Health insurance costs for 2014 - didn't expect that

[Bowfinger]

Social Security is a scam/pyramid scheme and it's almost bankrupt.
Medicare is a scam/pyramid scheme and it's almost bankrupt.

Why do you want single payer and why are you assuming that the US government will run such a program properly and efficiently giving their history in running Social Security and Medicare?

The only people that will make money from single payer healthcare are the drug manufacturers, lobbyists, and the bureaucrats.

No. Social Security is not a scam and is nowhere near bankruptcy. Indeed, even when faced with a tremendous demographics change, it will remain solvent with only modest adjustments.

Medicare faces much greater challenges, in part due to the same demographics shift, but even more due to out of control cost increases in American healthcare. Medicare faces the same problem all American healthcare payers face, including employers. Employers are free to cut benefits and increase employee costs, however, and they have been doing so regularly. That's more difficult for Medicare, not because it is poorly run, but because it's tasked with providing a specific level of service.

Your final sentence is exactly backwards. The opposition to single payer comes from greedy drug manufacturers and healthcare providers who dread having to live under the tremendous negotiating leverage of a single U.S. payer. They know what's happened in all of our peer first-world countries with universal coverage: better coverage at a far lower per capita cost. They will have to become more efficient and cut their margins dramatically. They will make less money, and Americans will save billions.

And that is why we have Obamacare. Congress is fully bought and paid for. They would not approve a true single-payer system with the leverage to really reign in healthcare costs.

 

[K1052]

Not sure if I qualify for a federal subsidy or whatever other thing they are offering.

Such information could drastically change the premium you'll have to pay. Might want to check that out.

 

[sixone]

Here's one for ya. Illegals walk into the hospital with everything from a cold to a woman in labor. They treat them and pass the cost on to us legals. Around here, under my present, employer paid insurance plan, if I walk into an emergency room for any reason and get lab tests, proven twice, I'm getting a $1000 bill in the mail. That is after co-pay and deductible. In both instances the total bill has been about $5000, which, in itself, is ridiculous for a 2 hour visit.
The first time I got such a bill I called the billing department to protest how such a short visit could result in such a large bill. I was simply told that those who don't have insurance or means to pay are causing us to offset these costs onto those who do. I said, well, I guess that is the penalty I pay for being born white and not having a last name like Martinez, even though I was born here and didn't sneak into the country illegally. Population here is approaching 60% hispanic. We have a huge agriculture commerce here.

After running all this through my mental computer, I've shifted my view of Obamacare. Bring it on. It might just provide for these people without these expenses being offset on me. Let's redistribute some of this wealth. I can afford a bit, so can you.

Problem is, those expenses are STILL going to be offset on you. They're going to be hidden in the insurance premiums you pay, and in the taxes you pay.

The only thing that's changing is that those costs will be barely disguised.

 

[Engineer]

The law says she has to have it next year, or pay a fine. The fine is going to be cheaper than insurance premiums, and that's more important than anything I can say to her.

If you want to send some money to pay for her coverage, I'll be happy to see that she gets it.

Fuck that. She CHOSE to not get insurance and people like her cause my, and all of the other people who chose wisely and pay our bills, prices in healthcare to skyrocket. The care providers aren't doing it as charity, they pass it on to the next stiff who will pay it.

As the GOP people around here like to say about everyone paying federal taxes.....she has no skin in the game so why does she care who pays?

 

[sixone]

Fuck that. She CHOSE to not get insurance and people like her cause my, and all of the other people who chose wisely and pay our bills, prices in healthcare to skyrocket. The care providers aren't doing it as charity, they pass it on to the next stiff who will pay it.

As the GOP people around here like to say about everyone paying federal taxes.....she has no skin in the game so why does she care who pays?

What other choice do they have? Close their doors? Lay off employees? Turn away patients?

Every government solution presented passes costs to people who will pay them.

Again, where's your solution that makes this BETTER instead of only different?

 

[Engineer]

them.

Again, where's your solution that makes this BETTER instead of only different?

I gave it to you. For those of us who are responsible and pay, it would lower our bills greatly to tell the deadbeats to pound sand. She had no skin in the game by choice and when she became sick, 'oh, I'm sick, take care of me'....and 'oh, I can't pay that so please don't make me pay the bill'. BETTER, as you put it, is relative in this case, isn't it?

Funny how you keep hounding me to make it better and you say nothing about her choices to not get insurance which could have made it better on everyone because she would have been paying in to get the services she received instead of getting her cake and eating it too. Maybe if I didn't have to pay for 3 people, me, your deadbeat friend and welfare cases, it would be lots BETTER for me? Would certainly be better for the providers to actually, you know...get paid instead of being a charity, don't you think? (oh wait, it would put the bill collectors out of work....the horror!!!)

