Can anyone explain how Obamacare will change things for our family (self-employed, OOP payments)

[TranquilMind]

'GWOB' :

See, our deductible is only $1,200 per person and/or $2,400 for our family. Our premiums have increased by a whopping $5/month in the 4 1/2 years we have been here. We do have a HSA with the company matching our contributions up to a certain amount. I am a little ticked that I can no longer use my HSA funds to purchase my necessary allergy meds, but oh well.

That's great for your family. I'd be hopping with joy. Ours went from a few hundred to $4000 per person, $10,000 per family. It's a joke.

 

I just want to put it out there that some, perhaps even many, people are not suffering due to the AHA. And that statement in no way diminishes the suffering of people at the mercy of large corporations who refuse to provide adequate healthcare to their workers or greedy insurance companies.

 

 

And some of us have been clobbered financially. It's early days yet, so we shall see how it all shakes out. But anything the government controls has had ridiculous levels of bureaucracy and has not been very efficient, I've noted over the years. Not optimistic. But then I try to go more alternative anyway...it's what works (except for the rare, unmistakeable incident requiring surgery, like an appendix bursting).

[TranquilMind]

'GWOB' :

See, our deductible is only $1,200 per person and/or $2,400 for our family. Our premiums have increased by a whopping $5/month in the 4 1/2 years we have been here. We do have a HSA with the company matching our contributions up to a certain amount. I am a little ticked that I can no longer use my HSA funds to purchase my necessary allergy meds, but oh well.

That's great for your family. I'd be hopping with joy. Ours went from a few hundred to $4000 per person, $10,000 per family. It's a joke.

 

I just want to put it out there that some, perhaps even many, people are not suffering due to the AHA. And that statement in no way diminishes the suffering of people at the mercy of large corporations who refuse to provide adequate healthcare to their workers or greedy insurance companies.

 

 

And some of us have been clobbered financially. It's early days yet, so we shall see how it all shakes out. But anything the government controls has had ridiculous levels of bureaucracy and has not been very efficient, I've noted over the years. Not optimistic. But then I try to go more alternative anyway...it's what works (except for the rare, unmistakeable incident requiring surgery, like an appendix bursting).

[TranquilMind]

That's great for your family. I'd be hopping with joy. Ours went from a few hundred to $4000 per person, $10,000 per family. It's a joke.

 

And some of us have been clobbered financially. It's early days yet, so we shall see how it all shakes out. But anything the government controls has had ridiculous levels of bureaucracy and has not been very efficient, I've noted over the years. Not optimistic. But then I try to go more alternative anyway...it's what works (except for the rare, unmistakeable incident requiring surgery, like an appendix bursting). Only now, I will have Big Brother watching me. It's already started. I get mailings all the time (because we refused calls and emails, an option we still have, for the moment) demanding that I do this or that test by the insurance company. All of this information is being compiled on everyone and will now be available to the Government.

 

Goodbye, freedom to maintain my private information.

[A.Balaban]

Goodbye, freedom to maintain my private information.

 

:iagree: That is what scares me the most. Among the entire pile of rubbish, that is.

[GWOB]

 

That's great for your family. I'd be hopping with joy. Ours went from a few hundred to $4000 per person, $10,000 per family. It's a joke.

 

 

 

 

And some of us have been clobbered financially. It's early days yet, so we shall see how it all shakes out. But anything the government controls has had ridiculous levels of bureaucracy and has not been very efficient, I've noted over the years. Not optimistic. But then I try to go more alternative anyway...it's what works (except for the rare, unmistakeable incident requiring surgery, like an appendix bursting).

 

I am so sorry for what your family is experiencing. Really. I can only speak from personal experience. My experience with the AHA has been good, even though most of it has not been enacted. And that's the thing that many forget. Most parts of the AHA have not gone into effect. The rising insurance cost from which many are suffering are not actually due to the AHA. Those rising costs have everything to do with insurance companies and the refusal of major corporations to provide adequate healthcare to their employees. I'm not talking about small businesses with less than 200 workers. I'm talking about wealthy employers who refuse to give up their Lexus cars and vacations to Monaco to provide their workers, the ones who truly earn them those fancy cars and vacations, in order to perform a basic human decency. And I am in no way saying people who work hard do not deserve to reap the benefits of their hard work! But when you react, before a law even goes into effect, by premptively raising insurance rates? Well, I have a problem with that.

[scrappyhappymama]

DH is self-employed, no employees just works for himself. We pay about $1100 a month for pretty much catastrophic coverage. Very high deductible ($2500 a person and $7500 as a family) which we have never hit. It is very difficult for us to pay this.

 

Does anyone know how Obamacare might change things for us? Does one have to be uninsured to benefit? Should we 'go off' insurance (maybe to a faith based insurance) now so we can be covered under Obamacare? Will prices vary from state to state? (we're in Florida).

 

 

We are very similar to the OP's situation, so I am reading this thread with great interest. We currently pay high premiums for similar coverage (our deductibles are a little higher), plus contribute half the premiums again to our HSA, so that the medical expenses we do pay out are pre-tax. The premiums and HSA contributions combined are 14% of my husband's gross income. We are seriously reconsidering whether to continue this medical coverage, possibly switching to a faith based exchange, or purchasing the subsidized coverage when it is available.

 

We are self-insured also. I have heard/read that, if you already have insurance, this won't affect you much. But then I keep reading about insurance prices going up and companies cutting the number of employees or cutting employees hours so they are part-time to avoid having to provide insurance for them because they can't afford to provide what Obamacare says they must.. So, by the time we really see this implemented, there will likely be a lot more people without insurance.

