DescentBB

So sayeth Lord Obama way back when. Unfortunately he didn't have a clue as to how the real word works. Lets take a look at CA where the major insurance companies are pulling out of the state:

"Fifty-four percent of Californians expect to lose their coverage, according to an August poll."

Or we can look at other states like:

Missouri: Patients of the state’s largest hospital system — which spans 13 hospitals including the St. Louis Children’s Hospital — will not be covered by the largest insurer on Obamacare exchanges, Anthem BlueCross BlueShield. Anthem covers 79,000 patients in Missouri who may seek subsidies on Obamacare exchanges, but won’t be able to see any doctors in the BJC HealthCare system.

or

3) Connecticut: Aetna, the third largest insurer in the nation, won’t offer insurance on the Obamacare exchange in its own home state, where it was founded in 1850. The reason? “We believe the modification to the rates filed by Aetna will not allow us to collect enough premiums to cover the cost of the plans and meet the service expectations of our customers,” said Aetna spokesman Susan Millerick.

For other states:
http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/28/ten-s ... are-plans/

So I guess the second part of Hope & Change is going full bore while the first part lies languishing in the gutter of despair.

I repeat, I am about to save $2500 per year. Works for me, and I suspect its going to work for a LOT of people.

Good thing it’s going to work for the rich guy, it’s not going to work for me.

examples, please, and be specific(how much you pay in 2013, how much you pay for similar coverage in 2014). Thus far, I am the only one to do so. Everything else is guesswork, speculation, and frankly much of what I've read in the last month is pure fiction.

OK, slick, I'm now paying $224 a month for individual insurance, me. It just went up from $211 last year. I'm grandfathered in right now with a $7500 deductible (thank God I didn't change things a couple of years ago). Searching through the Oregon Health Insurance site, the cheapest Bronze plan looks really good, at $192 a month, UNTIL you factor in that this rate quote is for a 40 year old non-smoker! Now if I go to the proposed 2014 rates, THAT does include 3 age groups in a PDF list for the Eugene area. Since I'm 56, I have to look at the 60 year old column to get a somewhat close rate quote. $425 is the cheapest Bronze Plan in my area for a 60 year old non-smoker, and it's already offered by my present company! So will Obamacare save me money? NOPE! Do I qualify for subsidies? NOPE!

Here's the link for rate requests in Oregon. If you're an Oregonian, go through the form checking your circumstances and see what you get. This is the ONLY way to get a somewhat close rate quote, because Cover Oregon's main site will not be up and running with actual quotes until mid-October, at the earliest.

http://www.oregonhealthrates.org/

callmeslick wrote:examples, please, and be specific(how much you pay in 2013, how much you pay for similar coverage in 2014). Thus far, I am the only one to do so. Everything else is guesswork, speculation, and frankly much of what I've read in the last month is pure fiction.

Slick, this topic wasn't about how much you will pay, but if you will be able to keep the same plan that you had before...like Obama promised. As what I've linked show, a awful lot of people won't.

tunnelcat wrote:OK, slick, I'm now paying $224 a month for individual insurance, me. It just went up from $211 last year. I'm grandfathered in right now with a $7500 deductible (thank God I didn't change things a couple of years ago). Searching through the Oregon Health Insurance site, the cheapest Bronze plan looks really good, at $192 a month, UNTIL you factor in that this rate quote is for a 40 year old non-smoker! Now if I go to the proposed 2014 rates, THAT does include 3 age groups in a PDF list for the Eugene area. Since I'm 56, I have to look at the 60 year old column to get a somewhat close rate quote. $425 is the cheapest Bronze Plan in my area for a 60 year old non-smoker, and it's already offered by my present company! So will Obamacare save me money? NOPE! Do I qualify for subsidies? NOPE!