It's easy to hound me, the anonymous internet poster about coming up with a solution...but to tell your friend to take responsibility for herself and pay her own bills instead of causing the bills for the rest of us to go up? Nah, that would be 'cruel' and 'harsh'. Why should you do that to your friend, a real person? Why should she have to pay because 'she is my friend'?

As for your article, I already said to open the boarders to foreign, imported doctors. Maybe we could use them on the people who don't pay or refuse to pay and instead pay the fine.

 

[sixone]

I gave it to you. For those of us who are responsible and pay, it would lower our bills greatly to tell the deadbeats to pound sand. She had no skin in the game by choice and when she became sick, 'oh, I'm sick, take care of me'....and 'oh, I can't pay that so please don't make me pay the bill'. BETTER, as you put it, is relative in this case, isn't it?

I never said that she asked someone else to pay, or that she was unable to pay. In fact, she was willing and able to pay the bill, though it would have taken a very long time. The hospital opted not to wait.

Please don't make things up to support your argument.

Funny how you keep hounding me to make it better and you say nothing about her choices to not get insurance which could have made it better on everyone because she would have been paying in to get the services she received instead of getting her cake and eating it too. Maybe if I didn't have to pay for 3 people, me, your deadbeat friend and welfare cases, it would be lots BETTER for me? Would certainly be better for the providers to actually, you know...get paid instead of being a charity, don't you think? (oh wait, it would put the bill collectors out of work....the horror!!!)

The only two solutions you've offered are to let sick people die, or to shift the costs so you don't have to pay. Except every shift you support actually does leave you paying the bill. Is that all you've got?

It's easy to hound me, the anonymous internet poster about coming up with a solution...but to tell your friend to take responsibility for herself and pay her own bills instead of causing the bills for the rest of us to go up? Nah, that would be 'cruel' and 'harsh'. Why should you do that to your friend, a real person? Why should she have to pay because 'she is my friend'?

Why do you think I'll have any better luck telling her what to do, than I'm having getting you to stop going in circles?

As for your article, I already said to open the boarders to foreign, imported doctors. Maybe we could use them on the people who don't pay or refuse to pay and instead pay the fine.

Why not just let US citizens take tests to become doctors? If you don't care how they're educated, let's keep those jobs at home, at the very least.

 

[woolfe9998]

Every article and report on health insurance premiums that I've seen says that they're going up more than usual. This makes sense, given the new rules that the insurance companies have to play by. I don't think it's a stretch to say that legislators understood this would happen and that it was most likely intended. We will eventually have a single payer system, once private insurance is too expensive for the middle class, even with employer subsidy.

I'm glad we're aware of what you claim to have read, and of the OP's personal anecdote. That's all the evidence we need.

http://blogs.wsj.com/cfo/2013/08/21/health-care-costs-seen-rising-modestly-in-2014/

 

[sixone]

I'm glad we're aware of what you claim to have read, and of the OP's personal anecdote. That's all the evidence we need.

http://blogs.wsj.com/cfo/2013/08/21/health-care-costs-seen-rising-modestly-in-2014/

That article specifically addresses ONLY employer-sponsored plans. It doesn't address individual plans, nor does it take into account the people who are going from an employer plan to an individual plan.

Cherry picking won't fly.

 

[Engineer]

I never said that she asked someone else to pay, or that she was unable to pay. In fact, she was willing and able to pay the bill, though it would have taken a very long time. The hospital opted not to wait.

Please don't make things up to support your argument.

Since a charity became involved and paid part of the bill, I don't believe you one damn bit, period.

The only two solutions you've offered are to let sick people die, or to shift the costs so you don't have to pay. Except every shift you support actually does leave you paying the bill. Is that all you've got?

I've offered to shift the bill back to the people who get the services instead of them passing it on to me AND others who pay their bills. You want lower health care costs, why won't that work? Explain how a business who gets paid promptly and doesn't have to spend money to collect the bills, therefore being more efficient, isn't going to be not only more profitable as well as able to offer cheaper prices to those of us that pay? Do you think that a hospital charges $20 for a bandaide because the bandaide costs $20? They do it to make up for the deadbeats who won't pay.

Why do you think I'll have any better luck telling her what to do, than I'm having getting you to stop going in circles?

She is your deadbeat friend, not mine. I have no clue. I'll make a note though that if I ever see you preach 'personal responsibility' on this forum, you'll be called out on it by me, period. You'll condemn me all day long but won't publicly condemn her....because she is your (deadbeat) friend.