 

 

Here is how Obamacare has affected us. My husband does the exact same kind of job now that he has done for the last ten years. Only now, instead of being a hospital employee, he is an "independent contractor"- self employed. Which means they no longer pay for any of our benefits, including health care coverage. More and more businesses will be hiring folks this way to avoid having to pay the increasing costs of coverage. My husband's employer made no secret that this is directly related to the coming changes. So, he does the same work with fewer benefits and is considered self employed. In the past, self employment was an opportunity to start and grow a business, with the hope that it would become profitable in the future and make the early sacrifices like giving up employer benefits worthwhile. Now, non-optional "self employment" is code for No Benefits, with no opportunity to grow your fake business.

 

This is not a new problem; when I was working I worked as a benefits administrator and every year insurance premiums for the companies increased and level of coverage decreased and somehow we had to make it palatable to our employees and still seem like a "benefit." In the last 20 years, employer funded pension plans have gone the way of the dodo bird, a benefit that was completely expected by previous generations and considered inviolable. Companies, including the one I worked for, paid large sums of money now to get out of these plans, foreseeing the cash pit they would become. In the same way, it is very possible that the AHA will influence more businesses to phase out traditional employer-subsidized medical benefits.

 

My dad recently lost his job of 33 years. His employers closed down their company, citing Obamacare as the primary reason, because after several years of losing money, their profits were already razor thin. Dad was fortunate to find another job, but at reduced pay, longer hours, AND... you guessed it, no medical benefits.

 

Our insurance went up $3 per pay period. Not exactly gloom and doom. That's typically the amount it increases.

 

 

Our employer-subsidized insurance premiums went from $300 a month to $0, which was awesome. Well, except for the uninsured part.

 

Yep, we lose too. We pay very little, like laughably little in premiums with a max out of pocket of $5000, but the calculator says we would pay over $700 a month for premiums and over $8000 max. We cannot afford that. :(

 

 

I think your situation actually hits at the crux of the changes. You currently pay relatively low premiums, but AHA will raise your premiums and OOP expense to much higher levels. Ironically, by the calculators posted, AHA would *drop* my premiums and OOP expenses to approximately the levels you quote above (we currently pay over $10k a year in premiums alone, before our OOP expenses). So, hooray me, right?

 

Overall, I think the act is misnamed. In the short term, it will be more affordable for some and less affordable for others. So far, from what I've read here and elsewhere, it will primarily "hurt" those who currently have good employer medical coverage. And it will benefit those of us who pay for self coverage or are not covered at all. And as more and more folks lose employer coverage, more and more will be funneled into the subsidized coverage. (I know my family and my parent's experiences are anecdotal, but I don't think it is coincidental that for our entire adult lives both they and we have had employer medical, and now in the last year, we don't). Honestly, I don't think this act is intended to be a fix, but rather a stepping stone to a single payer system. I know some states are saber rattling about not participating or establishing exchanges, but I believe that the powers that be aren't really bothered. It will just shorten the time frame for their citizens to enroll in the federally established plans.

 

I am still not sure how I feel about this program yet. Due to the great thread on here about why people love universal healthcare, I have changed some of my opinions. Obviously this is not anywhere near that yet. Right now we get insurance through DH work. I put our info in that calculator and if we had to choose that option it would be $355 more a month than we are paying now. I don't see how that helps us at all. It would make things very tight. However, I know a couple without insurance and it would benefit them. So confusing.

 

 

I'm torn too. Our family will possibly personally benefit. But I can't really rejoice in that knowing that many other families will not, ykwim? Plus, I will admit to concerns about health care quality and access.

 

 

It does not require anyone to change their existing plans.

 

 

 

Not per se, but if the employer sponsored plans go away, it has the same effect.

 

However, I have no problems paying a little extra in taxes (though we do not make enough to have our tax rate increased) so some other 16yo kid does not have to watch her "pre-existing condition" mom almost bleed out on an ER floor.

 

 

:grouphug: That is tragic. I am so sorry.

 

I don't know why so many people are assuming that they won't be able to afford insurance once everything kicks in. You be able to participate in the insurance exchanges (intended to bring down the cost of insurance for many). Families making up to 400% of the poverty line will qualify for a tax benefit, which will help pay for insurance. http://www.healthcar...ml#event41-pane Right now, the federal poverty line calculator tells me that a family of 5 can bring in $9,000/month and be just squeaking under 400% of the poverty line. http://www.safetyweb.org/fpl.php. Why do so many people believe that these things won't apply yo them and they still won't be able to afford it?

 

 

Well for me, I am simply skeptical that things will all shake out for the good for us in the end. There are so many variables and unknowns at this time that one cannot really know for sure. Right now, the calculators show our family will benefit from a subsidy and will pay less in premiums. But, what will the coverage be like? What will we pay in co-pays, deductibles, and other OOP expenses? Since we are "self employed" our current health insurance premiums are tax deductible as well as our HSA contributions. If HSAs are eliminated and only the unsubsidized portions (or none) of our premiums remain deductible, our AGI will increase substantially, cutting our subsidy eligibility and probably not improving our situation overall. Since we currently struggle with paying the premiums and pretty much all of our medical expenses as well due to high deductibles, paying a similar amount for (completely unknown) coverage doesn't fill me with optimism.

 

Edited: to fix midnight-posting, NAK errors. If I've missed some more, please excuse.

[Mrs Mungo]

Again, you cannot say something is "reality" when it has not come to pass. Whether or not things will work out for better or worse is a matter of supposition, not fact.

 

I'm on my way out the door, but my understanding is that HSAs are not being eliminated, merely limited.

