The beggars, losers, perpetual mooches, dependent slouches, lazy bums, do-nothings, incompetents, passive couch potatoes and ne'er-do-well's always prefer things that are "universal", "government provided", "government subsidized" and the like. That is because they generally end up getting it free or for very little effort while others foot the bill. I prefer to pay my own way through life and not be supported by someone else or have to support or subsidized them either. If I decide to slouch, then I suffer the consequences and the same goes for everyone else. No one gets a free ride.
61 replies (most recent on top)
I think the government has done a pretty good job with Obamacare up through this year. The 25% average increase nationwide for 2017 is turning that around. I believe Obamacare was purposely designed since the beginning to start failing in the last year of King Obama's reign in order to open the way to single-payer universal insurance. Obama is not concerned with his ACA legacy, but with the final end game that is universal healthcare. If Hillary wins next Tuesday, it's coming to America.
@7ffh - Actually, the government has done a pretty good job with Medicare, so there's reason to believe that it could manage a single-payer system for everyone reasonably well.
@6xvn, that "someday" could be too long to wait. The answer might be single-payer universal healthcare. Maybe this is one thing the government needs to control and manage now. Healthcare costs are high because of greed. When artificial intelligence and medical technology advances are made in the future, costs will come down and the burden on the taxpayer will too.
@6wpd - Medical malpractice tort reform is a good idea, but from what I've read it's effect has been grossly exaggerated. The latest study I know of from 2010 pegs the cost at 2.4% of total healthcare expenditures, and it's been dropping. California passed medical malpractice tort reform in 1975 with a cap of $250,000 on non-economic damages (not adjusted for inflation), but that hasn't resulted in dirt cheap medical care in CA. In any case, any cost reduction would be a one-time deal, and then the slow relentless climb of costs would continue again. The fact is, there is no easy answer to high medical costs that doesn't drastically reduce the quality of medical care. Training good doctors and nurses is expensive, designing and building fancy medical equipment is expensive, technicians cost money, developing new drugs and procedures is expensive, and so on. And this is not an area where we're willing to just let quality decline. If we want to continue being healthier and living longer as a society we are going to have to pay more. Perhaps someday technology and AI will be able to lower medical costs significantly as it has in other businesses, but, for now, it's going to keep going up. All government policy can do is try to reduce the rate of increase without sacrificing quality significantly.
6hky, I understand what you're saying and agree. Although you say the Repblican points brought up by the other poster don't solve the problem, what are the Democrats saying will fix the high cost of healthcare? I think all ideas and proposals work to one degree or another. The other point that was brought up about Tort reform is probably the most effective method to lower the cost of healthcare. Scumbag lawyers and ambulance chasers are everywhere stirring up fear and bringing frivolous lawsuits and class actions against the medical industry on a daily basis. Costs to settle cases one after another tally into the millions each time. How many operations and procedures does each doctor need to do just to set aside to settle false claims? That's a major reason why healthcare is so expensive. Your point about the high healthcare costs in large scale economy states like California and Texas is thought provoking. There should be enough competition there already to make healthcare costs lower than other states. Who knows.
@5fkw - Of course, anything we can do to bring down health care costs without sacrificing quality should be seriously considered. However, while allowing people to shop across state lines might be helpful, I don't see how it can possibly produce any significant long-term cost reductions. California's economy is a big as France's, and Texas' is as big as Brazil's. If these states aren't big enough to support a competitive medical insurance market, then something else is going on. I've always felt that this was a Republican talking point because they don't really have any idea how to bring down medical costs, but they feel like they have to say something.
Also, while health care savings accounts are nice, comparison shopping on a small scale is just not something that's practical for much of medical care. You can compare HMOs or insurance plans, but to try to price shop individual treatments just doesn't make sense, especially when in many cases getting the right diagnosis is half the battle. And if comparison shopping is hard, then competitive pressures won't drive down prices. For certain elective procedures, like lasik eye surgery, it can and has worked, but I don't think there's any evidence that it will work for other more poorly defined ailments, and certainly not for emergency care. I certainly don't want to spend hours researching how much all the doctors in town charge for every procedure I might possibly need when I need to seek medical care and I don't know what's wrong.
