So NOW there 40 million "uninsured" Obama? ..contrary to this

[Vox]

.....Next you'll see more kids starving, and dying of treatable illnesses......

Got news for you. They already are and have been for some time.

.

a lie. there are no starving children in America. Yet.
as for diseases - that depends on the parents, not on the availability of insurance

 

[Antares]

The main reason people lose their health plan is because the insurance companies were overcharging them and the plan was no longer price competitive so they cancel it.

That was funny.

By the way, can you explain why everyone's prices are going up?

Everyone's prices are going up at the slowest rate in the last 20 years.

But Prez Cracka ass said they would go down

 

[regent]

Sounds like the end of health care in the United States. Will they be closing the hospitals, and what of the doctors and nurses, will they be allowed to treat people or will the whole medical thing now go underground?

 

[Caroljo]

I did not buy the Democratic claim that there were "46 million uninsured Americans", nor do I buy this claim that "16 million Americans will lose their current plans".

Nevertheless, many of those who are being disenrolled from their current plans are actually going to be eligible for better health insurance coverage, for less money, under the ACA.

I have insurance through my employer. I pay for my husband and myself (he works there too), $156.00/month (the best plan out of 3). I got a link from another board to a Xcel file that gives all the Obamacare charge for everyone per state. (I have it saved at work, will try to put it here tomorrow). But according to that, for my state and county, if I had to sign up for the insurance, it would cost me anywhere from $460 to over $700 per month. So, If i wanted the "best" plan with ACA, it would cost me over $550 more. It doesn't show you the deductibles either. Thank God our insurance at work passes Obama's "rules". Still doesn't mean my premiums won't go up this next year....I've heard horror stories about that too!

 

[Antares]

I did not buy the Democratic claim that there were "46 million uninsured Americans", nor do I buy this claim that "16 million Americans will lose their current plans".

Nevertheless, many of those who are being disenrolled from their current plans are actually going to be eligible for better health insurance coverage, for less money, under the ACA.

I have insurance through my employer. I pay for my husband and myself (he works there too), $156.00/month (the best plan out of 3). I got a link from another board to a Xcel file that gives all the Obamacare charge for everyone per state. (I have it saved at work, will try to put it here tomorrow). But according to that, for my state and county, if I had to sign up for the insurance, it would cost me anywhere from $460 to over $700 per month. So, If i wanted the "best" plan with ACA, it would cost me over $550 more. It doesn't show you the deductibles either. Thank God our insurance at work passes Obama's "rules". Still doesn't mean my premiums won't go up this next year....I've heard horror stories about that too!

g is simply talking out of his ass, he knows nothing of the Law, nothing.

 

[healthmyths]

I did not buy the Democratic claim that there were "46 million uninsured Americans", nor do I buy this claim that "16 million Americans will lose their current plans".

Nevertheless, many of those who are being disenrolled from their current plans are actually going to be eligible for better health insurance coverage, for less money, under the ACA.

I have insurance through my employer. I pay for my husband and myself (he works there too), $156.00/month (the best plan out of 3). I got a link from another board to a Xcel file that gives all the Obamacare charge for everyone per state. (I have it saved at work, will try to put it here tomorrow). But according to that, for my state and county, if I had to sign up for the insurance, it would cost me anywhere from $460 to over $700 per month. So, If i wanted the "best" plan with ACA, it would cost me over $550 more. It doesn't show you the deductibles either. Thank God our insurance at work passes Obama's "rules". Still doesn't mean my premiums won't go up this next year....I've heard horror stories about that too!

Obama told us:"I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program"
This means HE Prefers the 1,300 insurance companies go out of business.
This means 400,000 people unemployed.
This means $100 billion a year in tax revenue lost.
And for what???

Please tell your friends all of this was for less then 4 million people that wanted and need health insurance... not the
18 million counted though who are under 34, make over $50k didn't want their employers' plans.
14 million counted uninsured EVEN though they simply have to register with medicaid!
10 million counted as part of Obama's 46 million ARE NOT citizens!
42 million that adds up to and when you subtract them from 46 million WE"VE been grossly grossly FOOLED!

 

[Katzndogz]

I did not buy the Democratic claim that there were "46 million uninsured Americans", nor do I buy this claim that "16 million Americans will lose their current plans".

Nevertheless, many of those who are being disenrolled from their current plans are actually going to be eligible for better health insurance coverage, for less money, under the ACA.