[TXMomof4]

Several months ago there was a thread about what medical care was being because because it couldnt be afforded. Anyone remember that? What struck me was that a LOT of people had insurance but couldn't afford the copays/deductibles. Does this fix.that in anyway? Even if the gov is subsidizing the premiums that doesn't cover the $25 or $50 copays or the $10,000 deductible.

 

[Murphy101]

Aimee paints a familiar picture for us too. Almost everyone in dh's field was an employee 6 years ago. Now almost none are. They are "contractors" which is lingo for getting paid slightly more and getting absolutely nothing else. No benefits at all. You want a vacation? That's what the space between contracts is called. Aka unemployment. And many times the contracts are training in India or south America to do the jobs.

 

And Medicaid/Medicare is awful! I cannot believe people think it is an example of good healthcare. I shudder to think of being on it and I sure don't want to see them expanded as the single payer option for everyone. I don't know anyone on either that I would say is getting quality care. That's presuming they get any care. My dad has to drive 2 hours to find a dr that can't see him for months. So does my sister. Neither live in the boonies either. Seriously. It scares the poo out of me to imagine everyone having to be on those programs some day. And they are not free either. My elderly family is paying a bloody fortune for the medicines and such. And so little is covered that they have to pay significant or entire portions OOP for outside of benefits care.

[mlbuchina]

With the Affordable Health Care Act, they must pay out 80% of what they take in from premiums. Of course they'll remain profitable, they are businesses. They'd have no reason to exist as private entities if they were not allowed to make a profit. This section of the law keeps the percentage of profit "in check".

 

That statement disturbs me on so many levels. And who is it that will determine what an "acceptable" level of profit will be? Have we degraded as a country so much that we believe it is fine for the government to pass a law telling me how successful I may be?

 

This will not fix all the healthcare problems in our country, but we are moving in the right direction. When all the changes go into effect and everyone calms down, I do think things will be better. Perhaps some would consider me naive for thinking that way. That's fine. I just want to put it out there that some, perhaps even many, people are not suffering due to the AHA. And that statement in no way diminishes the suffering of people at the mercy of large corporations who refuse to provide adequate healthcare to their workers or greedy insurance companies.

 

If they aren't doctors, why would it be their job to provide adequate healthcare? I think you are talking about health insurance. I'm still trying to figure out when it became an employer's responsibility to make sure the employees could see a doctor. Is that not your (general "you") own responsibility to make sure that you maintain your own health? I am not talking about the cost of such, just addressing who is ultimately responsible for the keeping and care of you. And, really, "at the mercy of"? Please, if you don't like who you work for, go work for someone else.

 

 

I am so sorry for what your family is experiencing. Really. I can only speak from personal experience. My experience with the AHA has been good, even though most of it has not been enacted. And that's the thing that many forget. Most parts of the AHA have not gone into effect. The rising insurance cost from which many are suffering are not actually due to the AHA. Those rising costs have everything to do with insurance companies and the refusal of major corporations to provide adequate healthcare to their employees. I'm not talking about small businesses with less than 200 workers. I'm talking about wealthy employers who refuse to give up their Lexus cars and vacations to Monaco to provide their workers, the ones who truly earn them those fancy cars and vacations, in order to perform a basic human decency. And I am in no way saying people who work hard do not deserve to reap the benefits of their hard work!(except that is exactly what you just said) But when you react, before a law even goes into effect, by premptively raising insurance rates? Well, I have a problem with that.

 

Why does the small business get a break from having to provide health insurance for their employees? Because they don't make as much profit as the major corporation? This comes down, again, to who you believe is responsible for taking care of you. All of this is just class warfare rhetoric. We do not have "classes" in the United States. If you are born poor, you can die a millionaire. If you are born a millionaire, you can die poorer than dirt. Within your lifetime, you can move from being poor to being rich several times! We have that freedom. I truly believe we should go to a single-payer program. The individual is the single payer responsible for themselves.

[QueenCat]

 

 

That statement disturbs me on so many levels. And who is it that will determine what an "acceptable" level of profit will be? Have we degraded as a country so much that we believe it is fine for the government to pass a law telling me how successful I may be?

 

 

 

If they aren't doctors, why would it be their job to provide adequate healthcare? I think you are talking about health insurance. I'm still trying to figure out when it became an employer's responsibility to make sure the employees could see a doctor. Is that not your (general "you") own responsibility to make sure that you maintain your own health? I am not talking about the cost of such, just addressing who is ultimately responsible for the keeping and care of you. And, really, "at the mercy of"? Please, if you don't like who you work for, go work for someone else.

 

 

 

 

Why does the small business get a break from having to provide health insurance for their employees? Because they don't make as much profit as the major corporation? This comes down, again, to who you believe is responsible for taking care of you. All of this is just class warfare rhetoric. We do not have "classes" in the United States. If you are born poor, you can die a millionaire. If you are born a millionaire, you can die poorer than dirt. Within your lifetime, you can move from being poor to being rich several times! We have that freedom. I truly believe we should go to a single-payer program. The individual is the single payer responsible for themselves.

 

[QueenCat]

Ugh... Didn't mean to just post a quote. First time on the new boards from my phone.

 

The percentage is there to keep from price gouging consumers for something they need. Some are already sering that benefit visa refunds. Others should see it over the next few years as premiums will level out & even decrease for some.

[misty.warden]

That statement disturbs me on so many levels. And who is it that will determine what an "acceptable" level of profit will be? Have we degraded as a country so much that we believe it is fine for the government to pass a law telling me how successful I may be?

