It's official. The ACA has completely screwed us.

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Jan 10, 2014 5:27 pm

Title says it all.

vision · Post by **vision** » Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:20 pm

Was at the doctor today. Didn't see any problems. Actually, everyone seemed rather satisfied.

flip · Post by **flip** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:08 am

Well, we ended up with crap compared to what we've seen for the last 10 years.

EDIT: All the ACA did was throw the burden on individuals, probably just to screw the pooch so they can pass single-payer. Is that good or bad? I don't know.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 1:43 am

flip wrote:All the ACA did was throw the burden on individuals...

But isn't that part of individual liberty and responsibility? Remember, this is Romneycare you are talking about.

flip · Post by **flip** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 1:55 am

You talk to me like im a republican or something. No, ideally there would be a free market, no monopolies and our elected, representative government in complete control of commerce. Barring that there is the need for safety nets, but only cause they a bunch a bastids.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:00 am

Being compelled to do something doesn’t count as liberty, or taking personal responsibility.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:52 am

Spidey wrote:Being compelled to do something doesn’t count as liberty, or taking personal responsibility.

What exactly are you being compelled to do again?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 7:23 am

vision wrote:
Spidey wrote:Being compelled to do something doesn’t count as liberty, or taking personal responsibility.
What exactly are you being compelled to do again?

Get insurance or be fined.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 7:52 am

what, Flip, is the exact problem? Also, was the new policy one you chose? If so, were your choices too limited? Trying to get at your issue. Here in Delaware, I had about 14 choices on the exchange, another 20 off the exchange(which were more expensive, on the whole). As for issues, I concur with Vision. I've had no issues, every provider we use takes the new policy, I have lower deductable and lower out-of-pocket at a very competetive rate.

flip · Post by **flip** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 1:24 pm

Well, it ends up about the same premium, but a lot more out of pocket expenses. $2000 deductible for one $4000.00 for all. The credits are a joke, especially if you really need them they may last a couple months, then everything starts to come out of your pocket. I'd much rather had just paid the 35 dollar visits and side-by-side comparison, this one is far inferior to last years and the 9 before that. They only offered 3 tiers, we went middle of the road.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:53 pm

woodchip wrote:Get insurance or be fined.

And that's a problem why? You already pay taxes. Just think if your insurance policy as a break on your taxes. And you'll be healthier. Win-win.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:04 pm

Problem or not…that’s not the point, if somebody gets raped and they enjoyed it…what’s the problem?

If I steal money from you, but you didn't need it, what's the big deal?

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:06 pm

vision wrote:You already pay taxes. Just think if your insurance policy as a break on your taxes.

But it doesn't work that way.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:06 pm

vision wrote:
woodchip wrote:Get insurance or be fined.
And that's a problem why? You already pay taxes. Just think if your insurance policy as a break on your taxes. And you'll be healthier. Win-win.

Lol! Is that how you reconcile it? You pretend creating the largest perpetual federal entitlement ever is going to be revenue neutral? So if it doesn't increase taxes then the benefits of the coverage can count as dividends?!?

Lol, you've fallen victim to some of slicks accounting propaganda perhaps.

If the cost isn't really net neutral then the benefits aren't really benefits. So unless flip lives in fantasy land he, and all the rest of us in the real world, are paying more now due to the ACA than we were beforehand.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:58 pm

Will Robinson wrote:If the cost isn't really net neutral then the benefits aren't really benefits.

Sure, assuming good health isn't a benefit. Some of us like to be healthy, and it is worth every penny.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 9:30 pm

vision wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:If the cost isn't really net neutral then the benefits aren't really benefits.
Sure, assuming good health isn't a benefit. Some of us like to be healthy, and it is worth every penny.

Well if it isn't an added benefit, because you do, in fact, have a new net expense, then it isn't a benefit in a fiscal sense it is merely a product/service you spent money on.

Secondly, for it to be worth every penny to you YOU had to decide what EVERY penny is worth to YOU.
The government isn't able to make that determination for ALL OF US. And the ACA is definitely designed to increase the cost to certain groups AND force them to make the purchase!

Someone who was uninsured, by choice, at age 21 because they decided it WASNT worth the the expense, to them, is now having to buy it and the price they are now FORCED to pay is now MORE than it was when they had the freedom to decide it WASNT worth it!

It funny that the same people who are so morally outraged at the thought of someone refusing to raise minimum wage, which affects less than 3% of the population is hell bent on reducing the net income of practically the whole population by a much larger margin. It kind of takes the merit out of their argument...

flip · Post by **flip** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:12 am

Well if it isn't an added benefit, because you do, in fact, have a new net expense, then it isn't a benefit in a fiscal sense it is merely a product/service you spent money on.

