Jump to content

Menu

Free Birth Control; Children Up to 26; Pre-Existing Conditions; Free Mammograms, etc. If these matter to you...


umsami
 Share

Recommended Posts

The number of people on this site that have opened up about health care costs for an unplanned illness or accident, mental health, disabilities, etc etc is enough of a cross sample to realize the seriousness of affordable complete coverage. It saddens me how little we think of those who have less. Doctors in our area say the ACA has saved as well as improved lives. 

 

And those are the things that SHOULD be paid for via health insurance, not co-pay free birth control for non-poor women. I can pay for my own contraception or the pre-ACA co-pay for having my tubes tied if I wanted that. I couldn't have paid for my daughter's cochlear implant surgery.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anecdotal, yes, but everyone I know who leans to a certain side of the political spectrum feels that way--including all of my own family (despite my children and I having pre-existing conditions which may very well become catastrophic if we become uninsurable/unable to access regular healthcare).

 

No, they do not care if my children die. That's just the way the cookie crumbles sometimes, you know? Nothing is free.

 

 

I don't know anyone who feels that way and if they do we quickly become unacquainted. My son has a congenital heart defect, my nephew has CF. 

 

We cannot call ourselves the, "greatest nation," when the number one reason people go bankrupt is medical bills and we cannot call ourselves the, "greatest nation," if people die because they cannot afford treatment or even a simple check-up.

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, now imagine that your insurance payments and access are entirely in the hands of the government, and one of the people who thinks like this is in charge of deciding which items will be covered and which will not.  Do you trust him to do that?

 

I don't.

 

This is why I can't imagine single payer working in our country.  We simply don't have enough of a consensus to trust that the priority will be getting people cared for without question.

 

Well, right now several of the folks (51 of them) just told all of us that they really don't care if my children get healthcare at all. While the vote the other night may have been more symbolic than anything, it sent a message, loud and clear: they reject many important pieces of the ACA, pieces that are keeping people alive. So, I'd say a bigger decision is already being made at the hands of the government.

 

Here's the thing, and why I can't really craft a more rational and eloquent response right now: My kids are going to die. If they don't get run over randomly by the proverbial bus one day, as any one of us has a chance to be, one day they are going to suffer a fatal arrhythmia and their hearts will simply stop beating. This could happen when they are adults. This could happen tomorrow. This is the reality we live with every day. We know a lot but not enough to prevent this eventuality. However, the health care we currently have access to is increasing their chances of living longer. Their health care gives me some hope that I'll get more days with my babies.

 

So I'm not really in a place to be very diplomatic when so many so flippantly make comments like "nothing is free" or make suggestions such as saving for medical care (my entire salary wouldn't cover the cost of their medical care) or muse over how interesting it'll be to watch how this pans out or? I have a great job with generous benefits that I pay into every pay period. I work my ass off so my kids have access to what they need. Yet many, many are cheering the repeal of the ACA--they're cheering the rug being ripped out from under us. And we are only one story of so many.

  • Like 25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, right now several of the folks (51 of them) just told all of us that they really don't care if my children get healthcare at all. While the vote the other night may have been more symbolic than anything, it sent a message, loud and clear: they reject many important pieces of the ACA, pieces that are keeping people alive. So, I'd say a bigger decision is already being made at the hands of the government.

 

Here's the thing, and why I can't really craft a more rational and eloquent response right now: My kids are going to die. If they don't get run over randomly by the proverbial bus one day, as any one of us has a chance to be, one day they are going to suffer a fatal arrhythmia and their hearts will simply stop beating. This could happen when they are adults. This could happen tomorrow. This is the reality we live with every day. We know a lot but not enough to prevent this eventuality. However, the health care we currently have access to is increasing their chances of living longer. Their health care gives me some hope that I'll get more days with my babies.

 

So I'm not really in a place to be very diplomatic when so many so flippantly make comments like "nothing is free" or make suggestions such as saving for medical care (my entire salary wouldn't cover the cost of their medical care) or muse over how interesting it'll be to watch how this pans out or? I have a great job with generous benefits that I pay into every pay period. I work my ass off so my kids have access to what they need. Yet many, many are cheering the repeal of the ACA--they're cheering the rug being ripped out from under us. And we are only one story of so many.

 

 

Yes, as I stated my nephew's care runs tens of thousands of dollars a month. That is not an exaggeration. It really is that much.