Here's the link for rate requests in Oregon. If you're an Oregonian, go through the form checking your circumstances and see what you get. This is the ONLY way to get a somewhat close rate quote, because Cover Oregon's main site will not be up and running with actual quotes until mid-October, at the earliest.

http://www.oregonhealthrates.org/

ok, we start at $425 vs. 224. You say you aren't eligible for subsidies. Are you certain? The income caps are pretty generous.

Edit: are you self-employed? Are you working for an employer that offers coverage now? I am a little unclear as to who is providing your present coverage. Not to be a pest, but it DOES matter.

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:examples, please, and be specific(how much you pay in 2013, how much you pay for similar coverage in 2014). Thus far, I am the only one to do so. Everything else is guesswork, speculation, and frankly much of what I've read in the last month is pure fiction.

Slick, this topic wasn't about how much you will pay, but if you will be able to keep the same plan that you had before...like Obama promised. As what I've linked show, a awful lot of people won't.

actually the vast majority WILL. If you have government plan, union coverage, corporate coverage, very little is changing, and certainly nothing past the annual movement between available plans that all such entities go through(for instance, when I worked for Quest Diagnostics, I was forced to drop 3 plans over the course of 26 years, just due to bargaining between HR and Insurers). Overall, your stats are just another bogus scare tactic. Watch and see whether this whole thing takes off, gets accepted and then responds over time to calls for change. Similar has happened to Social Security and Medicare, so this will be no different, I suspect.

callmeslick wrote:ok, we start at $425 vs. 224. You say you aren't eligible for subsidies. Are you certain? The income caps are pretty generous.

Edit: are you self-employed? Are you working for an employer that offers coverage now? I am a little unclear as to who is providing your present coverage. Not to be a pest, but it DOES matter.

Slick, we're both retired, unhealthy and getting old. My husband is probably going to die young. Our income comes from the stock market, bonds and company disability. Pretty good income that depends on the whims of politicians and the market, unfortunately. It's scary depending on that nest egg, because you never know when most of it will vanish because of the foibles of the market, or the government. We don't qualify for subsidies, period. I suppose if we lost our investments, our income would drop to a level that subsidies would kick in, but it wouldn't be a good exchange. I like the buffer we have between being comfortable and dirt poor, and being poorer would not be worth the subsidies. I'd rather self-insure, but the mandate says that I can't do that. At least my money would be going directly towards any treatments I wanted, not to the profits of an insurance company.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:examples, please, and be specific(how much you pay in 2013, how much you pay for similar coverage in 2014). Thus far, I am the only one to do so. Everything else is guesswork, speculation, and frankly much of what I've read in the last month is pure fiction.

Slick, this topic wasn't about how much you will pay, but if you will be able to keep the same plan that you had before...like Obama promised. As what I've linked show, a awful lot of people won't.

actually the vast majority WILL. If you have government plan, union coverage, corporate coverage, very little is changing, and certainly nothing past the annual movement between available plans that all such entities go through(for instance, when I worked for Quest Diagnostics, I was forced to drop 3 plans over the course of 26 years, just due to bargaining between HR and Insurers). Overall, your stats are just another bogus scare tactic. Watch and see whether this whole thing takes off, gets accepted and then responds over time to calls for change. Similar has happened to Social Security and Medicare, so this will be no different, I suspect.

I suggest you read up on "cadillac plans" like the unions have, look at the 40% excise tax over a certain threshold and tell me how this won't affect the rank and file when bargaining starts. Also tell me how happy all the people who are being reduced to part time status and lose their employer paid insurance are thanking Obama for this new and exciting lifestyle change.

woodchip wrote:I suggest you read up on "cadillac plans" like the unions have, look at the 40% excise tax over a certain threshold and tell me how this won't affect the rank and file when bargaining starts[/quote[
I, essentially have a 'Cadillac' plan, and I gave the numbers to your here.

.