It all depends on what you feel is better coverage? Men will get their abortions covered and 70 year old women will have in vitro fertilization covered. Is that what you call better coverage?

 

[JakeStarkey]

healthmyths, no one buys your silly accounting or your sillier and fraudulent comments.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The main reason people lose their health plan is because the insurance companies were overcharging them and the plan was no longer price competitive so they cancel it.

That was funny.

By the way, can you explain why everyone's prices are going up?

Everyone's prices are going up at the slowest rate in the last 20 years.

People had their prices increase more than 100% in one year before? I'm not sure you understand the word slowest, or increase actually. Maybe up has confused you.

 

[tap4154]

I'm one of those 16 million who had our chosen, affordable HC plan canceled by the ACA Have a $5K deductible with no copay after the deductible is met, with some dental for only $286/month at 59 years old. Exactly the plan I want since I'm healthy, on no meds, and just want to insure against a major illness, which this plan does. It pretty much limits my financial loss to $5K/year if I have a major illness, and small stuff I just pay for.

BUT because of ACA coverage mandates and it's wealth redistribution scheme to cover other folks subsidies, the plan I want and like is canceled as-of December 31, and the replacement has a $4,500 deductible BUT also added a 40% copay after the deductible for 92% more per month, $527!

So I'll be paying around $3,000 MORE per year and, God forbid, if I do get a serious illness ALSO have a 40% copay after the deductible is met! MUCH less coverage for twice the price!

It's ******* worthless! I'll just let the plan cancel and go "bare". No way I'm paying over $6k per year with a big deductible AND 40% copay!

Here's a scan of my old rates and terms on top, with the new ones below. I cropped out my personal info. My story is repeated ALL over America! Millions FUCKED over by the ACA.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The main reason people lose their health plan is because the insurance companies were overcharging them and the plan was no longer price competitive so they cancel it.

That was funny.

By the way, can you explain why everyone's prices are going up?

Everyone's prices are going up at the slowest rate in the last 20 years.

If you want to give Obama the credit for a sucky economy, then you can't blame Bush for the sucky economy.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I did not buy the Democratic claim that there were "46 million uninsured Americans", nor do I buy this claim that "16 million Americans will lose their current plans".

Nevertheless, many of those who are being disenrolled from their current plans are actually going to be eligible for better health insurance coverage, for less money, under the ACA.

It all depends on what you feel is better coverage? Men will get their abortions covered and 70 year old women will have in vitro fertilization covered. Is that what you call better coverage?

Everyone gets benefits they don't need, how can that possibly be bad?

 

[Billo_Really]

Now for the truth about how beneficial the ACA bill will be...

According to a release by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, nearly 6 in 10 uninsured Americans will be able to pay less than $100 per month for health insurance coverage on the exchanges.

...the health care advocacy group Families USA found that up to 26 million Americans would be eligible for subsidies to reduce the cost of insurance.

...as a study by the Center for American Progress explains, the lower-than-projected premiums "will save the federal government $190 billion over 10 years and increase the law's deficit reduction by 174 percent to almost $300 billion.

...a study by the RAND Corporation found that the law will help consumers lower their out-of-pocket costs in some cases by more than $1,000.

Popularity for the law is gaining momentum, despite all the bullshit lies coming from the right.

 

[auditor0007]

I did not buy the Democratic claim that there were "46 million uninsured Americans", nor do I buy this claim that "16 million Americans will lose their current plans".

Nevertheless, many of those who are being disenrolled from their current plans are actually going to be eligible for better health insurance coverage, for less money, under the ACA.

For some, their rates are going up substantially. This includes those over 60. For them, the rates are very high, and if you earn just enough to not qualify for a tax credit, then it is an awful lot. Personally, I think there should only be three age categories to set rates by rather than increasing rates for every year of age. What people do not understand is that these rates based on age are pretty much the same rates that employers pay. The big difference is that employers usually pay a flat rate per employee based on the average age of all of the employees in the plan. In other words, young people pay the same amount as the employee near retirement.

While young people could get a much cheaper policy on their own, if they were healthy, most people assumed that their costs were cheaper for employers also, but that is not how it works. If the exchanges worked the same as employer based insurance, then everyone would pay basically the same rate regardless of age.