 

If you(general) own an insurance company and raise rates so that they are unaffordable for the majority of customers in your area to ensure that your business is profitable when lowering them would allow more people to buy your product and still allow a (maybe smaller?) profit, you don't see a problem? It's not about limiting your success, it's about making healthcare affordable. Which is why I'm skeptical AHA will actually do that since there's nothing as of yet requiring insurance companies to limit how expensive their plans actually are.

 

If they aren't doctors, why would it be their job to provide adequate healthcare? I think you are talking about health insurance. I'm still trying to figure out when it became an employer's responsibility to make sure the employees could see a doctor. Is that not your (general "you") own responsibility to make sure that you maintain your own health? I am not talking about the cost of such, just addressing who is ultimately responsible for the keeping and care of you. And, really, "at the mercy of"? Please, if you don't like who you work for, go work for someone else.

 

Employers are not responsible for making sure their employees see a doctor, they are responsible to provide insurance that is affordable and accepted by doctors in the area (i.e. actually usable). It is ludicrous to think we're saying your boss should be the one telling you when you should see a doctor or maintain one's own health, that's not what anyone has said.

 

I'm glad you have the option to change careers at any given point if you're dissatisfied with your job. Not everyone can afford to be unemployed while searching, some rely on the meager benefits they have to support a family and cannot afford time off to re-train for a new career that may or may not have a job opening in their area, and relocation can also limit career transition. Your last statement is unimaginably offensive. Please show me the vast pool of employers providing affordable insurance in every locality that we can all change to work for them. You seem to have an inside track none of us have heard of.

 

 

Why does the small business get a break from having to provide health insurance for their employees? Because they don't make as much profit as the major corporation? This comes down, again, to who you believe is responsible for taking care of you. All of this is just class warfare rhetoric. We do not have "classes" in the United States. If you are born poor, you can die a millionaire. If you are born a millionaire, you can die poorer than dirt. Within your lifetime, you can move from being poor to being rich several times! We have that freedom. I truly believe we should go to a single-payer program. The individual is the single payer responsible for themselves.

 

 

Small businesses get a break (from my understanding) because they are small and difficult to make any profit at all. Yes we have class mobility these days, however that does not mean that people are able to change their circumstances as easily as you seem to think. Freedom to do something does not mean it's guaranteed to happen for anyone. ETA Does your last statement mean we should all have no insurance and pay OOP for all care?

[CAMom]

Again, you cannot say something is "reality" when it has not come to pass. Whether or not things will work out for better or worse is a matter of supposition, not fact.

 

I'm on my way out the door, but my understanding is that HSAs are not being eliminated, merely limited.

 

 

I think that's a good point and swings both ways. Just as folks shouldn't be overly pessimistic, maybe the champions of the AHA shouldn't be so overly optimistic until they see how it actually plays out? :)

[CAMom]

For those of you who have been impacted by becoming self-employed independent contractors, you may want to check the laws in your state.

 

For some, if you work the majority of your hours for a certain company and that company basically controls your schedule, it is not legal for them to call you an independent contractor because you're really not. You're an employee. We've had to deal with this as small business owners who can't always afford to hire a full time employee and make use of independent contractors.

[texasmama]

^{Following this topic with great interest. I am a part-time employee with no benefits - not a contractor but an employee.}

 

^{My husband is a self-employed small business owner with no employees, just sub contractors. He and I are both "on the payroll" of his business.}

 

^{We purchase limited benefit, high deductible health insurance. We have only had affordable, good benefits health insurance during about 3 years of the past 15. High cost, low benefit insurance has been our norm.}

 

^{The income of the business varies a great deal from year to year.}

 

^{So far, the only impact we have felt of the ACA is that my youngest dd's clubfoot congenital birth defect was not able to be excluded. Previously, it was excluded (which is very satisfactory to us, since her treatment is completed). Due to the ACA, the insurance company could not exclude this condition from her coverage, but they attempted to rate her up, adding $500 a month to the cost of our premiums. After much back and forth and a letter from her orthopedic specialist, she was only rated up an extra $100 a month. So now we pay $1200 extra a year for a condition that doesn't need treatment which is not legally able to be excluded, as a direct result of the ACA.}

[armymomma]

I am coming to this very late. DH is retiring from the Army next summer. He has a new job lined up with good health insurance. I understand we are going to be taxed 40% on that health insurance benefit. yikes. It will be cheaper just to decline it and continue to go with Tricare (military) insurance. I need to read more about all this.

 

 

 

[armymomma]

I am coming to this very late. DH is retiring from the Army next summer. He has a new job lined up with good health insurance. I understand we are going to be taxed 40% on that health insurance benefit. yikes. It will be cheaper just to decline it and continue to go with Tricare (military) insurance. I need to read more about all this.

 

 

 

[OrdinaryTime]

Okay, I just have to step in and say it is ACA (or PPACA if you want to get technical), not AHA. Somewhere in the thread we must have had a typo, but now it is taking on a life of its own.

[nmoira]

He has a new job lined up with good health insurance. I understand we are going to be taxed 40% on that health insurance benefit. yikes.

 

If you're talking about the tax on Cadillac Plans, that doesn't go into effect until 2018 and is assessed only on the plan value over the cutoff for determining what is "Cadillac" and what isn't ($27,500 for a family, $10,200 for an individual -- not including dental and vision premium components). So if the medical component of the plan value is $30,000 for a family, the 40% tax would be assessed on $2,500, not the entire $30,000.

[misty.warden]

Several people have raised multiple objections to what exactly we call this, OP said Obamacare specifically and we all know what this post is about whether or not we're using the exact acronym specified in the act itself. Please can we stop derailing to talk about what to call it? That's not the issue.