Finally, there is the problem of what to do with people who just are not able to pay for their own healthcare because they don't earn enough, have extremely costly illnesses, are unable to work, or even just don't manage their money well. Do we just let them die? Do we depend on charity? If we expect the government to foot the bill anyway, then the taxpayers are still on the hook.
Great post, 5elh. However, I will take a stand and say that affordable healthcare in the United States needs be a right every citizen should have. The key word is "affordable". Our government should ensure we have access to affordable healthcare, not through a mandate like the ACA, but instead by enacting laws that allow costs to come down. Examples would be allowing American citizens and legal residents to shop for insurance across State lines, passing tort reform laws to reduce or eliminate frivolous law suits against doctors and hospitals, allow everyone to open tax free health savings accounts that don't expire and can be transferred to a family member upon death. Reducing regulation and letting the free market economy work to lower healthcare costs naturally is the fix we need. That is the "Right to Affordable Healthcare" that I advocate.
@K6JHHrR-5elh , Good response, but I look at those so-called rights of tax-payers and citizens in a different category. No one born in some odd place on this planet simply gets free "fire protection and police services" You are drawing a fine line. I am not sure how to explain it myself. but I think you get my point. There needs to be a distinction between a right and free stuff. Many of those take tax dollars so are effectively citizens rights or tax-payers rights and not what people refer to as "Human Rights" and imply that when you are born you are effectively granted free health care for life. That is how some people think. I truly believe that we need to be compassionate as America has always been after all, there have always been laws that protect the sick and wounded at emergency rooms of hospitals. The expense of that in comparison to the ACA has been grossly exaggerated, however.
-5jti Good for you that you can get assistance that I assume you need so that you can provide assistance for your kids, others, etc. at this time in your life. I have more money than I will ever be able to spend and I have no need to die with a certain amount as if it is some kind of game like who dies with the most money wins, so I'm not sure I'll need the ACA at all. It goes the same with Social Security. Some think that there is a goal to get the absolute most, as if you win a prize and ignore the utility aspect of long term insurance for longevity(OASDI). When you are dead you get the prize??? That utility value is maximized when you delay 'til age 70. the "Utility Value" not the monetary value. In other words, you get a guarantee(at least as much as they can, nothing is guaranteed) that you will have a certain amount, COL adjusted, until you die. The stock market can go belly up and you still have that. It doesn't matter if you get it for 2 years or 20 years. It's the piece of mind that you are buying all the way there, during your younger years which actually helps since you can spend other savings without regret. There's no way to put a price on that piece of mind. On the other hand, if you desperately need the money at 62, that's a different story.
@5aec - Actually there are certain widely accepted rights that do require work from others. One notable example is the right to counsel in a criminal trial, which is free if you can't afford it. This requires a lawyer to perform this service. Other examples that most people accept are the right to military protection, police protection, emergency services, K-12 public education, the right to a fair and speedy trial. People can disagree with whether each of these things should be a right, but there is plenty of precedence for rights that involve work from others. BTW, I'm not taking a stand here on whether health care is or should be a right but I see no fundamental reason why a society can't decide that it should be.
@5aan, it's not easy for the average person to "play poor" and max out the Obamacare subsidy. To do that, you need to have low expenses, like no mortgage or rent and be debt free. You also need to have substantial liquid cash in banks to float most of your lifestyle. The objective is to keep your total annual household income reported on your 1040 tax return between the minimum of $16,050 and maximum of $62,050. The sweet spot is between $25-32k. Take advantage if you can. I did and my medical coverage is just as good, but less expensive than what Chevron employees are paying.
Not sure where these numb nuts come from when they say free health care is a "right". I guess they are just ignorant moochers.