 

[Billo_Really]

For some, their rates are going up substantially. This includes those over 60. For them, the rates are very high, and if you earn just enough to not qualify for a tax credit, then it is an awful lot. Personally, I think there should only be three age categories to set rates by rather than increasing rates for every year of age. What people do not understand is that these rates based on age are pretty much the same rates that employers pay. The big difference is that employers usually pay a flat rate per employee based on the average age of all of the employees in the plan. In other words, young people pay the same amount as the employee near retirement.

While young people could get a much cheaper policy on their own, if they were healthy, most people assumed that their costs were cheaper for employers also, but that is not how it works. If the exchanges worked the same as employer based insurance, then everyone would pay basically the same rate regardless of age.

And just where is this happening?

Got any links to back that shit up?

 

[auditor0007]

I did not buy the Democratic claim that there were "46 million uninsured Americans", nor do I buy this claim that "16 million Americans will lose their current plans".

Nevertheless, many of those who are being disenrolled from their current plans are actually going to be eligible for better health insurance coverage, for less money, under the ACA.

Another lie.

Premiums wnet up in 42 States and average of 33%, stop lying.

Tell me how the coverages are better?

It's a mixed bag in most cases. For the most part, deductibles are higher but the max out of pocket is lower. Premiums are a bit higher but preventative care is covered 100% saving people money. In the end, most people will end up paying about the same amount. Those who get hit the hardest will likely be those who have a lot of medical bills but don't quite hit their max out of pocket.

The good part about the higher deductibles is that with higher deductibles people are more likely to shop for the best price when it comes to their healthcare needs. I've always had high deductible insurance, so I've been shopping for a long time. I pay for my lab tests out of pocket and order them online. They are half the price of my insurance company's discounted price. I need phlebotomies three to four times per year. For those, I go to my local hospital that offers a reasonable plan. The only thing I don't like is that I have to see a doctor first, so they get me for that charge. I also need one ultrasound done on my liver every year. For this I go to an imaging center where it costs me $220 rather than $1500 at the hospital.

There are many things people can do to reduce their medical costs if they know what to look for. Once they have to start paying out of pocket for some things, they might just become better shoppers.

 

[auditor0007]

For some, their rates are going up substantially. This includes those over 60. For them, the rates are very high, and if you earn just enough to not qualify for a tax credit, then it is an awful lot. Personally, I think there should only be three age categories to set rates by rather than increasing rates for every year of age. What people do not understand is that these rates based on age are pretty much the same rates that employers pay. The big difference is that employers usually pay a flat rate per employee based on the average age of all of the employees in the plan. In other words, young people pay the same amount as the employee near retirement.

While young people could get a much cheaper policy on their own, if they were healthy, most people assumed that their costs were cheaper for employers also, but that is not how it works. If the exchanges worked the same as employer based insurance, then everyone would pay basically the same rate regardless of age.

And just where is this happening?

Got any links to back that shit up?

Back what up? That those over 60 are going to pay substantially more? I don't need links. I've compared rates in a number of states from existing plans to ones offered through the exchanges. I did this to confirm complaints from many people over 60 who are caught in this trap. It is one of the downsides of the plans that are offered through the exchanges.

If you want to check it out for yourself though, you can just check out the subsidy calculator.

Subsidy Calculator | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

If you use my example, you will see the big flaw in the way the subsidies work. I used the state of Ohio. For a couple aged 63 and 61 respectively, the estimated cost for a silver plan is $13134 per year. At an income level of $62,000, which is exactly 400% of poverty level, this hypothetical couple would receive a tax credit of $7244, making them responsible for $5890 to cover their premiums. Not a bad deal, right? Now change their income to $63,000. If you did this correctly what you will see is that this couple no longer qualifies for a tax credit and now must pay the full $13134 per year for their insurance. Their income is only $1000 higher but they will now have to pay an additional $7244 for their insurance. These people are going to get hammered.

Now as you will see, this comes to almost 21% or their income, so they actually could go without insurance and not be penalized because the cost of the insurance is over 9.5% of their income, but at age 60 plus, going without insurance is really not a very wise option. What I really wish Republicans had done is addressed issues like this, and pushed for changes that would have had a positive affect on those who will need to use these exchanges to purchase their insurance. Instead, they wasted everyone's time by trying to stop the whole thing which was never going to happen.

 

[Billo_Really]

Back what up? That those over 60 are going to pay substantially more? I don't need links. I've compared rates in a number of states from existing plans to ones offered through the exchanges. I did this to confirm complaints from many people over 60 who are caught in this trap. It is one of the downsides of the plans that are offered through the exchanges.