Also tell me how happy all the people who are being reduced to part time status and lose their employer paid insurance are thanking Obama for this new and exciting lifestyle change.

another lie from the scaremongers. Percentage of part timers has actually dropped, slowly, since a peak in 2009.

woodchip wrote:I suggest you read up on "cadillac plans" like the unions have, look at the 40% excise tax over a certain threshold and tell me how this won't affect the rank and file when bargaining starts. Also tell me how happy all the people who are being reduced to part time status and lose their employer paid insurance are thanking Obama for this new and exciting lifestyle change.

Yup, the Cadillac Tax. Begins in 2018. Ouch. Big stick.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapotheca ... insurance/

But there is a big windfall for businesses. They can get rid of that expensive COBRA obligation.

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories ... anges.aspx

And companies ARE abandoning their private sponsored health coverage and throwing their employees over to the ACA.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/19/home- ... obamacare/

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/walgree ... 4B11187909

I still need to figure out exactly where I fit into all of this. I'm currently working only part-time, and making waaay below the poverty line per year, so I think I'd be eligible for Medicaid for the time being. (The last time I applied for medical assistance, I apparently had "too many resources" to qualify, which was a pretty fantastic joke if you happened to look at my account statements.) I should probably look this up sooner rather than later.

OK Slick. I was able to go through the Cover Oregon calculator today. It will still cost me more if I went with any plan on the exchange.

My present grandfathered plan has a $7500 deductible and costs $224 a month. Now, the cheapest Bronze plan offered by my present insurer through the ACA has a $5000 deductible and costs $360 a month. Understandable since the deductible is lower. But now to compare apples to apples. If I happened to have a grandfathered pre-ACA equivalent plan with the $5000 deductible, it still would have had a lower monthly cost of $285. All the ACA's exchange offered plans still cost more than what I'm paying now. The cheapest Bronze plan offered for an individual in my county in Oregon costs $306 through another company I've never heard of. No warm and fuzzies there either. No reason to jump on the exchange or endorse it.

so what you are essentially saying is that under the ACA, next year, your costs would have been essentially flat(accounting for premiums and out of pocket costs). When was the last year when THAT happened?

Lets just say that if I'd changed plans 2 years ago, I'd have lost my grandfathering status. I would've had to go through the new exchange this year and cough up $306 a month and hassle changing insurers, instead of the $224 I'm currently now paying, even though it's not a equivalent case. That's not flat at all in my book. And, I was paying $217 a month last year, so it went up staying were I was anyway. Sure, I've got a bigger deductible, but I want the cheapest monthly rate I can get. Besides, I can't even get a $7500 deductible plan through the ACA even if I wanted to. It isn't offered. So going through the exchange, I'd be stuck paying for more than I really want. So where's the savings? Will costs keep rising too? That's the question.

one of the core principles of the ACA is that rates will rise at far lower rates from year to year, and in some cases may drop. Time will tell. At least your experience and mine indicate that so far, such is the case. Now, as for how you determine what plan to get, that is your call(and your husband's). For myself, and my wife, I want the lowest deductable, and lowest cap on total out-of pocket I can find, because my wife has traditionally used healthcare a fair bit. I am looking into separate policies. Hers with the low deduct and low cap, me with higher, as I tend to go to the doctor twice a year. For both of us, pharmacy coverage is very critical as well.

on a related note, I found it hilarious, following the news cycles today(watching the grandkiddies for a few hours). First, right wing types were crowing about a few glitches on the ACA state exchanges. Then, as the day wore on, it became obvious that the issue was sheer VOLUME. In other words, the program that everyone hated had several million participants on Day 1.

Slick, I'm not going to even use the exchange this year. I'm sticking with my old plan. It's cheaper right now. But what will be the determining factor is if Obamacare can hold down costs and survive. That will tell it's fate. Personally, I don't see how the ACA is going to hold down costs on healthcare that has infinite demand with a large number of older people entering the system. Time will tell, if the Republicans don't nuke it first however.

tunnelcat wrote:Slick, I'm not going to even use the exchange this year. I'm sticking with my old plan.

but, but, Woody says you can't do that!!!

nice overview in(of all places) Fox's commentary section:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/ ... map=%5B%5D

callmeslick wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:Slick, I'm not going to even use the exchange this year. I'm sticking with my old plan.

but, but, Woody says you can't do that!!!

