200,000 Coloradans to lose their insurance because of Obamacare (state, support, doctor)
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.
I just checked in the Denver zip code area and a 45 year old female can purchase a Kaiser plan with a $4500 deductible for $237 a month. The same 45 year old can purchase a Human plan with a $3650 deductible for $275. A family of four can be covered for $683 without any subisidies. I have a hard time believing that a 45 year old woman could have found insurance for less than $237 pre-ACA.
We are a family of four (under the age of 45) and the cheapest Bronze plan which would be all that we could afford had a deductible of $6250 per year per person, $12,500 for the family. The cost per month in premiums was just above $500 per month. That adds up to quite a lot for something that we most likely won't use at all.
I'd love to have the option of having a plan that covers unexpected (expensive) expenses. I don't need a plan that covers routine preventative care or office visits. Those are things I can pay for out of pocket.
Our Pre ACA plan was a little more then $250 per month. It was a catastrophic plan though with zero bells and whistles.
So... it's better to let them go on without insurance? I have a relative that had spinal surgery. The total cost was about $150k. Of that, she was responsible for about $10k of it. Are you telling me it was better for her to be responsible for all $150k than having to pay the $10k?
How is that any different than the much less expensive catastrophic plans that existed pre-Obamacare? The $10k deductible cost outcome would have been the same, at a much lower premium cost.
We are a family of four (under the age of 45) and the cheapest Bronze plan which would be all that we could afford had a deductible of $6250 per year per person, $12,500 for the family. The cost per month in premiums was just above $500 per month. That adds up to quite a lot for something that we most likely won't use at all.
I'd love to have the option of having a plan that covers unexpected (expensive) expenses. I don't need a plan that covers routine preventative care or office visits. Those are things I can pay for out of pocket.
Our Pre ACA plan was a little more then $250 per month. It was a catastrophic plan though with zero bells and whistles.
These are the ACA essentials. Are these unreasonable? Most private company plans cover all of these areas. The only thing that's "free" is one doctor visit a year and when you get to 60 you get a "free" colonoscopy.
Ambulatory patient services
Emergency services
Hospitalization
Maternity and newborn care
Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment
Prescription drugs
Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices
Laboratory services
Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management
Pediatric services, including oral and vision care
In absence of the ACA, how were the uninsured going to pay if they were involved in a serious accident, a victim of a violent crime or the recipient of a diagnosis of a serious disease?
The uninsured/ underinsured were routinely denied treatment for Cancer unless they could cough up 75,000- $100,000 for treatment.
That an ER is required to stabilize an emergency, regardless of the patient's financial situation, does not mean the hospital does not bill and pursue collections for ER and subsequent admission. The EMTLA does not require hospitals to rehabilitate or provide ongoing medication.
If I were a healthcare system CEO, I would prefer to have my potential write- offs capped at $6,600 / p/p than an unlimited amount. It's all about the for profit nature of US healthcare, including not for profits that routinely book $100,000's of millions in annual profits each year. The rest of the developed world governments are substantially more involved in controlling the cost of healthcare than occurs in the US and this has nothing to do with the ACA.
The closer the US gets to 100% insured, the greater the power of insurers to demand concessions from the American Hospital Association. The closer the US gets to 100% insured, the more likely the super healthcare systems will cut out the middleman, insurance companies, and offer their own insurance.
These are the changes that will, for example, compel independent healthcare systems to develop their own MD comprised Compariative- Effectiveness Panels to determine protocols, negotiate the price of patented meds, embrace lower cost alternatives, greater specialization and delegation to Physiciam Assistants , Nurse Practitioners, mid - wives and medical techs , where appropriate.
No two countries do healthcare the same. No two countries have the same legacy baggage.
These are the ACA essentials. Are these unreasonable? Most private company plans cover all of these areas. The only thing that's "free" is one doctor visit a year and when you get to 60 you get a "free" colonoscopy.
Ambulatory patient services
Emergency services
Hospitalization
Maternity and newborn care
Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment
Prescription drugs
Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices
Laboratory services
Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management
Pediatric services, including oral and vision care
Some of it is and some of it is not. I am in favor of people being able to pick and choose what they will have covered. For example, someone who cannot have children (men, older women, infertile women, etc.) should not have to have a plan that has maternity and pediatric services. Someone should be able to choose if they need mental health and substance abuse coverage. I am for more choice and for the option of just being able to buy a catastrophic plan that is affordable.
In absence of the ACA, how were the uninsured going to pay if they were involved in a serious accident, a victim of a violent crime or the recipient of a diagnosis of a serious disease?
They WORK for the money to pay for their insurance like any other respectable American does.
The grandfathered plans (that don't qualify) are no longer being allowed. . its not like 200k are "losing" they are just forced to pick a different plan.
On the whole, the number of enroll into health insurance has increased dramatically since the ACA launched.
Its like saying you get insurance for your car that only covers the wheels. Then your pissed off when the state says that ONLY covering the wheels doesn't count for car insurance.
I'm all for killing EVERY grandfathered plan asap.
I don't care what political nonsense Obama stated. . .or how it was taken out of context (i'm pretty sure he was saying if you want to keep your employer plan; you can. . .you won't be forced to move to an exchange by a govt action.)
I don't know what Obama meant with the goofy " if you like it/ keep it" stuff".
I used to work for an employer who switch plans every year. This meant changing primary care physicians, every year or incurring out of network expenses. This was happening in the 90's.
Employers, MDs and hospitals opt in and out of plans each year. Insurers tweaked plans and premiums each year. This happened before the ACA and will continue.
I live in a high cost of living state and wages don't necessarily reflect that. So we have higher costs, including health insurance yet the income doesn't really make up for it. Great.
Which state?
I too live in a high cost of living area within Illinois. I am covered by my husband's employer's insurance. Because he might choose to retire ( and go on Medicare), I have tracked the cost of individual plans, for years. I do not qualify for a subsidy. My cost for a better plan would be less than it was for an inferior plan before the ACA. I can and do appreciate mileage varies.
There are 13 healthcare zones in my state. If I lived 1/4 mile north I would be in a different county and would incur a higher premium. This was true before and after the ACA. If I lived down state, a substantially lower cost of living area, my premium would be higher because healthcare is less competitive than my current location.
First, I provided "my own insurance", no employer plan. AND the Obamacare plan is NOT as good as mine and cost more. Oh but no worries, I get to subsidize someone else's insurance, someone else's kids. And I'm supposed to be happy about it all?
What state?
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.