the same as the low income subsidies. In fact, it's pretty stupid to do it at all since no other business has to kick employees off the company plan and then pony up the same amount of money for the exchange. It sort of mucks things up actually. They should have just kept what they had since it met the requirements of the ACA, like many company plans currently do.
"B. Do you get health insurance from the government?
If the answer is yes, go on about your business. Obamacare doesn't really affect you. At least not yet. While Obamacare relies on making Medicare more efficient as a way to pay for some new services for younger people, it is not supposed to change the services offered by Medicare. One big test of this promise is Medicare Advantage. These are privately administered insurance plans that provide Medicare services to seniors. They cost the government more per person to provide Medicare. So, Obamacare seeks to bring their spending back in line with the rest of Medicare. This could lead to changes in Medicare Advantage options, like gym memberships and other items that are offered as enticements. But the same core Medicare services are supposed to remain in effect. The same goes for Medicaid. If you get your insurance from one of the 50 state-run Medicaid programs, Obamacare should not affect you. But you'll have a lot more company in these programs, which will grow to insure a larger portion of Americans." Can it be stopped? 8 answers on Obamacare and the shutdown - CNN.com

I'm sorry it's A.
A. Do you get health insurance from your employer?
If the answer is yes -- and this is by far the No. 1 way Americans get health insurance -- go on about your business. Obamacare doesn't really affect you. At least not yet. A lot of people think that because of Obamacare, fewer companies will offer health insurance, particularly to low-paid workers and retirees. There is some evidence of this. These employers would have to pay a per-worker fine to the government, but it might be cheaper for them in the long run to pay this fine to the government rather than offer insurance. Other companies might cut hours for some workers, making them part-timers working fewer than 30 hours a week in order to avoid helping pay their health insurance. But it will take some years to see if it really comes to pass. However, if you get health insurance at work, you could probably drop that coverage and buy health insurance on the Obamacare exchanges. But you might not want to. You won't qualify for any government help to buy your insurance and your employer wouldn't be contributing any of the money it is now.
*****
Federal employees have health insurance through their jobs. They do no need to shop for health insurance.

Last edited by Ellis Bell; 09-27-2013 at 07:03 PM.. Reason: Added A
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2013, 06:52 AM
 
Location: SE WI
747 posts, read 839,074 times
Reputation: 2204
Quote:
Originally Posted by moscowborn;31580305[B
]Wouldn't you rather be able to access preventative medicine for a pre-existing condition to help that condition from becoming a full blown disability? .
[/b]

Why do I need insurance to access preventative care? I would only buy the insurance once the costs out of pocket would exceed the premium. Until then I would just pay the fine.

The more young healthy people that we can get to just pay the fine, the sooner we can bust the system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2013, 07:13 AM
 
Location: Beautiful NNJ
1,279 posts, read 1,419,035 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRlaura View Post
Why do I need insurance to access preventative care? I would only buy the insurance once the costs out of pocket would exceed the premium. Until then I would just pay the fine.

The more young healthy people that we can get to just pay the fine, the sooner we can bust the system.
Can you afford the costs of a major accident? What happens if you're diagnosed with something that involves a lot of testing? Do you know what an MRI costs, and are you prepared to pay for that out of pocket?

I WANT young healthy people to get insurance, desperately, because I don't want to pay their ER costs. Not having insurance is irresponsible at BEST. And you're aalready paying the costs for all the other young, healthy people who are having accidents and coming down with unpredictable illnesses. Does that sit OK with you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2013, 07:24 AM
 
Location: SE WI
747 posts, read 839,074 times
Reputation: 2204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanderling View Post
Can you afford the costs of a major accident? What happens if you're diagnosed with something that involves a lot of testing? Do you know what an MRI costs, and are you prepared to pay for that out of pocket?

I WANT young healthy people to get insurance, desperately, because I don't want to pay their ER costs. Not having insurance is irresponsible at BEST. And you're aalready paying the costs for all the other young, healthy people who are having accidents and coming down with unpredictable illnesses. Does that sit OK with you?

As I said before, I currently have excellent insurance but plan to drop it and pay the fine. For 95 bucks next year I can pocket over $1000 by dropping it.