 

To get medicaid one has to *qualify* for medicaid. So people with pre-existing conditions should work at Walmart or just go on disability because they cannot afford care? These are people that could otherwise lead productive and full lives. With healthcare they could be contributing members of society.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'm for Medicare for all. Easy to implement, takes the burden away from employers and not tied to place of employment, etc. Medicare is an 80/20 plan, so that still leaves the door open for insurance companies to offer supplemental insurance and stay in business. Can be paid for with a VAT or other tax.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreeing with this, umsami.

Yep. But that makes sense and isn't divisive so..... Edited by joyofsix
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, right now several of the folks (51 of them) just told all of us that they really don't care if my children get healthcare at all. While the vote the other night may have been more symbolic than anything, it sent a message, loud and clear: they reject many important pieces of the ACA, pieces that are keeping people alive. So, I'd say a bigger decision is already being made at the hands of the government.

 

Here's the thing, and why I can't really craft a more rational and eloquent response right now: My kids are going to die. If they don't get run over randomly by the proverbial bus one day, as any one of us has a chance to be, one day they are going to suffer a fatal arrhythmia and their hearts will simply stop beating. This could happen when they are adults. This could happen tomorrow. This is the reality we live with every day. We know a lot but not enough to prevent this eventuality. However, the health care we currently have access to is increasing their chances of living longer. Their health care gives me some hope that I'll get more days with my babies.

 

So I'm not really in a place to be very diplomatic when so many so flippantly make comments like "nothing is free" or make suggestions such as saving for medical care (my entire salary wouldn't cover the cost of their medical care) or muse over how interesting it'll be to watch how this pans out or? I have a great job with generous benefits that I pay into every pay period. I work my ass off so my kids have access to what they need. Yet many, many are cheering the repeal of the ACA--they're cheering the rug being ripped out from under us. And we are only one story of so many.

This. I'm so sorry.
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started posting and was going to mention that you had a typo because I assumed that 30% of the federal poverty level wasn't possible. But you are correct....for a couple, that's about $5,000 a year income. Anything over that and you don't qualify in your state?? That's sick. That's asking destitute people to pay for an expensive health plan.

 

For comparison, VT has coverage for up to 317%. You may have to pay either $30/month in premiums or $50 if your income is on the higher end, but it's much less than BCBS.

 

Yup. It's despicable. Don't ask me what I think of our current governor. He is my most hated politician and I'm including the one people hate right now. He's evil. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30% of FPL - that's crazy and disgusting! I guess in FL they assume most of their extremely poor people are covered by Medicare or maybe they just don't care. 

 

My state did expand. They do 133% of FPL for adults, 142% for kids 0-18, and 208% for pregnant women.

 

They just don't care. And I'm sure it's part of the reason we have so many homeless..hard to keep a job if you have medical problems or mental health problems and can't get them treated. (our warm weather is also part of the problem, true, as homeless migrate here, but it isn't the whole issue)

 

 

I know many many many adults that can't afford healthcare. 

 

Subsidies kick in with the ACA at 100 percent of poverty I think, but if you are below poverty but above the 30% that gets you medicaid you are out of luck. Or if you are anywhere below 100 percent and don't have dependents, out of luck. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just don't care. And I'm sure it's part of the reason we have so many homeless..hard to keep a job if you have medical problems or mental health problems and can't get them treated. (our warm weather is also part of the problem, true, as homeless migrate here, but it isn't the whole issue)

 

 

I know many many many adults that can't afford healthcare.

 

Subsidies kick in with the ACA at 100 percent of poverty I think, but if you are below poverty but above the 30% that gets you medicaid you are out of luck. Or if you are anywhere below 100 percent and don't have dependents, out of luck.

The subsidies kick in at 130% of FPL. People in states who didn't expand Medicare got screwed.

 

Florida is the child and family homelessness capital of the United States for exactly the reason you cited.

Edited by LucyStoner
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The subsidies kick in at 130% of FPL. People in states who didn't expand Medicare got screwed.

 

Florida is the child and family homelessness capital of the United States for exactly the reason you cited.

 

 

People also got screwed because the risk corridors were removed. That would have prevented some of the price increases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's not that CASH is cheaper than ACA really but for you, cash plus charity coverage plus a cost sharing system was cheaper than your ACA option. 