Right there. See, I kept an open mind. The results? My instincts were right, but here's the thing that stings. Being compelled to purchase. At this point, it probably makes sense for us to not have insurance (rarely go) and turn the premiums into liquid cash. I need an MRI? In 4 months I can get one, worst case and I don't care how brilliant a doctor is (also rare), you need testing to figure out what's wrong.Their only genius is to know which test. That was my whole concern with the ACA it has set the first and most dangerous of all precedents in this country. It will completely and entirely change her nature and spirit.

EDIT: Ok, so people like Vision will say, "don't pay it, just pay the penalty,fine." I ask, does that make me a criminal? It will eventually. It will create a spirit of rebellion when it becomes too burdensome.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 2:51 am

flip wrote:EDIT: Ok, so people like Vision will say, "don't pay it, just pay the penalty,fine." I ask, does that make me a criminal? It will eventually. It will create a spirit of rebellion when it becomes too burdensome.

Give me a break. You are a criminal if you don't pay the fine, not if you don't get insurance. There is not going to be a rebellion over the ACA because that is not the type of thing that causes rebellions. Food shortages and severe oppression do. Paying 10% more taxes doesn't count as severe oppression. Cant afford the big bad ACA? Just make more money. Take that advice you give to all the freeloading minorities and get a better job. It's easy right? Why are you so lazy you can't afford the ACA or your new premiums?

You all make me laugh. The whole thing is symptomatic of the horrible priorities Americans have. Money first, guns second, health last.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 8:14 am

To add to Vision's point of priorities, and reality: Flip, do really think that 'saving up' and maybe having enough for an unplanned MRI is intelligent health planning for you and yours?? Where do you stand when, say, you get in a bad accident and need critical care in a hospital for a few weeks? Got enough savings for that? That sort of thing is WHY you should have insurance.....not some diagnostic test. That sort of thing is how lots of your fellow Americans get into bad debt, and lots more of us pay higher prices to cover folks who can't pay the bill. Like vision states, it is priorities we are talking about here, and while some folks are harumphing over 'being forced' to do something they really should have had the personal responsibility to do, others who do realize the benefit are finally able to afford to get insurance who couldn't before(many of them couldn't buy insurance at any price, given pre-existings and the like).

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 8:46 am

On the "flip" side, what do you choose from if insurance is so damn expensive you have to cut back on other things.

Do you eat less ?
Do you find a cheaper place to live and run the risk the neighbors are less than savory?
Do you buy a older car and run the risk of it malfunctioning and thus lose time from work?
Do you tell the children at Christmas that thanks to Obama, Santa is not delivering presents to their house?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 8:51 am

woodchip wrote:On the "flip" side, what do you choose from if insurance is so damn expensive you have to cut back on other things.

shouldn't happen.......no one with such low income as to have to make those sorts of choices shouldn't be also eligible for expanded Medicaid coverage,which would be free. Anyone who ISN'T in line for subsidies should be finding room in the budget for health care costs. Hell, if they're giving ME 900 per month for the mere fact that I have a daughter, wife and 3 grandkids on my 'dependants' list and an income of 60K per year, NO ONE should be making the sort of goofy choices you cite, Woody. In fact, the last time I remember such choices being an issue in when there were severe gaps in Medicare coverage for pharmacy, and folks had to make such calls over medicine costs.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:00 am

I was referring to visions "At any cost" point of view

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:15 am

callmeslick wrote:T....
Where do you stand when, say, you get in a bad accident and need critical care in a hospital for a few weeks? Got enough savings for that? That sort of thing is WHY you should have insurance.....not some diagnostic test. That sort of thing is how lots of your fellow Americans get into bad debt, and lots more of us pay higher prices to cover folks who can't pay the bill. ....

" That sort of thing"?!?!

That sort of thing is largely the result of two different variations of GOVERNMENT intrusion/manipulation of the market!

Government, in bed with the insurance industry, dictates we can't buy insurance across state lines where competition would spur reductions in prices and states mandate we can't buy a coverage for the list we determine our needs to be without also including unwanted extra expense coverage like massage therapy, aroma therapy, maternity, etc, etc.

And government is dictating we have insurance that covers those diagnostics that you indict as part of the problem!
That is considered a feature of the ACA not something it saves us from! Preventative treatment reduces long term expense etc.

So get your rhetoric straightened out there slick. You are sounding half TeaParty half Obama. You are advocating for completely opposing strategies to cut expense of health care coverage!

Actually I think you just spout off any contrary notion that enters your brain that, on first glance, seems to counter someones complaint without really thinking it through to see if it jibes with reality, your previous position or even if it is viable at all!

