Forum Index » Chaff » Tea Party Haters


Display Avatars Sort By:
Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 13:42:40 MDT Print View

What insurance do you have pre-ACA?

My wife is covered mostly by her employer. We cannot afford to have me added to that plan. So I am without insurance like I have been for all but three years since I was 17. I'm 47 in January. I've been lucky.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 13:44:28 MDT Print View

Jesus, yes- lucky. A case of appendicitis could wipe you out! Brother, you need insurance... Heck, you're coming due for colon cancer screening in a few years. So, it costs more than the $427 to add you to your wife's plan, eh? Hmm. And $427/month is 8.5% of your annual family income, and doesn't include whatever you pay for your wife. (Or are you trying to cover both of you?) Tough one.

Did you use one of the much-maligned 'navigators' to be sure that you aren't missing anything? Actually, California has it's own exchange, so I'm not sure that there are navigators there...

One of those minimalist Bronze plans, or even the one below that for 'hardship' cases, might be for you. At least then you'd be paying for *something* rather than paying for nothing. (I admit that I cannot quote any prices for such a thing, though.)

Is it possible to get lesser Bronze coverage than your wife (e.g. a Bronze plan) through her employer? After all, you say that you are pretty healthy, though she has prescription needs. (I have no idea if this is possible.)

EDIT--- I'm not trying to be preachy. I'm just sort of a problem-solver personality.

The Bronze plans on Covered California look to generally be about 2/3 the cost of silver plans, so presumably one would cost you less than $300/month. (The lowest Bronze rates are in the low-$200s, but presumably your estimated Silver premiums are higher than the average Silver plan for a reason, so let's extrapolate from there. I'm sure that this isn't how it actually works, but I'm brainstorming, here.) Yes, the other co-pays are higher in a Bronze plan, but they still cover preventive visits the same as the higher plans, and you would still have an annual catastrophic cap that is the same as the Gold plans.

Edited by acrosome on 10/27/2013 14:21:03 MDT.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 13:52:27 MDT Print View

coveroregon.org - 2 person household:
$55K - no tax credit
$50K - $158 annual tax credit - estimate only, wait a month
$40K - $1608 - estimate...
$20K - "Good news! eligible for Oregon Health Plan, details not yet available online"

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 13:52:32 MDT Print View

Ken has been on the " hope for good luck and take good care of myself plan". All the backpacking must have helped.
I hope something more affordable becomes available soon.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 14:12:15 MDT Print View

This is another example where a HSA and a high deductible catastrophic coverage combination makes all the sense.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 14:15:56 MDT Print View

Okay, I'm going to be a total jerk here, just consider this a hypothetical question : )

You make $60K a year and you can't afford health insurance????

Well, I guess you live in California where some things cost more

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Re: Re: Citizenship on 10/27/2013 14:24:49 MDT Print View

@ Tom, thanks for the encouragement. It will be a few months still, but it looks pretty straightforward in my case. At least I hope so.

@ Jerry. Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt, even though we butt heads sometimes

@ Ken H. We disagree about many things, probably mostly about form . However, you are correct that my comment about not posting when incoherent was a low blow. It's hard for me to be sorry about it at this point, since you shot back many fold, but I admit that it was uncalled for.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Re: Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 14:25:17 MDT Print View

No, his *family* makes $60k a year. He and his wife together. That said, especially since he says that he has few expenses... I was trying not to be so rude, jerry...

Edited by acrosome on 10/27/2013 14:27:46 MDT.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Re: Re: Propaganda from right-wing rag LA Times! on 10/27/2013 14:40:19 MDT Print View

@jerry - "I think there's a flaw in the law. They have removed income verification from the IRS out of fear that the "Gestapo IRS" is going to do bad things to people. That makes it almost impossible to verify income, so it's going to be difficult for this to work smoothly. "

Not totally accurate:

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/07/blunt-wrong-on-income-verification/

Plus, it's kind of hypocritical for a Republican to complain about this, since it was the Republicans who kept a robust income verification scheme out of the ACA in the first place, out of some misguided belief that the IRS an equivalent of the Gestapo.

See:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/may/20/fact-checking-michele-bachamann-irs-and-health-car/

Granted, those are statements made by Batsh!t Bachmann, but hey she is "The Face of the Tea Party" after all... :)

Check out the rest of her record:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/may/29/michele-bachmann-truth-o-meter-politifact/

PolitiFact says "She had a remarkable streak: Her first 13 ratings were False or Pants on Fire."

The anti-vaccination claptrap is particularly dear to my heart.

Edited by acrosome on 10/27/2013 15:05:54 MDT.