If I have an accident or need an MRI I'll go but it, but not until then. And yes, that sits just fine with me. I didn't vote for this nonsense, but you did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2013, 07:28 AM
 
Location: Beautiful NNJ
1,279 posts, read 1,419,035 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC View Post
No, I won't "sign up" for tyranny.

I pay for any health care I deem necessary for myself. If I can't afford it, I don't get it. And yes, I will refuse medical care that I can't afford or don't want. It has happened before. The difference between me and you is that I don't think the world owes me anything. I don't expect you to pay for anything I can't afford.

...

And as for grandchildren, I had the forethought to see the writing on the wall many, many years ago as to where this country was headed. So, I did not bring life into this world. I did not want to be held responsible for it and I did not want anyone that I was responsible for bringing into the world to be subjected to the ****hole that has been constructed around me by meddlesome people who can't seem to mind their own business, rather than mine.
It's all well and good to have this POV. In fact, if you can truly live by it I completely applaud it. But realistically, it's just not the world we live in. People WILL have children, people WILL have accidents, and people WILL seek care that is outside their ready cash reserves. If you have a family it's all but inevitable at some point unless you are a Rockefeller. My family is financially well-situated, with two extremely healthy kids, but we've had two ER visits in the last 10 years--with stitches, casts, and physical therapy involved--and one child needed orthodontic care and ongoing followup care for TMJ. The other child had a heart murmur and a suspected hypoactive thyroid for which she was tested and watched for a few years. My husband had a testicular seminoma (cancer) and kidney stones, both conditions that involve considerable ongoing monitoring. Without the resources provided by our medical and dental coverage, these expenses would have been an impossible burden to bear.

The ACA is trying to help Americans get better, more affordable health insurance, and it's doing so the only way our political system would allow. It's definitely not perfect, but obviously there is NO perfect system that won't tick off at least some segment of society. No matter WHAT is put in place someone will hate it with the burning fire of a thousand suns. That's just a fact.

But seriously--the ACA will help many many many people get coverage who want it but couldn't access it before. And it will pull into the system many many many healthy people who are one major incident away from bankruptcy but who couldn't afford even basic coverage. For me these are unmitigated positives. I really find it difficult to understand the arguments that the flaws in the law--and there certainly are some--negate the benefits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2013, 07:32 AM
 
Location: Beautiful NNJ
1,279 posts, read 1,419,035 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRlaura View Post
As I said before, I currently have excellent insurance but plan to drop it and pay the fine. For 95 bucks next year I can pocket over $1000 by dropping it.

If I have an accident or need an MRI I'll go but it, but not until then. And yes, that sits just fine with me. I didn't vote for this nonsense, but you did.
What do you mean you'll go for it if you have an accident or need an MRI? No policy will cover anything that happened before the plan is in place. If you have an accident on Monday and buy coverage on Tuesday (which likely wouldn't go into effect until the first of the next month, no matter what), nothing will be covered before the plan actually starts.

The pre-existing condition factor in the law states that you can't be turned down for coverage. I imagine there will still be exclusionary periods before which a pre-existing condition can be covered, depending on your state regulations. Do you really think you'll be permitted to buy a policy that covers the injuries you suffered in a car accident you had last week?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2013, 07:52 AM
 
15,047 posts, read 8,870,511 times
Reputation: 9510
Quote:
Originally Posted by actonbell View Post
Show were they have to carry their own insurance and I'll believe you.
Here you go:

"The dispute has its origin in the debate over the law in 2010. Republican senator Chuck Grassley suggested an amendment intended to make Democrats balk: Members of Congress and their staff would have to buy their insurance from the health-care exchanges. The amendment explicitly said that the federal government should continue making the same employer contributions. It was not designed to cut employees’ benefits, but rather to make sure they had a stake in the quality and efficiency of the exchanges. Democrats actually accepted it, and put it into the eventually passed bill, but without the provision for employer contributions.

The law thus treats Congress and its staff substantially differently than all other Americans. Many Americans who now get insurance coverage from their employer may end up having to go on the exchanges; but only congressional employees are actually forced onto them, with the option of an employer plan prohibited by law."

More at the link.
The Obamacare Non-Exemption | National Review Online
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:13 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