Obamascare: Let's run the numbers

reply to post by Kumo77


I have a feeling what we'll see is that these "exchanges" won't be where most people go.

We'll see TV ads for insurance companies basically "fighting" for your business like we do with auto insurance. "Call us for a quote!" or "Switch to us and save $$$!"

Isn't that pretty capitalistic?

Like I said, unless you are your own doctor and have your own ER, rad-tech setup and pharmacy -- you already utilize subsidized healthcare in "some" capacity. There are 100% private hospitals, but most hospitals get tax deductions and subsidies to stay in business.

Oh, and where do the specialists operate on people? Hospitals.

I like to be able to drive to work. I pay taxes so I have plowed, paved roads. I also have to carry auto insurance if I'm going to utilize that service.

So, if you don't want to "buy in" via your employer, Obamacare or pay the "Tax" -- don't expect me to pay for your ambulance ride.

Isn't that in the "conservative" spirit? Survival of the fittest? Because honestly, most of ATS must make over 40-50k, have amazing health, never engage in "living" and never worry about accidents happening. *eyeroll*

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


That is something I disagree with in Obamacare too. Unemployed people should not pay insurance and get free-of-charge health care.

Although if something like that was added to Obamacare it would never have passed due to the very individualistic / egoistic thinking by too many: "Why I have to pay more, when they do not pay anything?" without considering that one day they might be in the same place and such people are often not in such position due to their own mistakes.

The extreme individualism was also the reason behind the overegulation of this policy. Adding any extra "plans" would need extra bureaucrats and people filling the paperwork -> higher cost.

Elimination of the insurance companies also would never have passed due to right-wing being strong. In the current economy that would lose many jobs and would be political suicide to even try something like that.

For an universal healthcare US is simply not ready. It might work better as many other nations are proving, yet the extreme individualism (in my opinion, simply egoism) and very strong right-wing culture will never let something like that pass.

Healthcare should be a right, not a privilege...

reply to post by Cabin


I'm calling it a night -- but I agree with you. Healthcare -- not "Health Insurance" should be a basic right in a civilized, 1st-world country.

Drug companies and medical device manufactures claim they charge Americans so much for R&D and "cost" -- this is why prescriptions are cheaper in other countries. This is why Canada and Europe can do what they do. America just can't go to a single-payer/universal system when it costs $10 for a 500mg Tylenol.

I am also in a state that is not expanding medicaid and I have no idea what that is going to mean for rates or exemption from having to carry it altogether if I am not able to get medicaid (because I have tried before with no such luck)...and i will not know any of this until I am able to access the correct information.

Oh, this is a mess. If it is bad, we need to try to shoot this down asap but if it is not as bad as the quotes I obtained make it sound like... then we could also be missing a chance to get the majority of people under healthcare.

What a mess.

has the websites itself been shut down?

I know this may make me look like I'm dropping the ball on finding this stuff out but i AM trying to understand it. Meanwhile, I've got other unnecessary aggravations to deal with from a person I made the mistake of taking up for months ago because I thought they at least needed a fair chance despite what 6 different people have told me. Now I am having to eat my own words and find out the hard way while they all give her that fair chance, hoping she will figure things out and she isn't, she just finds someone new to turn the knife on and it's me this time... and now she is just proving it by showing me how right they were.

When it comes to giving fair chances.... so many of us are once bitten twice shy and a lot of times, the proof is still in the putting.

I see now just how confusing this obamacare is right now and I hope they get this cleared up for people or it's going to be an even bigger mess and turn everyone against the government at the worst possible time. A time when they need support and they need to show reasons they deserve support.

they had better not ever expect me to have anything like an RFID device implanted though.
And another thing that gripes me is when it is not your job to do so, it can be very time consuming and extremely inconvenient to have to do research on health care just to avoid a tax penalty that could escalate. they seem to forget this a lot and that when we are supposed to be doing all our other stuff like working or going to school or whatever the case may be.... its not so easy for us to do research and go to a whole bunch of trouble to understand something that they are on the clock for. the people working in these fields, yes, they may know their stuff a lot better than we do (or do some of them???).... but it is their JOB.