Why not just let US citizens take tests to become doctors? If you don't care how they're educated, let's keep those jobs at home, at the very least.

Never said I didn't care how they were educated, so don't go making shit up.

 

[sixone]

Since a charity became involved and paid part of the bill, I don't believe you one damn bit, period.

Why would the hospital want to wait five years to be paid back, when they can go to a charity and ask them to pay it right now?

I've offered to shift the bill back to the people who get the services instead of them passing it on to me AND others who pay their bills. You want lower health care costs, why won't that work? Explain how a business who gets paid promptly and doesn't have to spend money to collect the bills, therefore being more efficient, isn't going to be not only more profitable as well as able to offer cheaper prices to those of us that pay? Do you think that a hospital charges $20 for a bandaide because the bandaide costs $20? They do it to make up for the deadbeats who won't pay.

The only option you've offered is to shift the bill in different ways. It still ends up on you. Oh, and let sick people die - great choice, that.

She is your deadbeat friend, not mine. I have no clue. I'll make a note though that if I ever see you preach 'personal responsibility' on this forum, you'll be called out on it by me, period.

Again, with the making stuff up. She's not a deadbeat, she paid exactly what the hospital asked her to pay. Unless you're making up a new definition of "deadbeat"?

Never said I didn't care how they were educated, so don't go making shit up.

If you're going to bring them in from other countries to work for cheap, they'd better have a good command of the English language and of all the medical options that are available here. That's going to require education, which you've made no provision for.

 

[Engineer]

Why would the hospital want to wait five years to be paid back, when they can go to a charity and ask them to pay it right now?

Why would a charity pay for someone who 'can and is willing to pay' when there are others that cannot? Again, don't buy your bullshit.

The only option you've offered is to shift the bill in different ways. It still ends up on you. Oh, and let sick people die - great choice, that.

So by making others pay for their own care instead of passing the bill on to me still causes me to continue to pay for them? Right......

Again, with the making stuff up. She's not a deadbeat, she paid exactly what the hospital asked her to pay. Unless you're making up a new definition of "deadbeat"?

Did the hospital send her a bill for $40,000 or not and did she not pay it? If not, then your original statement was mis-worded.

If you're going to bring them in from other countries to work for cheap, they'd better have a good command of the English language and of all the medical options that are available here. That's going to require education, which you've made no provision for.

So I'm supposed to give EVERY detail in the plan?

What details have you given for yours? You've offered nothing other than a talking points memo on ideas that 'might encourage more people to buy insurance'.

Oh, and has your 'friend' decided to buy her own insurance or is she still riding high on other people's money?

 

[sixone]

Why would a charity pay for someone who 'can and is willing to pay' when there are others that cannot? Again, don't buy your bullshit.

The bullshit is your premise. The charity is there to help everyone, including the hospital, so that the hospital will continue to be able to provide care to those who can't pay or can't pay quickly.

So by making others pay for their own care instead of passing the bill on to me still causes me to continue to pay for them? Right......

You can't make people pay for anything, when they have no money. That's why they'll go for the fine, instead of buying insurance.

Did the hospital send her a bill for $40,000 or not and did she not pay it? If not, then your original statement was mis-worded.

She never saw a bill. She contacted the hospital to make payment arrangements, and they told her it was already settled. She then asked how much the bill was, and they told her.

So I'm supposed to give EVERY detail in the plan?

What details have you given for yours? You've offered nothing other than a talking points memo on ideas that 'might encourage more people to buy insurance'.

Failure to address details in a constructive way is what got us Obamacare. It's that pesky little law of unintended consequences that our politicians are so skilled at ignoring.

Oh, and has your 'friend' decided to buy her own insurance or is she still riding high on other people's money?

Neither.

 

[Engineer]

She never saw a bill. She contacted the hospital to make payment arrangements, and they told her it was already settled. She then asked how much the bill was, and they told her.

I'm calling you out as a bold face liar on that one. You'll do nothing but lie to defend your deadbeat friend while blasting at the rest of us for pointing out that she is one of big reasons why healthcare is skyrocketing - people who don't pay.

Neither.

and she is still a big part of the problem but of course, you'll never see it that way. It's 'somebody else's fault as it could never be your friend's.

 

[sixone]

I'm calling you out as a bold face liar on that one. You'll do nothing but lie to defend your deadbeat friend while blasting at the rest of us for pointing out that she is one of big reasons why healthcare is skyrocketing - people who don't pay.



and she is still a big part of the problem but of course, you'll never see it that way. It's 'somebody else's fault as it could never be your friend's.