[idnib]

Right now we pay half of our premium and DH's employer pays the other half. If I look at the full premium (both halves) and I compare it to the calculator posted earlier, our total premium will drop by around $600/month.

 

Although Kaiser Permanente has its drawbacks, one of the main benefits is that they both are the insurance company and the medical provider. The have their own clinics, offices, hospitals, etc. That means that when you buy KP insurance, all of your doctors take your insurance. I wonder if this model should be expanded as a way to mitigate paying for insurance that doctors don't accept.

[misty.warden]

Researching the provisions of the Affordable Healthcare for America Act would also state that it wasn't passed.

[mlbuchina]

I am coming to this very late. DH is retiring from the Army next summer. He has a new job lined up with good health insurance. I understand we are going to be taxed 40% on that health insurance benefit. yikes. It will be cheaper just to decline it and continue to go with Tricare (military) insurance. I need to read more about all this.

 

I've been wondering if we would even still have Tricare available. My dh retires in two years, and he has started looking for a new job. Trying to find one that pays comparably is proving to be difficult.

[OrdinaryTime]

Several people have raised multiple objections to what exactly we call this, OP said Obamacare specifically and we all know what this post is about whether or not we're using the exact acronym specified in the act itself. Please can we stop derailing to talk about what to call it? That's not the issue.

 

 

I don't have problem with Obamacare. I think it is a nationally recognized name for the legislation, where one likes it or not. (Kind of like the Bush Tax cuts being short for the EGTRRA and JGTRRA. That would be a mouthful!!) No one is calling this legislation AHA, though, and as a board, I think it makes us all look uninformed to continuing using an incorrect acronym, though I'm sure it was an innocent mistake.

[TranquilMind]

Scrappyhappymama:

 

 

Here is how Obamacare has affected us. My husband does the exact same kind of job now that he has done for the last ten years. Only now, instead of being a hospital employee, he is an "independent contractor"- self employed. Which means they no longer pay for any of our benefits, including health care coverage. More and more businesses will be hiring folks this way to avoid having to pay the increasing costs of coverage. My husband's employer made no secret that this is directly related to the coming changes. So, he does the same work with fewer benefits and is considered self employed. In the past, self employment was an opportunity to start and grow a business, with the hope that it would become profitable in the future and make the early sacrifices like giving up employer benefits worthwhile. Now, non-optional "self employment" is code for No Benefits, with no opportunity to grow your fake business.

 

 

So, so true. This is exactly what is happening everywhere to people in the trenches. They are losing what they had, and others think they will be gaining something they didn't have. What will happen is exactly what has happened: a few will benefit and most middle class working people will be heavily penalized.

 

 

This is not a new problem; when I was working I worked as a benefits administrator and every year insurance premiums for the companies increased and level of coverage decreased and somehow we had to make it palatable to our employees and still seem like a "benefit."

This is so funny that you say this. Every year, we read this crap coming our direction from the insurance company which ALWAYS reduces benefits (or benefits that matter - as a woman in my mid-fifties, I really don't care about birth coverage!) Every year, they take a disastrous financial negative and present it as a positive, and we laugh while we are reading it (attorneys...we know what we are reading).

 

Hey, I've been in real estate in various capacities for a couple of decades, and my brother has worked in sales all his life. We KNOW how to word a negative as a positive. For example, a neighbor was giving me her house-selling spiel, walking me through and presenting what she thought the positive points were. I asked questions. It's been a long time, so I don't remember them all, but one I distinctly remember...I asked her if the fireplace was a real one. She said, "No, it's fake. It doesnt' work". So, I corrected her, saying, "No, it's a beautiful decorative feature...don't you love the carved mantel?"

 

That's what they do on the "benefits" presentation also, in person, in emails and in brochures. Present a non-benefit as a real benefit.

 

In the last 20 years, employer funded pension plans have gone the way of the dodo bird, a benefit that was completely expected by previous generations and considered inviolable. Companies, including the one I worked for, paid large sums of money now to get out of these plans, foreseeing the cash pit they would become. In the same way, it is very possible that the AHA will influence more businesses to phase out traditional employer-subsidized medical benefits.

 

 

Exactly. This is a very sad development for the boomers who are retiring now. They will not live as well as their parents, because pensions were phased out in favor of the "benefit" they presented as "defined benefit contributions. YOU control your savings for retirement!" Yeah, right. Because the stock market never takes a dive, and people never have emergencies that deplete funds.

 

My dad recently lost his job of 33 years. His employers closed down their company, citing Obamacare as the primary reason, because after several years of losing money, their profits were already razor thin. Dad was fortunate to find another job, but at reduced pay, longer hours, AND... you guessed it, no medical benefits.

 

Yes, I guessed it. I'm also guessing your Dad is a senior citizen, and is just at the time in life where medical benefits might come in handy.

 

 

 

Our employer-subsidized insurance premiums went from $300 a month to $0, which was awesome. Well, except for the uninsured part.

 

 

:glare: Yeah, that minor problem!

 

 

 

I think your situation actually hits at the crux of the changes. You currently pay relatively low premiums, but AHA will raise your premiums and OOP expense to much higher levels. Ironically, by the calculators posted, AHA would *drop* my premiums and OOP expenses to approximately the levels you quote above (we currently pay over $10k a year in premiums alone, before our OOP expenses). So, hooray me, right?