That's all fine and good, but not a viable argument for removing coverage for everyone else.

 

And [part of the reason that charges are high for others is that we cover some of the cost of the charity program. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will you feel the same about health sharing ministries if they decide to drop you rather than pay because your family is too expensive? I'm not trying to be snarky, but it's a very real possibility. HSMs are totally unregulated (unless they opt in to certain limited regulations, some do and some don't) and can drop you anytime they want even if you've been paying in for years, which is exactly the kind of thing the ACA prevents.

 

They can't drop us for this incident until concluded, as per their own guidelines.

 

Though I guess they could down the road our stay has been very cost efficient for them - we have bargained 100% discount of the hospital stay for the nicu, 50% from the c section, and a good 80% discount on average for the associated specialists, lab services, etc. The only discount I didn't find satisfactory was the ambulance, but given that this stay is likely going to exceed a million for three weeks and we have almost all of it discounted down, even if they did drop us we would be responsible for paying about 80k leftover, and we have had to do that over the course of several other pregnancies and health issues (medical debt isn't new to us and we always had insurance, but still ended up thousands in debt). So yes, I'd be fine with it. But since he incident was incurred during current coverage they could drop us going forward but not legally do so in the middle of the incident. Coverage isn't guaranteed ever, that is true, and yet it still saved us ridiculous amounts over the ACA because we negotiated as individuals with a checkbook.

 

Is it incredibly difficult for our family? Yes. Without reimbursement we would be looking at possibly selling the house or declaring bankruptcy if the amount was due in a lump sum. But it is still far and away the cheapest option for us. There is a reason we dropped our ACA-modified plan, it was a good 26k a year all told, *before* the 10k individual deductible, 15k family out of pocket as (and remember this baby was born in the end of December and half his bill is in January, so we'd be paying double in terms of deductibles - 20 and 30k before any coverage kicks in), and many of the specialists and labs, as well as ongoing therapy for his brain damage, are exempt from coverage. We'd likely be stuck paying at least 20% of the hospital stay for the nicu too as per our copay. Which is a minimum of 200k.

 

Cash pay wins out even for this health catastrophe, without CHM included.

Edited by Arctic Mama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Yet many, many are cheering the repeal of the ACA--they're cheering the rug being ripped out from under us. And we are only one story of so many.

Yup, it's absolutely horrible.

And I don't trust them with my medical decisions.  Because they really, really don't care.  Which is horrible and a crying shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing, and why I can't really craft a more rational and eloquent response right now: My kids are going to die. If they don't get run over randomly by the proverbial bus one day, as any one of us has a chance to be, one day they are going to suffer a fatal arrhythmia and their hearts will simply stop beating. This could happen when they are adults. This could happen tomorrow. This is the reality we live with every day. We know a lot but not enough to prevent this eventuality. However, the health care we currently have access to is increasing their chances of living longer. Their health care gives me some hope that I'll get more days with my babies.

 

 

Oh, mama. So unfair. I'm sorry.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And [part of the reason that charges are high for others is that we cover some of the cost of the charity program.

Some of it. We paid two other childbirths with that hospital - those together left us with 40k in medical debt. We actually had insurance during both those pregnancies too. But it's a religious hospital and maintains a non-profit status mostly through endowment, and they have to award charitable deductions in various percentages of their operating expenses to maintain that status. This is the first time we have qualified in any service, because we have so many people on one income.

 

But please everyone, do feel free to keep picking us apart because we don't agree with you on how awesome and helpful the ACA is while we are stuck on the phone and writing massive checks to manage all this. I'm in the middle of *living* the financial differences and have had an ACA plan and dropped it. The numbers for our family are incredibly clear and we are not lying or inflating them - bargaining as individuals based on our own circumstances serves us much better even without CHM. We keep them on for catastrophe, but they have paid nothing yet and our bills are still a fraction of what they would have been with our old plan. We aren't taking advantage of anything but the programs already in place - we aren't retroactively applying for the ACA, hiding income, misrepresenting our own situation, or seeking any discount based on anything but us as a family.

 

CHM has done nothing at this point, this is all work we do prior to submitting an incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ACA is not sustainable.  I know there are a lot of "if it wasn't for ACA, I wouldn't be alive" stories floating around, but that doesn't make the program any better.