My wife and I bring in around $2400 monthly after taxes- around $3200 monthly pre-tax, and have around $1900 in necessary expenditures such as the home, water, trash collection, electricity, telephone, car insurance, child support and natural gas, but not including luxury items like food and gasoline.

I guess we could move to a trailer park somewhere, but can't afford to pay to move. That's hard to do with only $500 a month in 'discretionary income', considering around $400 is going for food to feed 3 people.

And I have to pay how much for Obamacare, a month? ... and pay deductibles?
Healthy or starvation? The two are mutually exclusive.

MystikMushroom
Wow, I expected to be lambasted -- but I thought ATS's motto was "Deny Ignorance"

I have laid out examples, and have shown (using a calculator provided by "conservative" ATS members) that there is quite a bit of fear mongering and fact-twisting.

I have successfully shown that people that make the "average personal income" -- and even people making TWICE the average personal income will be just fine.

I even demonstrated (with pictures! yay!) that a family of four, with a stay-at-home parent and a bread winner grossing $35,000/year won't have to cough up more than $4,500 a year AT MOST BY LAW. More than likely, they'll pay the $1,373 ($57.20 a paycheck)

Now, even with a few doctor visits and some prescriptions if that amounted to $2,500 TOTAL a year, that divided by 12 equals $208.133 a month, or $104.16 per pay check.

Apparently, 40k for a single adult is about the average personal income.

Now that is GROSS, not NET.

Do people not understand the difference is? Gross is what you are actually paid and net is what is actually on your paycheck.

Obamacare is concerned with your GROSS not your NET income.

People hate being told they "have to do something". Grow up and act like adults instead of crybabies. I'll have to pay $30-$40 more a month and I'm OK with that. My friend who is a cook and makes half of what I make will now be able to get that root canal he needs. His employer doesn't and never has offered any health coverage. He was quoted attwice the amount I calculated before the ACA passed.

Hopefully he'll get the dental work done so he doesn't die of sepsis or have a heart attack from infection. And yes, he can afford and does brush his teeth with a toothbrush and toothpaste. He also can't be denied because of a car accident he had when he was 20 years younger. Yeah, pre-existing conditions and whatnot.

I had nothing but the best medical attention in France. I actually was taken to the oldest hospital in Paris. I had a CT, blood work and prescriptions written. I didn't wait in line nor did I see any lines. I tried to pay, I really did -- I showed my insurance cards but I was waved away. I was told to go to one of the numerous "green neon cross" pharmacies (which are everywhere). IMO it seemed to almost open up a more "free market" pharmacy system. Some of the pharmacies charged more, some less. Either way I paid about the same co-pay I would WITH insurance in the United States.

Please, reserve the one line replies; It only reiterates your ignorance and unwillingness to discuss the "details" logically while denying ignorance.

Thank you - very well said - I wish I could star and flag several times. I'll be able to afford health care for the first time in 7 years.

I have a friend who is dying a painful death because she lost her healthcare (breast cancer survivor) couldn't afford or even get any care and had to wait until she was 65 because her income was too much for medicaid and a secondary cancer went undetected until just recently (she turned 65). She couldn't afford the expensive tests - .

Again thank you for posting some reason.

abecedarian
My wife and I bring in around $2400 monthly after taxes- around $3200 monthly pre-tax, and have around $1900 in necessary expenditures such as the home, water, trash collection, electricity, telephone, car insurance, child support and natural gas, but not including luxury items like food and gasoline.

I guess we could move to a trailer park somewhere, but can't afford to pay to move. That's hard to do with only $500 a month in 'discretionary income', considering around $400 is going for food to feed 3 people.

And I have to pay how much for Obamacare, a month? ... and pay deductibles?
Healthy or starvation? The two are mutually exclusive.

edit on 10/3/2013 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)

So what are you going to do if someone gets sick - hope it goes away?

I appreciate the spirit of this topic, but not everyone is well served.

Here is my case:

Was full time architect, high-end custom residential, laid off due to no constructions in my city or area. No jobs available anywhere in architecture in that city. I have been working part time for a Belgium firm, through consulting, but for very few hours. I made maybe 8,000 USD per year for the last 2 years. My work history with architecture made any other kind of job unattainable, and architecture is very tight these days, so I am in a sour spot.