 

 

Yep, while I am glad it will work for you, I can't help but think of a couple of quotes that seem apropos here:

 

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul. – George Bernard Shaw

 

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money. – G. Gordon Liddy

 

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. – P.J. O'R

 

When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. – P.J. O'Rourke

 

A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away. – Barry Goldwater (1964)

 

The government is good at one thing. It knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say, "See if it weren't for the government, you wouldn't be able to walk". – Harry Browne

 

No matter how disastrously some policy has turned out, anyone who criticizes it can expect to hear: "But what would you replace it with?" When you put out a fire, what do you replace it with? – Thomas Sowell

 

The New Deal began, like the Salvation Army, by promising to save humanity. It ended, again like the Salvation Army, by running flop-houses and disturbing the peace. – H. L. Mencken

 

Sorry, I got carried away. Such a great site of quotes here:http://www.lpboulder.org/quotes/index.html

 

And don't EVEN get me started on Roosevelt and his solemn promise that Social Security Numbers would NEVER be permitted to be used as ID or to track you. We see how that has worked out, and everyone knows that the SSN's were used to round up the Japanese in WWII and put them in concentration camps. So yeah, when you start talking to me about how the government is going to do something for us that we can't do for ourselves, this kind of stuff is what I am thinking.

 

I'd rather have Apple or Microsoft set up the health care system than the government.

 

 

Overall, I think the act is misnamed.

 

:smilielol5: You think?

 

In the short term, it will be more affordable for some and less affordable for others. So far, from what I've read here and elsewhere, it will primarily "hurt" those who currently have good employer medical coverage. And it will benefit those of us who pay for self coverage or are not covered at all. And as more and more folks lose employer coverage, more and more will be funneled into the subsidized coverage. (I know my family and my parent's experiences are anecdotal, but I don't think it is coincidental that for our entire adult lives both they and we have had employer medical, and now in the last year, we don't). Honestly, I don't think this act is intended to be a fix, but rather a stepping stone to a single payer system. I know some states are saber rattling about not participating or establishing exchanges, but I believe that the powers that be aren't really bothered. It will just shorten the time frame for their citizens to enroll in the federally established plans.

 

Yes, and then government will literally be tracking us cradle to grave.

 

 

 

I'm torn too. Our family will possibly personally benefit. But I can't really rejoice in that knowing that many other families will not, ykwim? Plus, I will admit to concerns about health care quality and access.

 

 

 

 

 

Yep.

 

 

 

 

 

Well for me, I am simply skeptical that things will all shake out for the good for us in the end. There are so many variables and unknowns at this time that one cannot really know for sure. Right now, the calculators show our family will benefit from a subsidy and will pay less in premiums. But, what will the coverage be like? What will we pay in co-pays, deductibles, and other OOP expenses? Since we are "self employed" our current health insurance premiums are tax deductible as well as our HSA contributions. If HSAs are eliminated and only the unsubsidized portions (or none) of our premiums remain deductible, our AGI will increase substantially, cutting our subsidy eligibility and probably not improving our situation overall. Since we currently struggle with paying the premiums and pretty much all of our medical expenses as well due to high deductibles, paying a similar amount for (completely unknown) coverage doesn't fill me with optimism

 

Me either, but you aren't supposed to examine it too closely. You have to trust people like Pelosi when she says, "You will have to pass it to see what is in it." (SHE got elected, seriously?) No, thanks. That's not how I conduct business.

[TranquilMind]

Aimee paints a familiar picture for us too. Almost everyone in dh's field was an employee 6 years ago. Now almost none are. They are "contractors" which is lingo for getting paid slightly more and getting absolutely nothing else. No benefits at all. You want a vacation? That's what the space between contracts is called. Aka unemployment. And many times the contracts are training in India or south America to do the jobs.

 

And Medicaid/Medicare is awful! I cannot believe people think it is an example of good healthcare. I shudder to think of being on it and I sure don't want to see them expanded as the single payer option for everyone. I don't know anyone on either that I would say is getting quality care. That's presuming they get any care. My dad has to drive 2 hours to find a dr that can't see him for months. So does my sister. Neither live in the boonies either. Seriously. It scares the poo out of me to imagine everyone having to be on those programs some day. And they are not free either. My elderly family is paying a bloody fortune for the medicines and such. And so little is covered that they have to pay significant or entire portions OOP for outside of benefits care.

 

 

So, so true. Medicare doesn't even resemble what it was just 10 years ago.

[Murphy101]

I'd rather have Apple or Microsoft set up the health care system

 

 

Oh please for the love of all that's holy, let it be Apple over Microsoft! I shudder to think of the constant system crashes and losses if it were Microsoft!

[TranquilMind]

Oh please for the love of all that's holy, let it be Apple over Microsoft! I shudder to think of the constant system crashes and losses if it were Microsoft!

 

 

Ok, works for me! At least Apple knows how to give consumers what they want at a price they will pay. That's more than I can say for governmental programs.

[FaithManor]

Sorry, I can't stomach Apple or Microsoft! But, I'm really fond of the Teaching Company/Great Courses! Their products are just grand. Let's give them the job! :smilielol5:

 

At any rate, I am very, very concerned that many people will be in our boat. We have insurance that hypothetically pays out a grand amount, but in reality the patient is hard pressed to find anyone who accepts it which means access to care will not improve making it a no-win for most people.

 

Faith

[butterflymommy]

There is no doubt that it is not universal health care, that isn't opinion, that is fact. But, will it move us toward a single payer system? Maybe.

 

 

Someone I know joked that it's like requiring homeless people to buy homes, to solve homelessness.

[Frances]

For those of you who have been impacted by becoming self-employed independent contractors, you may want to check the laws in your state.

 

For some, if you work the majority of your hours for a certain company and that company basically controls your schedule, it is not legal for them to call you an independent contractor because you're really not. You're an employee. We've had to deal with this as small business owners who can't always afford to hire a full time employee and make use of independent contractors.