 

Yes, sure, it helped some people.  It also made things a lot worse for many people.  But that is all irrelevant, bc at the end of the day, there is nothing affordable about ACA and it didn't fix the real problem  - the actual cost of healthcare.

 

And neither we, as a society or the govt can afford to continue paying such high costs.  We also can't afford to absolve a large % of population of not paying anything for their healthcare. 

 

The problem is that is hasn't been long enough where people can actually see that it is not sustainable.   It's still honeymoon period for many,

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who get subsidies.  Am I wrong?

 

Yes.

 

Those people get help paying insurance premiums because they cannot afford to purchase insurance otherwise. They still pay. They also still have copays, deductibles, not covered out of pocket expenses.

 

They are not "not paying anything for healthcare".

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of it. We paid two other childbirths with that hospital - those together left us with 40k in medical debt. We actually had insurance during both those pregnancies too. But it's a religious hospital and maintains a non-profit status mostly through endowment, and they have to award charitable deductions in various percentages of their operating expenses to maintain that status. This is the first time we have qualified in any service, because we have so many people on one income.

 

But please everyone, do feel free to keep picking us apart because we don't agree with you on how awesome and helpful the ACA is while we are stuck on the phone and writing massive checks to manage all this. I'm in the middle of *living* the financial differences and have had an ACA plan and dropped it. The numbers for our family are incredibly clear and we are not lying or inflating them - bargaining as individuals based on our own circumstances serves us much better even without CHM. We keep them on for catastrophe, but they have paid nothing yet and our bills are still a fraction of what they would have been with our old plan. We aren't taking advantage of anything but the programs already in place - we aren't retroactively applying for the ACA, hiding income, misrepresenting our own situation, or seeking any discount based on anything but us as a family.

 

CHM has done nothing at this point, this is all work we do prior to submitting an incident.

 

I'm not trying to pick on you, just pointing out why it wouldn't work if everyone did it. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you search for articles about HSMs and then read the comments, there are some horror stories there. It sounds like the bigger these HSMs get, the worse the coverage becomes and the more problems people have. And because they are so unregulated, the members have zero recourse to get their bills covered.

 

It may be that they don't drop members so much as just blatantly refuse to pay for things because they can. That would terrify me.

 

 

I searched by the name of ours - and read comments - and searched for "negative reviews" and found nothing.

 

IRL, I know a handful of others also with our health share and oodles of others with insurance.  Every single complaint I hear is with insurance - esp insurance not covering things.  They refuse to pay because they can... and that will likely get worse at this point in time - esp with nothing "better" replacing what we had.

 

For us, our Health Share works well and I'm not afraid of it getting worse than the insurance nightmares I hear about from many.

 

At this point, NOTHING we have in the US helps everyone. We all have to pick and choose what fits us best and for many the choices just got far more difficult.  

 

If one is wealthy (or healthy) - it's good for them I suppose, but most of us don't fit into that category (or if they are healthy, just wait, older age catches all of us sooner or later).

 

I hope that sooner or later something better will indeed come around, but honestly?  I'm not holding my breath.

 

OK, now imagine that your insurance payments and access are entirely in the hands of the government, and one of the people who thinks like this is in charge of deciding which items will be covered and which will not.  Do you trust him to do that?

 

I don't.

 

This is why I can't imagine single payer working in our country.  We simply don't have enough of a consensus to trust that the priority will be getting people cared for without question.

 

This already happens... based upon insurance and/or wealth.

 

Then add to that the fact that so many can't afford even the basics, so lose out there without universal coverage.  They have options of debt (maybe - that depends upon whether what they need is life threatening or not) or going without.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tricare is not the only model out there.

 

And...you prefer that getting your healthcare needs met be dependent on a profit-driven corporation?

No, I prefer to have the choice to NOT have insurance if I don't want it,  and 

be able to negotiate with each healthcare professional on what they charge.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have said "paying very little". 

 

Depends on what you call "very little".

At 133% of poverty level, the contribution to the insurance is expected 2% of the income, at 3 *poverty level, 9.7% of the income.

That is only for the insurance coverage.

Copays, deductibles, out of pocket etc are on top of that.

 

I would think that for many families, these are substantial sums for their budgets.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of it. We paid two other childbirths with that hospital - those together left us with 40k in medical debt. We actually had insurance during both those pregnancies too. But it's a religious hospital and maintains a non-profit status mostly through endowment, and they have to award charitable deductions in various percentages of their operating expenses to maintain that status. This is the first time we have qualified in any service, because we have so many people on one income.