I live in Virginia, am single, don't smoke. Here are my numbers:



I understand there is meant to be a 9.5% cap for premiums, but that is not reflected in thsi calculator. It looks like the only option for me is catostophic coverage.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


Social Darwinism might ring true with Neoconservatives, but it goes against the beliefs of many other social and or fiscal Conservatives. While I am socially a Liberal, fiscally I am a Paleoconservative.

Contrary to what you may have heard or perhaps even led to believe, many Conservatives realize the importance of charitable contributions and in helping your fellow human. We just don't believe in forcing others to do it.

Here`s the problem that i`m seeing and maybe i`m not doing something right but,according to that calculator thing,
My oldest daughter who lives at home,is a full time college student and has no job and no income, will have to pay $2112 a year for premiums and she will only be eligible for a $146 tax credit.
now, explain to me how someone with no job and no income is suppose to pay $163.75 a month for insurance? Where is she going to get the thousands of dollars from to pay the deductible?How is that affordable?

I assume that because they ask for the total number of people in the household that they also want to know the annual income of all the people in the household.
By putting the total annual income of all the people in the household , they are calculating my daughters premiums based on everyone else`s income, not her income since she has no income.


If I just put her income of $0 in the annual income and leave the total number of household members the same the premium stays the same but it says she is eligible for medicaid,but that wouldn`t be accurate because the total household income is more than the eligibility for medicaid.

Why do they want to include my income in calculating her premiums even though I`m not going to get insurance through the exchange?
This is a mess.

Tardacus
Here`s the problem that i`m seeing and maybe i`m not doing something right but,according to that calculator thing,
My oldest daughter who lives at home,is a full time college student and has no job and no income, will have to pay $2112 a year for premiums and she will only be eligible for a $146 tax credit.
now, explain to me how someone with no job and no income is suppose to pay $163.75 a month for insurance? How is that affordable?

I assume that because they ask for the total number of people in the household that they also want to know the annual income of all the people in the household.
By putting the total annual income of all the people in the household , they are calculating my daughters premiums based on everyone else`s income, not her income since she has no income.


If I just put her income of $0 in the annual income and leave the total number of household members the same the premium stays the same but it says she is eligible for medicaid,but that wouldn`t be accurate because the total household income is more than the eligibility for medicaid.

Why do they want to include my income in calculating her premiums even though I`m not going to get insurance through the exchange?
This is a mess.

edit on 3-10-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-10-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)

yes, it seems this is dangerously confusing but I can tell you this...

I don't know about all states, but in my state a household is considered by certain things and not simply because people have the same address. I, for example, am the only member of my household and my meals and income are totally separate than the other members of the same mailing address. The same would be the case in some of these houses up town that are split into small rooms for students but there is one mailbox and the same address. It's often not possible to combine and calculate the income of multiple people who do not share certain things but share an address.

You should look that up in your state... and if they specify this, then the question is... can she provide her own food? Can she get enough back from any refunds or loans until she becomes employed to not have to depend upon your income. In some cases, even if she received money from you... if you could prove that this was a set amount and that you made no other contribution to her income and kept your word on it if this would change so that you would not have to face penalty, then you still might be able to exclude her from your household if you do not consider her any kind of dependent that would give YOU some kind of tax break. For example, a live in maid wouldn't expect to get up the business of the home owners to apply for health insurance... I would think.

Check into that and really see how it applies to you. If you include her as an adult dependent and part of your household, then you will share the responsibility of covering her insurance. If not... you will need to prove this by setting strict financing and resource boundaries.

Anyway... just trying to help.

maybe you could find this info on a state website and not the healthcare dot gov website that seems to be out of concision at the moment.

Is this post not in violation of TAN's T&C on advertising?

Come on OP. Nobody is being fooled. Just because it was called "Affordable" doesn't mean that it really is.

What exactly is wrong with you all that you going to the doctors so much?

I have been to the doctors on only a handful of occassions in the last 7 years, mainly because it is nearly impossibly to see a doctor in the UK, BUT I have found that all problems tend to clear up by themselves.
So, if I had been paying out $5000 a year I would have been throwing money away for something I don't need.