 

 

I agree. Among other issues, both the self-employed independent contractor and the "employer" can end up with tax problems if your state independent contractor laws are not being followed.

[cathmom]

Several months ago there was a thread about what medical care was being because because it couldnt be afforded. Anyone remember that? What struck me was that a LOT of people had insurance but couldn't afford the copays/deductibles. Does this fix.that in anyway? Even if the gov is subsidizing the premiums that doesn't cover the $25 or $50 copays or the $10,000 deductible.

 

 

This has been our problem for the last several years, since we've had a lot of medical bills. They are piling up, despite the fact that we have decent insurance, because we don't have enough money to pay both our premium and the bills! And somehow, hardly any of it counts towards the deductible! I have no idea how sick we'd have to be to actually meet our deductible! Oh, and we just got our annual "holiday greeting" from BCBS telling us our premium is going up another $30 a month in January.

 

And, yes, I remember that incredible thread. Having health insurance does NOT solve the problem.

[Georgiana Daniels]

Today our realtor told us that according to their company's lawyer, once the health care bill is fully enacted it's going to have a negative impact on real estate. I didn't internalize all the details she gave me about why, but something about an extra tax for sellers on top of closing fees and the inability of people to sell their own homes without blah blah. LOL, I wish I could remember everything she said.

 

Anyhow, I don't have a link, but she really pressed the point that there are items in the health care bill that have nothing whatsoever to do with health care.

 

Has anyone else heard that?

[TranquilMind]

Today our realtor told us that according to their company's lawyer, once the health care bill is fully enacted it's going to have a negative impact on real estate. I didn't internalize all the details she gave me about why, but something about an extra tax for sellers on top of closing fees and the inability of people to sell their own homes without blah blah. LOL, I wish I could remember everything she said.

 

Anyhow, I don't have a link, but she really pressed the point that there are items in the health care bill that have nothing whatsoever to do with health care.

 

Has anyone else heard that?

 

 

It is true, but only if you have income above $250,000 joint, or $200,000 individual, where it previously did not matter what your income was, you still received your house proceeds when you sold it.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

It is true, but only if you have income above $250,000 joint, or $200,000 individual, where it previously did not matter what your income was, you still received your house proceeds when you sold it.

 

Not exactly. It is a combination of income and capitals gains.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/realestate.asp

[Georgiana Daniels]

So my question is....why is this part of the health care bill?

[Jean in Newcastle]

Other things are often tacked on to the end of bills that have nothing to do with the main content.

[vonfirmath]

So my question is....why is this part of the health care bill?

 

Whoever put it in there thought they could get it passed that way.

 

Stuff gets added onto bills a LOT that has nothing to do with the supposed topic.

 

In this case, the bill didn't even get read evidently so they didn't know there was non-healthcare stuff in it.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

So my question is....why is this part of the health care bill?

 

The tax is actually the 3.8% Medicare tax on income being applied to hgher incomes and capital gains transactions that were previously exempt. The snopes.com article explains it fairly well.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Whoever put it in there thought they could get it passed that way.

 

Stuff gets added onto bills a LOT that has nothing to do with the supposed topic.

 

In this case, the bill didn't even get read evidently so they didn't know there was non-healthcare stuff in it.

 

Simply incorrect. The tax is related to healthcare, and it was discussed when the bill was being debated.

[Georgiana Daniels]

Other things are often tacked on to the end of bills that have nothing to do with the main content.

 

Bad idea, imo.

[Mrs Mungo]

Some of these posts are too political for me to respond to.

 

Today our realtor told us that according to their company's lawyer, once the health care bill is fully enacted it's going to have a negative impact on real estate. I didn't internalize all the details she gave me about why, but something about an extra tax for sellers on top of closing fees and the inability of people to sell their own homes without blah blah. LOL, I wish I could remember everything she said.

 

There is a persistent rumor that home sale proceeds were going to be taxed as part of the ACA, but it isn't true. Do you think maybe that's what she was talking about?

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/25/chain-email/3-8-percent-tax-real-estate-transactions-health-ca/

[Georgiana Daniels]

Some of these posts are too political for me to respond to.

 

 

 

There is a persistent rumor that home sale proceeds were going to be taxed as part of the ACA, but it isn't true. Do you think maybe that's what she was talking about?

 

http://www.politifac...ions-health-ca/

 

 

Yes! This is it. Good explanation, thanks.

[Rivka]

Some of these posts are too political for me to respond to.

 

Unfortunately, not everyone feels similarly restrained.

 

I agree. Is this being allowed now on the new chat board?

 

Hope not.

[Amy Jo]

For us Obamacare will mean that we will HAVE to stay on state insurance. Which they just sent me an an@l-exam letter (am I allowed to use that phrase?) wanting me to SIGN for THEM to access everything I have -- they would be able to talk to bankers, employers, etc -- let's just advertise that we are broke to all our friends! (And we are not hiding anything, but really, we just requalified and if they'd get their heads outa their rears they would SEE that they have all the documents already.) Oh, and we have to have a 3rd party verify who lives here. Everyone enjoy being called [basically] a liar? How the heck would anyone else know who lives in my house? They'd write down whatever I told them. And it says if any one is self-employed (DH is) to "explain".

 

I'd like to add that my mother had cancer. Without insurance. She did see doctors -- actually got to choose her own. She was treated. The cancer was removed, she also did chemo and radiation. My parents did not go bankrupt. Money was tight, but I'm not sure it would have been 'better' paying a premium (money was always tight). They paid the bills off, slowly but steadily. The hospital board forgave a portion of their bill (I think a few others did too, and yes, some of the companies were unscrupulous - obviously set up to milk insurance companies). My mom had several years cancer free. Now, obviously affordable health care would be good, but I just don't think this is the way. I wanted to say that no insurance is NOT a death warrant.