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:13 am

callmeslick wrote:
woodchip wrote:On the "flip" side, what do you choose from if insurance is so damn expensive you have to cut back on other things.
shouldn't happen.......no one with such low income as to have to make those sorts of choices shouldn't be also eligible for expanded Medicaid coverage,which would be free. Anyone who ISN'T in line for subsidies should be finding room in the budget for health care costs. Hell, if they're giving ME 900 per month for the mere fact that I have a daughter, wife and 3 grandkids on my 'dependants' list and an income of 60K per year, NO ONE should be making the sort of goofy choices you cite, Woody. In fact, the last time I remember such choices being an issue in when there were severe gaps in Medicare coverage for pharmacy, and folks had to make such calls over medicine costs.

That's bullship, you act like there are only two tiers of income, rich and poor, the fact of the matter is...there are many people who have to make choices like that on a daily basis, without the added expense. (who don’t qualify for Medicaid)

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:20 am

callmeslick wrote:To add to Vision's point of priorities, and reality: Flip, do really think that 'saving up' and maybe having enough for an unplanned MRI is intelligent health planning for you and yours?? Where do you stand when, say, you get in a bad accident and need critical care in a hospital for a few weeks? Got enough savings for that? That sort of thing is WHY you should have insurance.....not some diagnostic test. That sort of thing is how lots of your fellow Americans get into bad debt, and lots more of us pay higher prices to cover folks who can't pay the bill. Like vision states, it is priorities we are talking about here, and while some folks are harumphing over 'being forced' to do something they really should have had the personal responsibility to do, others who do realize the benefit are finally able to afford to get insurance who couldn't before(many of them couldn't buy insurance at any price, given pre-existings and the like).

Proper health care pricing, savings and low or no interest loans could eliminate the need for insurance altogether. (along with some other basic things like help for the poor…etc)

But people perceive health care as something that needs to be socialized, and the costs shared by everyone…and that is simply a different philosophy, not an actual need.

CobGobbler · Post by **CobGobbler** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:25 pm

And yet the countries that have socialized medicine enjoy a far better system than the vast majority of Americans. My friend's son was born with some long named heart valve condition and he was unable to get insurance because of that. He now has insurance and can do things for his son. Because I'm not a selfish bastard like Will or woodchip, I have no problems with what the ACA is designed to do. I'm not a huge proponent of the legislation itself because I don't think it goes near far enough, but it's a very good start.

The last three Republican presidents did absolutely nothing to improve the healthcare industry. What the Democrats passed is not perfect, but it's better than the GOP alternative of simply "don't get sick if you're poor".

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:32 pm

Costs cannot be shared by everyone when everyone wants care no matter the cost. No matter how you look at any health system, some form of rationing has to be used to control costs, even in a socialized system. Obamacare is trying to keep costs down by dumping a lot of it on young healthy people. Where things will fail for the ACA is when those young healthy people decide it's too expensive to subsidize the old people, and decide to not sign up. I also believe our present system just plain rips people off, because they can get away with it.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:35 pm

Just a few more thoughts…

10% in taxes could easily be the difference between sending your kids to college or not.

As far as sharing costs, I do believe there are cases where people’s costs can be legitimately shared by all…

1. The poor
2. The disabled. (if your illness prevents you from working…you qualify)

Beyond that, everyone should be responsible for their own health care, this idea that joining a collective to share costs as a matter of personal responsibility seems a little strange to me. Why would it be my personal responsibility to join an overpriced system?

If there is a birthright to health care, it should be quality affordable health care, not overpriced care with the costs shared among everyone, your “birthright” should not include paying for someone else’s overpriced needs…unless it meets the above qualifications. (not the overpriced part)

The case I made about the 5% using 50% of the care…wouldn’t be a problem if an MRI didn’t cost a years salary.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:36 pm

CobGobbler wrote:And yet the countries that have socialized medicine enjoy a far better system than the vast majority of Americans.

So does that mean its the only possible solution?

vision · Post by **vision** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:40 pm

Spidey wrote:But people perceive health care as something that needs to be socialized, and the costs shared by everyone…and that is simply a different philosophy, not an actual need.

It is an actual need if you think having a great country means having a healthy country, which we do not have. There are clear long term economic benefits to good health. But then again just about everyone here is practically an anarchist and is afraid to do anything collectively other than stroke each other off on this forum. It's comical what a closed loop this place is. Out of all the other forums I visit and social networking sites exactly zero people complain about their insurance premiums. Even among my friends, whose incomes range from below the poverty like to stinking rich, exactly zero of them have mentioned problems with their health insurance -- except for one friend in Oklahoma. He told me that he was eligible for extended Medicare coverage but it wasn't offered in his state, and he also said he wouldn't take it if it was available because he has some stuck up principal he wants to adhere to. So basically, he's one of my stupider friends as opposed to the other, smarter ones who hold multiple degrees in law, engineering, and science.