 

But please everyone, do feel free to keep picking us apart because we don't agree with you on how awesome and helpful the ACA is while we are stuck on the phone and writing massive checks to manage all this. I'm in the middle of *living* the financial differences and have had an ACA plan and dropped it. The numbers for our family are incredibly clear and we are not lying or inflating them - bargaining as individuals based on our own circumstances serves us much better even without CHM. We keep them on for catastrophe, but they have paid nothing yet and our bills are still a fraction of what they would have been with our old plan. We aren't taking advantage of anything but the programs already in place - we aren't retroactively applying for the ACA, hiding income, misrepresenting our own situation, or seeking any discount based on anything but us as a family.

 

CHM has done nothing at this point, this is all work we do prior to submitting an incident.

 

No one is picking you apart. I know you're going through an unbearably difficult situation right now, but so are a lot of us. That's the whole point, and that's why so many of us feel so passionate about this topic. Many of us have a frighteningly ill family member. Many of us have to worry about medical bills in the six figures, or about how in the world we're going to get our family member care in the near future. I live the difference between regular insurance and my state's free medical assistance every day. My dh has COPD and insurance through his employer, my dd has free medical assistance through the state, and I have nothing at the moment and pay cash for everything I need. Hands down, dd's MA wins.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I prefer to have the choice to NOT have insurance if I don't want it,  and 

be able to negotiate with each healthcare professional on what they charge.

 

Yeah...that doesn't work if you say, need a heart transplant (my ex caught a virus in his twenties that ended up in his heart and caused cardiomyopathy). They won't even put you on the list if you don't have the financial means to cover both surgery and the ongoing medications and aftercare. 

 

Or say, possible thyroid cancer, etc. Payment up front. Cash on the barrel. I know because a coworker has thyroid nodules that she is willing to go on a payment plan for, to have checked out, but the won't do that, only payment up front if you don't have insurance. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I prefer to have the choice to NOT have insurance if I don't want it,  and 

be able to negotiate with each healthcare professional on what they charge.

 

And if you have that option, an insurance system that covers people with preexisting conditions cannot work - unless we decide to go to a tax financed model.

Because most young and healthy people would opt out, and only sick and old people would want to buy insurance, which would make the premiums unaffordable.

But sure, for the healthy low risk individual, not paying for insurance is almost always the financially advantageous situation. Especially if they are wealthy and can simply pay what they negotiate with the provider.

Until disaster strikes, of course. 

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I prefer to have the choice to NOT have insurance if I don't want it,  and 

be able to negotiate with each healthcare professional on what they charge.

 

What would one do for an extreme expense such as a cancer diagnose, a serious accident or something of that nature?

 

How would one pay for that? I am not super in favor of people just not having insurance because I know all too well how much devastating medical costs can be when something goes wrong.

 

I have a child that was in the NICU and my pregnancy (which involved seeing a perinatologist and having several ultrasounds) with him, the NICU stay and the resulting specialist visits amounted more than the price of my home.

 

The *first* medical bill I saw for him was $50,000 and that was not the only bill.

Edited by Slartibartfast
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the same thread we have people saying it costs too much and saying that people get it for too little cost. 

 

It does cost too much for some, some states did not participate in the expansions that would have made it less expensive and the risk corridors were removed that would have reduced price increases.

 

If those things were added then it would cost less and people would be less financially devastated. I don't agree there is "too little," cost. 

Edited by Slartibartfast
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...remember when so many people went bat sh!t crazy when the First Lady made it her cause to help kids eat healthy? Tell me with a straight face that the opposition there wasn't partisan!

 

I was just reading some articles wondering whether they would make moves to roll back the school lunch changes. Apparently M.Obama went on tv saying not to, while politicians are putting them on the hit list. 

 

In our area, if you send your dc to school with a snack or contents in his lunch pail that the school does not approve, they will literally take it away and require you to bring/buy something else. Snacks, anything. Doesn't matter about YOUR opinion of healthy as parents. Nope, the school has decided. Not just the lunch they serve, but what you can send with your kid.

 

And in that town, if that's what people vote in and their elected school board does, that's their business. There's a lot that is ok on a local level that doesn't work if you try to mandate it on a larger scale. 