Maybe you all visit your doctors too much or is someone having a 'laugh' at your expense?

reply to post by MystikMushroom


I live in a county where men gross under 32,000 average and women under 22,000. That's gross. There's a very high number of uninsured as there are few area employers offering insurance. To pretty much everyone here this is a tax that is going to put real hurt on our local economy. There are many counties in the surrounding areas in similar situations.

I like where I live. Housing is cheap, air is clean and people are friendly. I shouldn't be forced to move to 'better myself' just so I can afford to pay the tax.

reply to post by MystikMushroom

We need a 'ba-dump-tssh' emotisound for exactly these circumstances.

The concern that I have with this piece of legislation was summarized reasonably well in another thread below.

We are all obligated not to follow unconstitutional 'laws'.

If there was a law that said that you had to buy fossil fuel energy insurance but, you don't use fossil fuel energy. The other side continually berated you for causing children everywhere to die from exposer. Would you possibly begin to understand how this 'law' and it's justifications might be questionable?

Considering the horrific implications of this act, a purely monetary argument seems insufficient. Especially since the moral attacks and shame tossing have been so effective in promoting it's passage and continued support among steadfast believers.

reply to post by greencmp

Health insurance is an artificial construct set up to keep the price of health care exhorbitantly high.

Left to itself and economic laws health care would be an affordable level for everyone.......after all the market could not support a price that virtually no one could afford.

So state funded healthcare and enforced health insurance keep the price at a level few would ever have the funds to afford.

My wife and i grossed about 75k last year combined. We have 2 kids. Using this calculator it would cost $460 a month for the useless bronze plan (it would be fine for my wife and i but kids get ear infections, flu, chicken pox, etc. and typically use the doctor more than healthy adults. The out of pocket costs associated combined with the premium make it basically garbage if you actually have to use it for more than catastrophic needs) and almost $600 month for the silver plan, including the government subsidy.

I pay about $230 a month now for insurance through my employer. At the least our premiums would double for bottom of the barrel insurance, and nearly triple if we wanted the Obamacare equivalant to what we have now which i foresee happening sooner or later.

75k might sound like a lot for a single person or a couple but its not a lot of money for a family of 4 to live on. We arent poor by any means but we still have to pinch pennies and watch our spending. Its easy to cherry pick areas of the country where premiums would be lowest. In our case its like adding a payment on a brand new vehicle to our monthly budget.

My zip code is 48085, i am 28 and my wife is 31. Try it for yourself.

greencmp
reply to post by MystikMushroom

 

We need a 'ba-dump-tssh' emotisound for exactly these circumstances.

The concern that I have with this piece of legislation was summarized reasonably well in another thread below.

We are all obligated not to follow unconstitutional 'laws'.

If there was a law that said that you had to buy fossil fuel energy insurance but, you don't use fossil fuel energy. The other side continually berated you for causing children everywhere to die from exposer. Would you possibly begin to understand how this 'law' and it's justifications might be questionable?

Considering the horrific implications of this act, a purely monetary argument seems insufficient. Especially since the moral attacks and shame tossing have been so effective in promoting it's passage and continued support among steadfast believers.

A mandatory fossil fuel tax would at least have logic because everybody uses fossil fuels every day at least indirectly. Supplies have to get to stores somehow...

I am 31 years old and have not been to a doctor in 10+ years (lucky I know) except for a couple of one-time visits for relatively minor work related injuries (super-lucky considering my work). My best cheapest option would be to pay the penalty, and if something happens to me just walk in the emergency room where I couldn't be denied care. Nothing changes for me except for the fine I will have to pay every year now.

Okay, I used the calculator.

If my employer throws me under the bus.....my premiums will more than double for the silver plan.
They will be cheaper under the bronze plan; and in either case, I won't be likely to be able to afford to see a doctor in either plan if I have to meet a huge deductible first.

This plan sucks.

This thread actually proves that Obamacare is a sham. Look at his first example: $35 a year for 150,000 dollars of coverage. How can that be possible? You'd need 4286 years of premium collection just to cover that 150,000. Or hope that only one person in 4286 ever gets in an accident. Where do you think the money is really coming from OP? How can you possibly think this is sustainable?