[Georgiana Daniels]

For us Obamacare will mean that we will HAVE to stay on state insurance. Which they just sent me an an@l-exam letter (am I allowed to use that phrase?) wanting me to SIGN for THEM to access everything I have -- they would be able to talk to bankers, employers, etc -- let's just advertise that we are broke to all our friends! (And we are not hiding anything, but really, we just requalified and if they'd get their heads outa their rears they would SEE that they have all the documents already.) Oh, and we have to have a 3rd party verify who lives here. Everyone enjoy being called [basically] a liar? How the heck would anyone else know who lives in my house? They'd write down whatever I told them. And it says if any one is self-employed (DH is) to "explain".

 

I'd like to add that my mother had cancer. Without insurance. She did see doctors -- actually got to choose her own. She was treated. The cancer was removed, she also did chemo and radiation. My parents did not go bankrupt. Money was tight, but I'm not sure it would have been 'better' paying a premium (money was always tight). They paid the bills off, slowly but steadily. The hospital board forgave a portion of their bill (I think a few others did too, and yes, some of the companies were unscrupulous - obviously set up to milk insurance companies). My mom had several years cancer free. Now, obviously affordable health care would be good, but I just don't think this is the way. I wanted to say that no insurance is NOT a death warrant.

 

Sorry to hear. It sounds awful having to go through all that to get the state insurance.

[Slartibartfast]

For us Obamacare will mean that we will HAVE to stay on state insurance. Which they just sent me an an@l-exam letter (am I allowed to use that phrase?) wanting me to SIGN for THEM to access everything I have -- they would be able to talk to bankers, employers, etc -- let's just advertise that we are broke to all our friends! (And we are not hiding anything, but really, we just requalified and if they'd get their heads outa their rears they would SEE that they have all the documents already.) Oh, and we have to have a 3rd party verify who lives here. Everyone enjoy being called [basically] a liar? How the heck would anyone else know who lives in my house? They'd write down whatever I told them. And it says if any one is self-employed (DH is) to "explain".

 

I'd like to add that my mother had cancer. Without insurance. She did see doctors -- actually got to choose her own. She was treated. The cancer was removed, she also did chemo and radiation. My parents did not go bankrupt. Money was tight, but I'm not sure it would have been 'better' paying a premium (money was always tight). They paid the bills off, slowly but steadily. The hospital board forgave a portion of their bill (I think a few others did too, and yes, some of the companies were unscrupulous - obviously set up to milk insurance companies). My mom had several years cancer free. Now, obviously affordable health care would be good, but I just don't think this is the way. I wanted to say that no insurance is NOT a death warrant.

 

 

My sister is going through cancer right now. She has state insurance because she was a VA Nurse before she became ill. She is currently disabled and unable to work. She is truly struggling. She nearly skipped a spinal tap because she didn't think she could afford it. A few phone calls later and a family member is paying her bill. She had an MRI recently and she was more upset at the expense than she was happy at the results. I am scared the costs are wearing her down.

 

Her insurance will not pay for clinical trials, they will not allow her to go to a special treatment facility. Her insurance will not pay for genetic testing (us sisters all went to have breastcancer screening and everyone one of OUR doctors were horrified at her insurance, they want genetic testing results)

 

She has to constantly fight with her insurance, they even balked at paying for her chemo, she had to get nasty lawyer notes sent. (fortunately our uncles are lawyers so that was free :))

 

That is great your mom was able to get through it without severe financial difficulties. But that isn't true of everyone, there are very different levels of care that is often necessary with cancer treatments. I have no idea how many rounds of chemo my sister has been through at this point. We would definitely be bankrupt if I became similarly ill.

 

 

 

http://www.reuters.c...E58G6W520090917

 

(Reuters) - Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year -- one every 12 minutes -- in large part because they lack ]health insurance. and can not get good care, Harvard Medical School researchers found in an analysis released on Thursday.

 

"We're losing more Americans every day because of inaction ... than drunk driving and homicide combined," Dr. David Himmelstein, a co-author of the study and an associate professor of medicine at Harvard, said in an interview with Reuters.

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=lack-of-insurance-causes-more-than-2009-09-17

 

"We doctors have many new ways to prevent deaths from hypertension, diabetes and heart disease—but only if patients can get into our offices and afford their medications," Andrew Wilper, of the University of Washington Medical School in Seattle, and lead study author, said in a prepared statement.

 

In the amount of time it took me to complete this post with studies and links another person died.

[FaithManor]

 

In the amount of time it took me to complete this post with studies and links another person died.

 

 

It's shameful and it sickening! That is why we need reform, true reform. I'm just afraid that "insurance" isn't the answer. We have "great" insurance, but it's next to impossible to actually use and the fight to get things approved delays things for unconscienable periods of time. Spreading around more of the same, or forcing people to buy more of the same isn't going to save lives in many, many instances. It makes my gut tie in knots thinking of how many will suffer because the industry has not been forced to change for the better. Dear Adrian, Joanne's husband....there is an example that hits close to home. If they had "proper" insurance on him, would that insurance actually pay for what it should and in a timely manner? It seems doubtful. I know my own insurance company would do everything it possibly could to get out of paying bills, approving procedures, etc.

 

Insurance needs to be taken out of the driver's seat and healthcare shouldn't be at the mercy of employment. For one thing, there are a lot of VERY necessary jobs out there that will never pay enough for decent insurance. So, our system further penalizes those that work in these positions. It's twisted.

 

Faith

[Murphy101]

I think the topic has been very civil and unpolitical so far.