I agree that we should have appropriately priced healthcare and would use the ACA if I could not afford any other insurance. However, Health care is not a "basic right" for humans, individuals or any other living thing. You have to understand "rights" are not things which require the work, input or provisions of others. "Rights" are things like free speech, freedom to bear arms, etc. In addition, nothing which requires the work of others and production of raw materials into useful products is free. Health care requires the time, effort and dedication of teams of skilled and trained personnel, many who devote their entire lifetimes to it, and many who make tremendous sacrifices and go into debt. The medical facilities alone and research cost $billions. There is nothing "free" about health care and never has been nor will be. It you would like it to be "Socialized" or paid for by pooled funds, that's different. In many cases when that is arranged some will have it paid for completely by others and not contribute a penny. But it is not a "Right" of any sort and it is definitely not "Free" and never will be. It is not realistic nor practical to start declaring things "Rights" when they become useful, popular even lifesaving, and widely available. That would be like declaring ownership of a car or phone or getting haircuts or controlled narcotics a "basic right".
We will definitely use Obamacare if and when the time comes. Have heard nothing but good things about it and the cost is low. Low cost or free healthcare should be a basic right provided by government. If our taxes increase to pay for it, I'm fine with that too. If some of you prefer to pay ten times as much for a private plan, guess what? We are all happy for you! Enjoy your sunset years. Stay healthy. Eat right and exercise.
5aan: why can't you be a good democrat and soak up anything free even if you don't need it.
I checked the Obamacare exchanges and it's more expensive for me. Of course, I am not a parasite sponge liberal either. I am not going to "play poor" so that I can take from people who really need the subsidies. I am not a mooch, a parasite, a sponge, a liberal or a thief. The system is supposed to help people who need help getting insurance, not people who are wealthy enough to afford the best health care already. The ACA is having problems because of the people getting subsidies who are sponging off the system by playing games with their income. That's not the intention, to have the working class support rich people who can game the system. I can afford good reliable health insurance for myself without milking the government Teat so I pay my own way. I didn't work my whole life so that I can sponge in retirement off of those less fortunate than me like a parasitic leech. I earned a good lifestyle for myself with good healthcare, not Obummercare crap. And I have plenty left over after that!!!
@K6JHHrR-5fkv ,there's no need to promote Obama, the failed ACA or any of your messiah's other non-accomplishments on this layoffs forum. simply because you have buyers remorse. I had the ACA for a couple of years and am dropping it because it is horrible and cost me more money and grief in the long run, It's very simple. It is plagued with problems and issues that have been noted by democrats and republicans alike. It's not a partisan thing. But if you have no knowledge of the failures and insolvency of the program that's your own problem and lack of information. I think that you have a comprehension problem. Your answer to the ACA's failure is " you're a simpleton" to the poster. that's very intellectual and convincing. Try reading:
" ‘Tweak’ for Obamacare is a red flag, not a fix"
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-28/a-tweak-to-fix-obamacare-that-s-a-red-flag
Yeah, if you don't live in California or one of the other red states, you are living on the wrong state.
@5nle, the ACA and Obamacare is NOT a complete failure. It's working beautifully for me and many others. Don't disparage things simply because you know nothing about it. It's obvious you are an ignorant simpleton.
Practice your lies more convincingly, @5lro. You are obviously an Obamabot and are in love with and have a hard-on for everything Obama. Any little speck of criticism for your boyfriend's pathetic signature legacy (soon to be all but eliminated) plan just makes you go ballistic. Unlike others on this thread, I do not have the ACA, need nor want it. On the other hand you obviously are pathetically in love with the ACA and any and all things Obama. You cannot accept the fact that it is an utter and complete failure. Also learn to spell at least high school level. You're embarrassing yourself.