Sweetie, if you need to believe that, because it threatens your security in your own view, feel free.

Your opinion doesn't change the facts.

 

[marvdmartian]

Everything they promised is coming true:
1. you can keep your present health insurance. It will cost more, and you won't be able to afford it, but you CAN keep it!
2. people who couldn't get health insurance before will be able to get it now. How precisely did you expect that insurance to be paid for? Higher health premiums for healthy people, of course!

All this, and I'm sure the political contributions from health insurance companies to politicians has gone up too, since they're making a sh*tload more money! :awe:

Politicians win, working people lose, and insurance companies get fatter, all without fixing one damn thing that was wrong with healthcare! 🙄

 

[Engineer]

Your opinion doesn't change the facts.

and you haven't proven any either.

 

[sixone]

and you haven't proven any either.

You wouldn't believe it, if I did. So why bother?

 

[Engineer]

You wouldn't believe it, if I did. So why bother?

In other words, you don't have any so why bother?

 

[sixone]

In other words, you don't have any so why bother?

I don't need any. You could call your local hospital, and ask them what happens when an uninsured patient has a large bill.

If you really want to know, that is. If your made-up version is more comforting, then you won't make that call.

 

[woolfe9998]

That article specifically addresses ONLY emlaer-sponsored plans. It doesn't address individual plans, nor does it take into account the people who are going from an employer plan to an individual plan.

Cherry picking won't fly.

Intellectual dishonesty won't fly either. You didn't call out those who claimed rising health care costs based on alleged personal anecdotes or what they claimed to recall reading, but you DO call me for "cherry picking" when I site survey's indicating the lowest increase in a decade in the employer based market which is what, 80% of the total market?

I also note that neither you nor anyone else has cited data projecting rising costs in the individual market. What we do know so far is that HHS has released a report projecting significant cost reductions in that market based on limited geographical data. Might be biased or erroneous. Has been criticized from the right. However, the notion that "healthcare costs" are going up under the ACA becomes an assumed premise of a 6 page thread based on absolutely nothing at all, and no one including you has questioned this premise. If citing 2 surveys which cover most of the market won't do, certainly citing a single person's experience will due even less. Apparently your standards for academic rigor hinge on which side of the issue you're addressing. You can lecture me on "cherry picking" when you find some objectivity on the issue.

 

[sixone]

Intellectual dishonesty won't fly either. You didn't call out those who claimed rising health care costs based on alleged personal anecdotes or what they claimed to recall reading, but you DO call me for "cherry picking" when I site survey's indicating the lowest increase in a decade in the employer based market which is what, 80% of the total market?

I also note that neither you nor anyone else has cited data projecting rising costs in the individual market. What we do know so far is that HHS has released a report projecting significant cost reductions in that market based on limited geographical data. Might be biased or erroneous. Has been criticized from the right. However, the notion that "healthcare costs" are going up under the ACA becomes an assumed premise of a 6 page thread based on absolutely nothing at all, and no one including you has questioned this premise. You can lecture me on "cherry picking" when you find some objectivity on the issue.

You can call me out on what I haven't said, to deflect from the falsehood that you posted.

You responded to a post about "health care premiums", and now you want to divert to "health care costs". People who don't know the difference might buy it, I suppose.

Rising premiums in the individual market

 

[Jhhnn]

You can call me out on what I haven't said, to deflect from the falsehood that you posted.

You responded to a post about "health care premiums", and now you want to divert to "health care costs". People who don't know the difference might buy it, I suppose.

Rising premiums in the individual market

Heh. The Manhattan Institute. Like they don't have an axe to grind. When they release their actual data for other people to examine, they might have some credibility.

Obviously, they won't, because they have an axe to grind. In the rightwing-o-sphere, it doesn't have to be true to make a point they'll drool over. It just has to fit what they already believe.

 

[fskimospy]

You can call me out on what I haven't said, to deflect from the falsehood that you posted.

You responded to a post about "health care premiums", and now you want to divert to "health care costs". People who don't know the difference might buy it, I suppose.

Rising premiums in the individual market

That "study" is from an ultra right wing think tank and has already been called out for dishonesty in another thread. Why is it so hard for conservatives to find factual support for their arguments that don't come from obviously biased sources?

 

[sixone]

That "study" is from an ultra right wing think tank and has already been called out for dishonesty in another thread. Why is it so hard for conservatives to find factual support for their arguments that don't come from obviously biased sources?

Because the ultra-left wing a) doesn't have think tanks, and b) won't print facts that don't fit with their POV.