Connect for Health
Oct 12th 2013, 12:23 am
#91
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 41,518
Re: Connect for Health
It amazes me that some people believe that the republican party are fiscal conservatives and want to do what is best for their constituents. In the following article, the obstructionists to ACA have put so many roadblocks and costs to administer ACA that one organization turned down $833,000 in federal funding since if they accepted that money, they were restricted in telling people how the program works.
South Carolina has proposed refunding any penalty imposed by the federal government in 2014 by not signing up for ACA. So South Carolina will be spending millions to keep people uninsured and Mississippi is turning down about $500 million in expanded Medicaid funding because it is too expensive to administer the program at about $2.80 per resident.
Some states require navigators (people who help people understand ACA) to not only be trained by the federal government but also by the state government and requires a license to be a navigator costing the group that sponsors the navigator so much money that it could literally not allow them to help people with the federal funding that is being provided.
http://t.money.msn.com/saving-money-...-in-red-states
If the republicans can only figure out a way to silence TV, radio, and newspapers about ACA and can put filters on the internet, they will have the problem solved. If the south wants to remain poor, I guess that will be good for the northern states since usually the south gets much more from the federal government per capita than the north and that will reverse the trend.
South Carolina has proposed refunding any penalty imposed by the federal government in 2014 by not signing up for ACA. So South Carolina will be spending millions to keep people uninsured and Mississippi is turning down about $500 million in expanded Medicaid funding because it is too expensive to administer the program at about $2.80 per resident.
Some states require navigators (people who help people understand ACA) to not only be trained by the federal government but also by the state government and requires a license to be a navigator costing the group that sponsors the navigator so much money that it could literally not allow them to help people with the federal funding that is being provided.
http://t.money.msn.com/saving-money-...-in-red-states
If the republicans can only figure out a way to silence TV, radio, and newspapers about ACA and can put filters on the internet, they will have the problem solved. If the south wants to remain poor, I guess that will be good for the northern states since usually the south gets much more from the federal government per capita than the north and that will reverse the trend.
Oct 12th 2013, 1:11 am
#92
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: Connect for Health
I guess that would depend on your definition of fine is.
Something that I wondered about, when they decided on Obamacare why did they leave a gap between it and Medicare, Why not just start at the Medicare levels rather than have this extra Medicare level.
Something that I wondered about, when they decided on Obamacare why did they leave a gap between it and Medicare, Why not just start at the Medicare levels rather than have this extra Medicare level.
Oct 12th 2013, 1:36 am
#93
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: Connect for Health
Conservatives also wouldn't stand for people only paying about $100 for coverage and think it is totally wrong for the government to subsidize health care for even very low income families even though the leaders of the opposition probably pay nothing for their coverage.
Or are you talking about Medicaid again.
Last edited by Michael; Oct 12th 2013 at 2:18 am.
Oct 12th 2013, 1:43 am
#94
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 41,518
Re: Connect for Health
Because Medicare is single payer and conservatives in both the democratic and republican party would not allow another single payer system. Also Medicare reimbursements are lower than insurance company reimbursements so that would be totally opposed by conservatives. With the two, rates would have likely been 30+% lower so the platinum plan (similar to Medicare) would have likely cost about the same as the Bronze or Silver plan now costs. The platinum plan is a 10% co-pay for in and out patient treatment where Medicare is 0% for inpatient and 20% for out patient treatment.
Or are you talking about Medicaid again.
Or are you talking about Medicaid again.
Oct 12th 2013, 1:46 am
#95
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: Connect for Health
Yah, the single payer they want is for everyone to pay their own health care costs except of course for congress and executives of companies and their families.
Last edited by Michael; Oct 12th 2013 at 1:49 am.
Oct 15th 2013, 11:18 pm
#96
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 41,518
Re: Connect for Health
Someone has just said on CNN that the ACA 'Will get between you and your doctor.'
Genuinely puzzled as to how.
Genuinely puzzled as to how.