If you want to check it out for yourself though, you can just check out the subsidy calculator.

Subsidy Calculator | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

If you use my example, you will see the big flaw in the way the subsidies work. I used the state of Ohio. For a couple aged 63 and 61 respectively, the estimated cost for a silver plan is $13134 per year. At an income level of $62,000, which is exactly 400% of poverty level, this hypothetical couple would receive a tax credit of $7244, making them responsible for $5890 to cover their premiums. Not a bad deal, right? Now change their income to $63,000. If you did this correctly what you will see is that this couple no longer qualifies for a tax credit and now must pay the full $13134 per year for their insurance. Their income is only $1000 higher but they will now have to pay an additional $7244 for their insurance. These people are going to get hammered.

Now as you will see, this comes to almost 21% or their income, so they actually could go without insurance and not be penalized because the cost of the insurance is over 9.5% of their income, but at age 60 plus, going without insurance is really not a very wise option. What I really wish Republicans had done is addressed issues like this, and pushed for changes that would have had a positive affect on those who will need to use these exchanges to purchase their insurance. Instead, they wasted everyone's time by trying to stop the whole thing which was never going to happen.

Each exchange, has about 35 different plans you could sign up with.

The only thing (public option) that would've guaranteed prices would go down, they took out of the bill.


I just did that "subsidy calculator" and my premium calc'd out to $1021 a yr.

That's pretty good! I like it! The ACA is good for me!

 

[Caroljo]

For some, their rates are going up substantially. This includes those over 60. For them, the rates are very high, and if you earn just enough to not qualify for a tax credit, then it is an awful lot. Personally, I think there should only be three age categories to set rates by rather than increasing rates for every year of age. What people do not understand is that these rates based on age are pretty much the same rates that employers pay. The big difference is that employers usually pay a flat rate per employee based on the average age of all of the employees in the plan. In other words, young people pay the same amount as the employee near retirement.

While young people could get a much cheaper policy on their own, if they were healthy, most people assumed that their costs were cheaper for employers also, but that is not how it works. If the exchanges worked the same as employer based insurance, then everyone would pay basically the same rate regardless of age.

And just where is this happening?

Got any links to back that shit up?

Back what up? That those over 60 are going to pay substantially more? I don't need links. I've compared rates in a number of states from existing plans to ones offered through the exchanges. I did this to confirm complaints from many people over 60 who are caught in this trap. It is one of the downsides of the plans that are offered through the exchanges.

If you want to check it out for yourself though, you can just check out the subsidy calculator.

Subsidy Calculator | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

If you use my example, you will see the big flaw in the way the subsidies work. I used the state of Ohio. For a couple aged 63 and 61 respectively, the estimated cost for a silver plan is $13134 per year. At an income level of $62,000, which is exactly 400% of poverty level, this hypothetical couple would receive a tax credit of $7244, making them responsible for $5890 to cover their premiums. Not a bad deal, right? Now change their income to $63,000. If you did this correctly what you will see is that this couple no longer qualifies for a tax credit and now must pay the full $13134 per year for their insurance. Their income is only $1000 higher but they will now have to pay an additional $7244 for their insurance. These people are going to get hammered.

Now as you will see, this comes to almost 21% or their income, so they actually could go without insurance and not be penalized because the cost of the insurance is over 9.5% of their income, but at age 60 plus, going without insurance is really not a very wise option. What I really wish Republicans had done is addressed issues like this, and pushed for changes that would have had a positive affect on those who will need to use these exchanges to purchase their insurance. Instead, they wasted everyone's time by trying to stop the whole thing which was never going to happen.

I checked it out, and it shows we would pay in Michigan over $15,000 in premiums! That's for ages 60 & 61 with $75000 annual income....we get no subsidy either. Holy cow, where are people getting that this is affordable??? !!!!

 

[billyerock1991]

The main reason people lose their health plan is because the insurance companies were overcharging them and the plan was no longer price competitive so they cancel it.

WRONG. They are losing their plans because they are not (un)aca compliant. Try again, skippy.

People know best what coverage they need, not some ******* government. Can you tell me why it makes sense that a 55 year old single guy with no kids now HAS to pay for maternity, newborn, pediatric care (including vision and dental)?? A coverage he will never need, does not want, and only serves to increase his premium?

******* idiots.

once again the stupid people, like you are sucked in ... your health carte plan is set up like all health care plans are according to your needs and the company you are buying it from ...