But yeah, Romneycare is going to ruin us all. Sure. I'll start stocking canned food tomorrow.

Spidey wrote:So does that mean its the only possible solution?

We can sit around and do nothing about it for 20 more years if that's what you want. I'd rather not. As shitty as the ACA is, at least it is an attempt to fix things. Let's see what happens in a couple years.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:46 pm

Spidey wrote:The case I made about the 5% using 50% of the care…wouldn’t be a problem if an MRI didn’t cost a years salary.

Yep. And doctors will prescribe these tests like candy. Too bad they're not as cheap as candy.

And I've got a gripe about the prices of glasses FRAMES! How in the hell can a little piece of shaped metal cost so much? $500 dollars and up, for some of the designer frames, and $100 or more for some of the flimsy ones made in China.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:56 pm

vision wrote:We can sit around and do nothing about it for 20 more years if that's what you want. I'd rather not. As shitty as the ACA is, at least it is an attempt to fix things. Let's see what happens in a couple years.

I have never said anything about sitting around for 20 years doing nothing, if you are going to start using that tactic, I can put you right on my list of people not to bother with.

There are other possible systems…there was a time doctors made house calls and people were charged according to their means, now people are charged by what the public or some insurance company can afford.

Why are people so afraid to explore other ideas?

Damn I thought “My way or the Highway” was a Republican concept.

CobGobbler · Post by **CobGobbler** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 1:28 pm

Spidey wrote:
CobGobbler wrote:And yet the countries that have socialized medicine enjoy a far better system than the vast majority of Americans.
So does that mean its the only possible solution?

Yep. There is a reason why every first tier nation has some sort of this system. It works and it is the right thing to do. Any other system that places company profits over actual health is flawed and morally wrong.

flip · Post by **flip** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 1:42 pm

Let me put it this way. I started busting my butt when I was 15 on a framing crew. I put my wife through college and then when she went for her masters. We have worked hard. For the last 10 years, I had great insurance until now. That is reality.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 1:43 pm

I agree with this part…

CobGobbler wrote:Any other system that places company profits over actual health is flawed and morally wrong.

But our system is so fucked up it wouldn’t take much to improve over it. To believe socialist systems are the only way to go because they are better than ours…is like believing a Cadillac is the only real car because it’s better than a Hyundai.

flip · Post by **flip** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 2:23 pm

It's like turning bread into stone in my opinion. It doesn't fit with the rest of our ideals and if we had stuck with our original ideas we all could afford healthcare.

CobGobbler · Post by **CobGobbler** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 2:57 pm

In complete and total agreement with you Spidey about the system being totally messed up. Single payer with equal access is only true way to avoid these types of discussions. No one should be denied for care at any time, and if we didn't have a for-profit system, no denials would be made. I have no idea how they could effectively overhaul the system and destroy the trillion dollar insurance industry, but they need to make it happen ASAP.

flip, I lied about my age so I could start working when I was 15. I put myself through college and post-grad work...and I still believe the ACA is the right start. That's my reality. I've worked for everything I have but I still believe in doing what's right, even when that doesn't include just myself. If you think life is just about you, then move to some island where you can take care of just yourself. Societies do things for the collective good, the ACA is part of that. I'm sorry it hasn't worked out perfectly in your favor, but I don't think the Govt had self-righteous d-bags in mind when they designed the legislation.

The fact is we are laughed at when it comes to healthcare. We have amazing hospitals and facilities, but only the precious few actually get to use them.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 3:02 pm

If we had stuck to our original ideas, we would still be living in caves communicating with only grunts or gestures and hunting with wooden tools, so while it is accurate to say we could all afford what would pass for "healthcare" that way, it has no bearing in reality.

Socialized isn't the only system of healthcare, it is just the best one out of the observable modern systems in practice around the world.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 3:12 pm

I don’t recall anyone suggesting going back to bleeding people for infections, and yes socialized is the only example we can see…

People are saying it’s better than our system…well DUH! Anything would be better than our system, ACA included.

But, what if there were an even better way…

But hell…no one even want’s to imagine one. I guess building a truly great system would be too hard, better let the government do it, they’ll fix it up just great.

Because government does everything just awesome!

Have any of you wondered why a person with my health problems and no insurance would be against the ACA or more of the same?

flip · Post by **flip** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 3:23 pm

No one should be denied for care at any time, and if we didn't have a for-profit system, no denials would be made. I have no idea how they could effectively overhaul the system and destroy the trillion dollar insurance industry, but they need to make it happen ASAP.

I agree with that. In our current circumstances but here's the problem. They should correct problems and strengthen what exists. Make it produce after it's own kind so to say. Not completely destroy it or turn it into something else.