 

You know what else is weird? This is a total aside, but people keep saying Trump is a junk food junkie. Well Melania Trump eats 7 pieces of fruit a day, and somebody told me they're crazy into organic. I don't know what's true, but I did read about the 7 pieces of fruit a day. I keep pondering what I can do to have skin like hers, since caviar lotion and 1 1/2 hour makeup sessions are out of reach, lol.

 

In other words, I think it could be really ironic if the next first lady has similar health food interests as the current first lady. Whatever, just a total rabbit trail. I just wonder how those private habits will influence their policies or come out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, now imagine that your insurance payments and access are entirely in the hands of the government, and one of the people who thinks like this is in charge of deciding which items will be covered and which will not. Do you trust him to do that?

 

I don't.

 

This is why I can't imagine single payer working in our country. We simply don't have enough of a consensus to trust that the priority will be getting people cared for without question.

The entire VA debacle is one big reason why I don't want our govt in charge of my healthcare. My father served for over 20 years. He is truly disabled- broke his back while serving. The ridiculous hoops we have to jump through coupled with the excessively long waits are inexcusable. The horrendous condition of the VA became big news years ago and.......um nothing has changed.

 

Not saying that our current insurance system is working well either.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it could be really ironic if the next first lady has similar health food interests as the current first lady. 

 

On your rabbit trail, I think that would be awesome.  As I've stated before, I don't think healthy or health care need be partisan.  I think we'd end up with something as best could be worked out for as many as possible if labels were dropped and intelligent people could just brainstorm and think it through (with input from many different sides) - then voting based upon what is best and not profit for stockholders or similar..

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most hospitals and many clinics are non-profit. The insurance company may be a publicly held corporation, but the organizations who are actually giving my family medical treatment for the most part aren't.

 

That's because you live in California where Kaiser rules. It's a completely different animal. In most places, but particularly in small towns, rural and other underserved areas, the for-profit model is KING. My husband started his career in finance in for-profit hospital systems and he has been preaching for two decades to anyone who will listen that the free market has no business controlling the health care model. For profits are focused on shareholder profits and bonuses and cost cutting ( though not profit cutting--god forbid) to the detriment of patient care. For profit chews up doctors and employees and spits them out. It's a horrible model for everyone involved. Edited by Barb_
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ACA is not sustainable.  I know there are a lot of "if it wasn't for ACA, I wouldn't be alive" stories floating around, but that doesn't make the program any better.

 

Yes, sure, it helped some people.  It also made things a lot worse for many people.  But that is all irrelevant, bc at the end of the day, there is nothing affordable about ACA and it didn't fix the real problem  - the actual cost of healthcare.

 

And neither we, as a society or the govt can afford to continue paying such high costs.  We also can't afford to absolve a large % of population of not paying anything for their healthcare. 

 

The problem is that is hasn't been long enough where people can actually see that it is not sustainable.   It's still honeymoon period for many,

 

I don't disagree with this.  But where does anyone even claim to start addressing it?  Getting rid of the ACA won't fix these problems.  ACA was a flawed in so many ways.  But at least somebody finally did *something*.  It was a start.  I don't see that going back to the previous status quo will change anything.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I

In our area, if you send your dc to school with a snack or contents in his lunch pail that the school does not approve, they will literally take it away and require you to bring/buy something else. Snacks, anything. Doesn't matter about YOUR opinion of healthy as parents. Nope, the school has decided. Not just the lunch they serve, but what you can send with your kid.

 

And in that town, if that's what people vote in and their elected school board does, that's their business. There's a lot that is ok on a local level that doesn't work if you try to mandate it on a larger scale. 

 

 

 

That behavior wasn't mandated on a federal level.  Or at least they aren't enforcing it in Colorado if it was.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yiu would rather the insurance companies make the descision?

 

That's what I don't get when people say that about the government.  The decisions are being made by the insurance companies what they will cover right now.  Not the doctors.  Sure you can still get the service out of pocket, but realistically people don't have money for that.  Maybe on small things, but nothing significant, even prescriptions.  In my lifetime, it has never been "between me and my doctor".

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the mammograms are not free anyway. I recently had one and my portion was about $150. That is hardly free. And birth control..I filled a prescription for that last year and the copay was $75 for three months. How is that free?