Doug I.
(idester) - MLife

Locale: MidAtlantic
Re: Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 14:44:18 MDT Print View

"Okay, I'm going to be a total jerk here"

Yup. But not really unusual recently....

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Just for fun... on 10/27/2013 14:48:00 MDT Print View

Here are some of the more amusing statements about the ACA...

http://www.politifact.com/georgia/article/2013/sep/25/top-16-myths-about-health-care-law/

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/article/2013/sep/29/testing-obamacare-truth-o-meter/

Edited by acrosome on 10/27/2013 14:49:28 MDT.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
For fun on 10/27/2013 15:21:34 MDT Print View

Politifacts half truths are typically under 75% accurate most of the time.

Continued tea party bashing, is something I've honestly tried to understand, and can't.

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 15:24:35 MDT Print View

Jerry remember that is our gross earnings. Take 25% off of that. Made 58k last year. Take home 46,400. Mortgage with property tax and home owners insurance is 13,200 a year. With gasoline at $4.70 a gallon or about $350 a month. Car insurance, PG&E, AT&T, prescription co-pays, food. (we consider $20 for a take out dining experience for the two of out as a splurge), dog food, etc. it is real hard to come up with anything to pay for insurance or have any left over to invest for the future.

So with just the mortgage taken out it gives us $2766 a month/$691 a week to pay for the rest. So yes $400+ a month on another bill is out of the question.

Just found a plumbing leak under the patio slab, and we need a roof. Joy.

Edited by kthompson on 10/27/2013 15:25:44 MDT.

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: Jerks and their questions on 10/27/2013 15:33:15 MDT Print View

Like I have said. I've got no secrets and am willing to share my experience. I don't take any of these questions personally. We all can only learn if we are given facts, not guesses.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Re: For fun on 10/27/2013 16:05:01 MDT Print View

*** Still not engaging Fred about his unsubstantiated claims. ***

I will say this, though- I do not always agree with the ratings that PolitiFact or FactCheck give, even after reading their analyses. But they never seem too far off, and I am personally more likely to weight the obviously intended meaning of a statement rather than literalism, since most of these are soundbites and its kind of hard to expect a politician to quote figures that are 100% correct off-the-cuff. This seems to equally favor the left and the right, by my personal standards. But, as I said, I don't disagree by much. "Mostly False" vs "Half-Truth" or such.

And I'm assuming that, no, Fred has not actually read these analyses. That would be far too much cognitive dissonance...

Edited by acrosome on 10/27/2013 16:21:48 MDT.

Dave Stoller
(BreakingAway)
"Tea Party Haters" on 10/27/2013 16:19:54 MDT Print View

Since I've been following this thing closely from the jump I don't need to visit a website to determine if something is true. And Dean you might spend some of your own time verifying the veracity of Politifact. Politifact is sometimes like the CBO, garbage in-garbage out.

Obama said repeatedly "If you like your plan you can keep your plan". And "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor". I saw the man say it. Then apparently something clicked behind the scenes because he modified it to "If you like your plan/doctor nothing in the plan forces you to change". Parsing words. This is the problem with having attorneys run things.

He also said that a family of four would see their health care expenses reduced by $2,500 per year. I saw the man say it repeatedly, don't need to have a website verify it for me.

Both of these statements have been proven to be untrue.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Re: "Tea Party Haters" on 10/27/2013 16:30:04 MDT Print View

Yeah. What I said.

You clearly haven't been following very *closely*, because I've already endorsed the first point (after looking it up on FactCheck and PolitiFact, I might add), and have never disputed the second, which the fact-checkers have also verified. So, your experience at least seems to support the accuracy of the fact-checkers, eh? :) In the case of the "keep you plan" statements I thought that it was important to go to the fact-checkers because people often latch onto sound bites without ever hearing the full speech, and it is easy to lose the actual message. And, of course, politicians LOVE to quote one another out of context. So, it is only honest to check. And, it does appear that Obama either couldn't deliver on that one or made a VERY severe grammatical error... heh. :)

I have a lot of problems with Obama, Brother. I'm not one of those knee-jerk "Obama Walks On Water" people. Hell, I have been posting fact-check links that are critical of him, haven't I? But I'm also smart enough to look it up when people like Ted Cruz or Michele Bachmann spew blatant falsehoods. They must think that the American people are idiots or something- and evidently they are right, actually. I mean, gee, it sure is funny how the "OBAMA LIED!" foam-at-the-mouth meme pops up every time you talk to a Tea Partier, based upon relatively few gaffs, yet no one ever calls out the arch-fiend of lies, Cruz... (Not calling you a Tea Partier- you merely reminded me of the issue.)