I will be needing to pick between the Exchanges and retiree insurance plan soon(via layoff or retire). I did the math and to get the equivalent of what I have now and what I want, I would need to pay approx. $850-900 a month for me and my wife. The reason is I am taking the annuity and that is income. I have no reason to turn down that since I have much at risk in the market already. (Different Topic, different threads). The cost for the retiree insurance is approx. the same. I don't know what the ACA will cost when the time comes, but I suspect they both will go up comparably. At this time, if I had to make the decision, I would choose the Chevron retiree plan, for the few years that I need it, then switch over to medicare/retiree. The reason is I would rather not have to potentially pick a new doctor and deal with all the hassle of changing and I would rather not be in a government subsidized plan like that, if I have a choice. I like the insurance we have, with ExpressScripts, etc. The beauty of the company plans, both employee and retiree is it is truly money that you have earned being put to use, not the redistribution of wealth that is the ACA.
5frz, I do have something constructive to say. My experience with a Silver level ACA Plan here in Houston has been nothing but excellent. No problems at all. So don't push your lame experience as the reason to cast stones at Obamacare. You either are in the wrong state, city or just didn't pick the right plan. There are some good ones and others that are not so good. One other thing for you to consider... clean up your foul language. Otherwise, you loose credibility and respect.
-4yzz , I had the Silver plan. No reason for me to lie. I am just informing others so that they may not make the same mistakes that I did and have bad experiences with the ACA, as many have including me and many others that I know. It is obvious that you are a troll and have an agenda. If you don't have anything constructive to add about Anthem. the ACA, etc. please get the FVCK out of here with your BS comments. Thanks.
Practice your lies more convincingly, 4pke. We can see right through your false testimony. You must be trying to retell the horror stories we've heard of the poor who only have Medicare. Until you have real experience with a Silver or Gold Obamacare plan, don't post about the subject.
I have had to deal with the nightmare called Obamacare for the past 2 years and not only the premiums but all of the other costs have gone up and up but the service and wait times are atrocious. Never again for me. I am out for 2017. After all is said and done, the CVX retiree plan is golden compared to the petulant Abortion which is Obamacare. Now, don't get me wrong. If you never get sick and don't have to see the doctor and don't make regular visits to a preferred doctor of your choice - no problem. You are good to go with the ACA and will probably save money. Since you don't really need health care at all. I know a few people like that. But you are an exception if you are over 50 and that's the case. On the other hand, Don't be an ignorant jerk by stating it's not a low quality insurance plan. You get what you pay for. I want better. I will not gamble with my heath and need real insurance at my age, not the universalized version of Medicaid.
-4txu, This is the USA. Don't fail too take advantage of any benefit you may be lucky enough to get with our high retirement incomes. If you make it happen, take it. Helping the less fortunate is very noble. Do it if you can, but also take from this capitalist government what you've earned by law. I'm a charitable person, but also take advantage of Obamacare too. I use the rules to my advantage and have a great medical policy below $100 for 2017. Who knows if it will be around at those low rates in 2018 and beyond.
The Chevron pre-65 plan is a gold plan and the cost for me and the wife for 2017 is $923. Expensive but you get what you pay for. I make too much money in retirement to get any subsidies and don't feel like I need subsidies. I can stand on my own two feet. If I were handicapped or otherwise incapacitated so would accept help but I'm thankful that I can instead help others who are less fortunate than me through my giving at Church and through various other ministries. I even occasionally give to the folks panhandling even through I know they won't likely use it for food like they say. However, it's not up to me to judge.
@3dri, the $1200 cost for a good medical insurance plan is typical, but the majority of us who are employed in large firms don't pay close to that amount. Our employer subsidizes about 80% and we only pay less than $300. In pre-65 aged retirement, that $1200 cost is expensive. I'm very grateful for having the ACA and Obamacare to provide me subsidized healthcare at an affordable cost. Don't be an ignorant jerk by stating it's a low quality insurance plan only because it's Obamacare. The Bronze plans offered in Obamacare may not be that great, but if you choose a Silver or Gold plan, they are equal in quality to the plan that Chevron offers. I know because I have a Silver plan and it covers everything and is accepted by hundreds of physicians and specialists in my Houston area. I have access to top grade hospitals too. BTW, last night I renewed the current Obamacare plan for me and spouse, and our monthly premium remains below $100.