 

 

There are different situations for which they are not free

 

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/breastcancer/moreinformation/breastcancerearlydetection/breast-cancer-early-detection-paying-for-br-ca-screening

 

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-birth-control/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't we look at the bigger picture?  We have a government largely run by corporate sponsorship. You have a lot of "elected" people around who actually "earn" way more money than their positions allow. And a lot of these corporations have international bases and sources. Now you have a bunch of rich people who want to stay in office and to keep getting their money. And so what do they do? They have to vote to keep the funding for every thing that their corporate and other such wealthy sponsors paid for. Now, the people of the US are paying for the entire rest of the world to..what? build green buildings in China? Medical care in Africa? Saving refugees and homeless people in other countries while ignoring our own? Foreign aid happens in the form of military support, medical support, even tuition, instate tuition and grants and public school education and so on for non citizens. We pay $8,000,000,000 to the UN every year. When the average American cannot afford college or medical care, we pay money out the butt to try to prove we are in charge of the rest of the world. The US is like the man at the table who picks up the check for everyone so he can look like the big man, and then goes home and his children don't have proper shoes or clothes.

 

The US needs to cut all foreign spending, stop supporting the UN, and start taking take of our own people. AND, hospitals need to stop charging hundreds of dollars for tylenol. 

 

And don't even get me started on the Visa issue. That costs American's a lot of money. It is just all over the place. This country needs to get its act together and find out where the money comes from rather than just continuing to try to spend it all over the place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree with this.  But where does anyone even claim to start addressing it?  Getting rid of the ACA won't fix these problems.  ACA was a flawed in so many ways.  But at least somebody finally did *something*.  It was a start.  I don't see that going back to the previous status quo will change anything.

 

And in fairness to the ACA, there were additional parts to the legislation that would have helped close some of those gaps which never made it out of committee.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't we look at the bigger picture?  We have a government largely run by corporate sponsorship. You have a lot of "elected" people around who actually "earn" way more money than their positions allow. And a lot of these corporations have international bases and sources. Now you have a bunch of rich people who want to stay in office and to keep getting their money. And so what do they do? They have to vote to keep the funding for every thing that their corporate and other such wealthy sponsors paid for. Now, the people of the US are paying for the entire rest of the world to..what? build green buildings in China? Medical care in Africa? Saving refugees and homeless people in other countries while ignoring our own? Foreign aid happens in the form of military support, medical support, even tuition, instate tuition and grants and public school education and so on for non citizens. We pay $8,000,000,000 to the UN every year. When the average American cannot afford college or medical care, we pay money out the butt to try to prove we are in charge of the rest of the world. The US is like the man at the table who picks up the check for everyone so he can look like the big man, and then goes home and his children don't have proper shoes or clothes.

 

The US needs to cut all foreign spending, stop supporting the UN, and start taking take of our own people. AND, hospitals need to stop charging hundreds of dollars for tylenol. 

 

And don't even get me started on the Visa issue. That costs American's a lot of money. It is just all over the place. This country needs to get its act together and find out where the money comes from rather than just continuing to try to spend it all over the place. 

 

You had me at corporate interests, you lost me at cutting all foreign aid.  It would help immensely if we didn't use our military to protect corporate interests around the globe.

 

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on what you call "very little".

At 133% of poverty level, the contribution to the insurance is expected 2% of the income, at 3 *poverty level, 9.7% of the income.

That is only for the insurance coverage.

Copays, deductibles, out of pocket etc are on top of that.

 

I would think that for many families, these are substantial sums for their budgets.

We pay about $5600 a year to have me in my husband's employer's plan. I can't choose the cheaper plans without bumping the boys down to a lower level of coverage since the entire family must be on the same employer based plan.

 

With SCHIP funded care in our state there are no additional OOP costs for the boys. We have a flex spending account for our own modest OOP costs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take a lot of precautions to prevent fires in my home. Always have, and even more so now that I live with two firefighters. I probably won't "need" fire services. So maybe I shouldn't have to pay my share into it. And then my spouse and child can stay home instead of risk their own safety while some unfortunate person who also decided not to pay watches their house burn. Hopefully from the outside.

 

And I'll just pretend there's no risk to me if the houses around me go up. Because other people's problems can't impact my little bubble, right?

I appreciate your doing that because when my daughter ignitighted the refrigerator and gutted our house and destroyed everything we owned, we didn't find ourselves suddenly homeless and destitute. I thank all of you for that--I mean it. Thank you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...