TC, could you keep your plan if your insurer pulled out of your state?

she doesn't know because she cant get on the website. Oregon is one of the states that is have major problems

callmeslick wrote:nice overview in(of all places) Fox's commentary section:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/ ... map=%5B%5D

And to counter your post:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisconove ... itiveness/

Note the one you harp about investing in infrastructure:

"Adverse Effect #3: Governments faced with higher health costs reduce investment in infrastructure and education."

CUDA wrote:she doesn't know because she cant get on the website. Oregon is one of the states that is have major problems

apparently, due to volume. What a shock.....the plan no one wants to participate in gets 10% of the eligible people logging on in the first 24 hours.

callmeslick wrote:

CUDA wrote:she doesn't know because she cant get on the website. Oregon is one of the states that is have major problems

apparently, due to volume. What a shock.....the plan no one wants to participate in gets 10% of the eligible people logging on in the first 24 hours.

And how many of those attempts are by repeat entry tries? Lets see, the govt had 3 years to set this up and the system crashes at the git go. I wonder how the rest of the scheme will work. And yeah, I'm like going to turn over my SS # and medical history to some dufus low wage person who is so stupid the handlers have to put in a operating manual that they shouldn't leave peoples sensitive info by a fax or copy machine. I wonder how long it will be before the hackers get into the system and start selling your info to interested parties.

woodchip wrote:Lets see, the govt had 3 years to set this up and the system crashes at the git go. I wonder how the rest of the scheme will work.

You should learn a little about Internet and and the problems of scalability. Ever been to the DMV? Why should this service be different than that? You want our government to take an already controversial service and spend exponentially larger sums of money to consider high volume influxes? There is no benefit to that.

woodchip wrote:And yeah, I'm like going to turn over my SS # and medical history to some dufus low wage person who is so stupid the handlers have to put in a operating manual that they shouldn't leave peoples sensitive info by a fax or copy machine. I wonder how long it will be before the hackers get into the system and start selling your info to interested parties.

Oh those terrible low wage workers, gosh! You know, policies are written into "operating manuals" not because people are stupid, but for legal reasons. Let's say someone did make a mistake and got fired for it. The worker could file a lawsuit saying "no one told me not to" and win. This is the government covering their arse and saving money. Also, pro tip: You can't hide your information from people who want to sell it, not from pro hackers and definitely not from the NSA. Chillax.

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:Slick, I'm not going to even use the exchange this year. I'm sticking with my old plan.

but, but, Woody says you can't do that!!!

TC, could you keep your plan if your insurer pulled out of your state?

Well, it is a local insurer, so they'll probably stick around. But yes, they'd probably dump me if they left the state. I'm more of the opinion that my rates will quickly rise to the ACA's quotes in a couple of years anyway, then I'll have to go shopping.

CUDA wrote:she doesn't know because she cant get on the website. Oregon is one of the states that is have major problems

Actually, I did get onto the website, twice, yesterday afternoon. That's how I got my quotes. It was a little slow though.

callmeslick wrote:

CUDA wrote:she doesn't know because she cant get on the website. Oregon is one of the states that is have major problems

apparently, due to volume. What a shock.....the plan no one wants to participate in gets 10% of the eligible people logging on in the first 24 hours.

Government “MANDATED” program, by and large American’s are law abiding people, and this in no way affirms this programs popularity. That will have to be seen in the long run.

Hell, I can imagine a great deal of the volume just being curiosity, I went on the site myself, and so did tc…neither one having any plans to sign up.

Spidey wrote:I can imagine a great deal of the volume just being curiosity...

I was among the "curiosity traffic" this morning. I will not be making any changes (family is on my employer-paid plan), but I went on the Colorado site this morning just to see. Premiums were about what I expected for my family - $400-500/mo for the "bronze" plans, and up.