Oct 15th 2013, 11:44 pm
#97
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: Connect for Health
Oct 16th 2013, 12:01 am
#98
Joined: Dec 2001
Location: Dixie, ex UK
Posts: 52,448
Re: Connect for Health
If there was a "tried and tested treatments only, generic drugs at all times if they exist, limited end-of-life treatments" insurance policy, that would be revolutionary, and stand a sporting chance of reducing costs, but that is not what is on offer.
Last edited by Pulaski; Oct 16th 2013 at 12:05 am.
Oct 16th 2013, 12:24 am
#99
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: Connect for Health
He is retiring, Obama care I think probably helped in the decision.
In no particular order:
1. There was an interesting article in the New York Times about the failure of the IT aspect, no doubt available on line. A lot of the issues are Political in their origination, now there is a surprise.
2. Still can not get on the system, called them and it is down, must say all the ladies I have spoken to have been very helpful.
3. You can go through Medicaid, qualify for it, decline it and go on the Exchange anyway.
4. Medicare is a means tested benefit, the tax benefit is not. So for those with I 864's in place that may help.
5. Change of income is and I forget the exact term, a change that allows you to change your cover outside of the open enrolment period.
6. A lot of people here seem to be in regular jobs with regular salaries, I am not, nor are most people I know, so I can see there will be a lot of switching back and forward.
7. Just mention it in case, but assuming you take the estimated tax subsidy from your premium, there will be an adjustment plus or minus in your annual tax return.
Last edited by scrubbedexpat099; Oct 16th 2013 at 12:29 am.
Oct 16th 2013, 12:28 am
#100
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: Connect for Health
The ACA won't pay for all possible treatments.
If there was a "tried and tested treatments only, generic drugs at all times if they exist, limited end-of-life treatments" insurance policy, that would be revolutionary, and stand a sporting chance of reducing costs, but that is not what is on offer.
If there was a "tried and tested treatments only, generic drugs at all times if they exist, limited end-of-life treatments" insurance policy, that would be revolutionary, and stand a sporting chance of reducing costs, but that is not what is on offer.
This is part of the problem. A national system should not cover all the weird and wonderful and drugs which cost the same price as a new car. Or the minor routine stuff.
Those should be the area of the private sector, decent basic cover should be the focus at a cost that is 'Affordable'.
Oct 16th 2013, 12:28 am
#101
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: Connect for Health
The ACA won't pay for all possible treatments.
If there was a "tried and tested treatments only, generic drugs at all times if they exist, limited end-of-life treatments" insurance policy, that would be revolutionary, and stand a sporting chance of reducing costs, but that is not what is on offer.
If there was a "tried and tested treatments only, generic drugs at all times if they exist, limited end-of-life treatments" insurance policy, that would be revolutionary, and stand a sporting chance of reducing costs, but that is not what is on offer.
Therefore the same "should" currently be said about unregulated private health insurance.
Oct 16th 2013, 12:29 am
#102
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: Connect for Health
Forget the Karma, I did slip in a Medicare.
Oct 16th 2013, 12:31 am
#103
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: Connect for Health
You are right that ACA could possibly lead to that but unregulated private health insurance is already between you and your doctor since you may have a pre-existing condition that the policy doesn't cover, fine print in the policy doesn't cover certain procedures, and/or you can't afford the premiums.
Therefore the same "should" currently be said about unregulated private health insurance.
Therefore the same "should" currently be said about unregulated private health insurance.
Oct 16th 2013, 12:39 am
#104
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: Connect for Health
The only way the free market can provide "affordable" health insurance is to only insure people that are healthy and kick everybody off as soon as they become sick.
Oct 16th 2013, 12:46 am
#105
Joined: Dec 2001
Location: Dixie, ex UK
Posts: 52,448
Re: Connect for Health
You are right that ACA could possibly lead to that but unregulated private health insurance is already between you and your doctor since you may have a pre-existing condition that the policy doesn't cover, fine print in the policy doesn't cover certain procedures, and/or you can't afford the premiums.
Therefore the same "should" currently be said about unregulated private health insurance.
Therefore the same "should" currently be said about unregulated private health insurance.