Yes Indeed - good health care is expensive, whoever said that is correct. In Retirement today budget approx. $15k+/- annually for health care for a couple. That's typical and what retirees do and use as their baseline. You will pay for it either through premiums or expenses. Anyone who doesn't take their health care seriously and pay for decent health insurance is definitely a Jerk. I agree.
3pmm: you are obviously a lightweight with limited financial knowledge. $1200 a month for the wife and I with the coverage we get is a good investment for me. We have lots of medical issues and expenses and this works well for us. Go get you some of that Obamacare and see how it works out of you have lots of medical issues. $1200 will seem like a drop in the bucket the.
$1200 per month for any medical plan is EXPENSIVE. Don't be a jerk.
I have priced the ACA plans comparable to the one that I want and have now and with my income level it is comparable in cost to the Chevron retiree plan, factoring in the subsidies. I have legitimate taxed income from multiple pensions. The Chevron retiree insurance is a better value and a better deal for a higher quality plan. I don't plan on living my retired days with piss-poor health insurance. I am gonna die soon enough. No sense in making it sooner.
The CVX retiree medical is around $1200 or so. I don't call that insanely expensive. It's expensive but very good coverage. Depends if you want to roll the dice until you hit age 65.
In some states, if you are unemployed and have no income, you qualify for medicaid, which is extended medicaid under aca. With medicaid, your medical expenses are covered 100% with no deductible or copay.
All medical insurance premiums other than employer paid plans are insanely expensive. If you are not 65 or older, the ACA is the only affordable way to go. If you opt not to have insurance, you'll be obligated to pay a penalty, so you might as well get the most affordable ACA plan and not use it. Look at it as insurance in case of a catastrophic necessity.
There are high deductibles in most ACA plans but not all. Choose carefully.
I was on the ACA exchange plan for one year and fortunately I can add retiree still and am getting on that for 2017. I am getting out of Obamacare permanently. It is worthless, I have experienced it first hand. You end up paying more unless you never have to see a doctor. There's no way in creation that I will intentionally put myself in a position to go through that nightmare again, YMMV.
@2vvg, if you and your spouse live in Texas and can maintain your 2017 total taxable household income between $16,020 and $64,080 (preferably no more than $40,050), you will pay much less for medical and prescription drug coverage through an ACA Plan. If you haven't reached your 65th birthday yet, forget about the Chevron pre-65 Retiree Medical. It's unaffordable until you reach 65, so wait until then. Once your subsidized cobra medical is 30 days from expiring, go out to www.healthcare.gov and inquire on the plans available to you. You can start an online application early and select a plan you like. If you live in the greater Houston area, checkout the silver-level ACA plan by Community Health Choice. It's an HMO with zero deductibles and a $2,250 annual per person maximum out of pocket copay limit. This is not the conventional HMO many people detest. There are many PCP doctors and specialists that participate in this plan, and you can see an in-network specialist without a referral from a PCP. The copayment amounts for medical services are very reasonable. In fact, for the low premium you pay, the copayments are low and affordable. Setting up an online account and completing an application with Healthcare.gov takes about 30 to 40 minutes. Once you select your healthcare plan, you will need to wait 7 to 10 days for the insurance company to receive information about your healthcare.gov application. Then you can call the insurance company and pay your first month premium by credit card over the phone. Another week or two later, your insurance cards will arrive in the mail. My experience with both the Healthcare Marketplace and my insurance company's customer service department have been great. No problems at all. Good luck.
I would like to see more comments on the goods and bad points of the ACA exchanges. I am looking into that as an option when my Cobra runs out. Glad to see this thread moving to something constructive. I honestly will not be able to afford much else, unlike some of our upper echelon elite tax-break milkers on this thread.