I guess, to get back to the OP- that's why I don't like the Tea Party. The politicians that they get elected treat me like an idiot and lie to my face with far too much regularity. Mind you- I mean that they CLEARLY lie on purpose, with malice aforethought. Screw them. Frankly, they are pushing me to the left- something that I am hearing from a LOT of fellow moderates- and I think that the congressional elections next year are going to be amusing. The Tea Partiers themselves are electorally untouchableb because their constituencies are just as delusional as they are, but the Republican Party as a whole is going to suffer for their sins. That's sort of a Bad Thing in at least one way- when the Dems control both houses and the presidency they are going to get tempted to try some dumb things...

Edited by acrosome on 10/27/2013 16:52:45 MDT.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 16:37:54 MDT Print View

Sorry Ken : )

Yeah, it sure is expensive to live, doesn't seem like you're spending extravagantly or stupidly

Median U.S. income is like $50K I think - I don't know how people do it

It seems like there's something wrong with U.S. economy, especially for middle income people, we've taken a wrong turn somewhere...

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: Re: You can keep your plan... on 10/27/2013 16:51:58 MDT Print View

I'm listening to the author of this book interviewed on radio

http://www.amazon.com/Extortion-Politicians-Extract-Money-Pockets/dp/0544103343

He talks about how politicians can do insider trading - if they know a bill they're about to pass is going to affect a stock price, then can insider trade that stock

And if a bill is going to be passed that will favorably affect a company, they will hold it until the company ponies up some political contributions

etc. etc. ad nauseum...

Both parties equally

He compared it to "professional wrestling". The fighting is all staged just for entertainment. All of these battles between "conservatives" and "liberals" are just B.S.

Occasionally, someone tries to push through a bill to change things but no one else is in favor of it, so it never goes anywhere

There are a few politicians that don't like all this but are unable to fix it. Just try to get through the few things they're capable of doing.

Should we have publically financed elections? Whose going to write the rules? the author says those same politicians, so it'll never work. He says term limits would work but I don't agree - then you'll have inexperienced politicans that will be more influenced by lobbyists.

We have a real mess with no obvious solutions. Us citizens have to get "mad as hell" to start with.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: Re: Re: "Tea Party Haters" on 10/27/2013 16:55:49 MDT Print View

"But that argument doesn't work for Medicare, because if a doctor/hospital/whatever ONLY takes Medicare patients (without supplemental plan) then it isn't that they are making less money, but rather they are damned close to operating at a LOSS. You cannot make a living on Medicare patients without some sort of further subsidy, for instance a tax-supported county hospital."

True enough, but if Medicare were expanded to all, it wouldn't be just the elderly, most expensive cohort they would be treating. My thought is that the young would pay a premium higher than what would be required to cover their projected costs, in return for coverage later when they were more likely to become sick at for premiums less than what would be required to cover the projected costs. A rigorous crackdown on fraud would also be part of the solution, as would a science based approach to treatment protocols and results based reimbursements, rather than fee for serivce. The pharmaceutical industry should also be thoroughly overhauled, IMO. I'll throw out an idea here. Let a government-university consortium do the drug research and relegate Big Pharma to manufacturing the drugs, which would be sold at cost plus a margin sufficient to cover development and manufacturing costs, plus a premium to fund ongoing research, plus a reasonable profit margin akin to what the utilities are permitted. Heresy, I know, but those ba$tards are out of control and need to be reined in. We should also institute a comprehensive program of diet counseling and reintroduce physical education at all levels of the school system as part of a preventive approach to health care. If people ate properly and got a decent amount of exercise, we would eliminate an enormous of medical expense. Lastly, and perhaps I should have started with this thought, premiums should be calculated on the basis of what would be required to pay providers a salary consistent with their training, skills, and the enormous sacrifices they make in their personal lives to provide quality care. I know quite a few physicians personally, and I have seen this up close. It is a very, very demanding calling. What I am talking about here is what other developed countries seem to be doing, and frankly, I see no reaason why we can't do it here.

"As a philosophical issue a single-payer system looks pretty good, even to me. And you are correct, a lot of other people make it work. But I'm not sure if it would work well for modern America, if for no other reason than at this point I just don't trust congress and the Medicare administration. There, I said it. They have been playing games with Medicare and Medicaid for decades and I don't see why they would stop if it were the only game in town. They have a nasty tendency to set limits on what medicare will pay for a service, and they set it far below market rate.

If they stopped such shenanigans I might take the proposition more seriously."


The politics of it, unfortunately, is another thing entirely. As things stand, you are very likely on the mark, but I feel it is within the power of the American electorate to change that in an election cycle or two, if they would withdraw their collective heads from
that nether region where the sun don't shine and THOUGHTFULLY exercise their constitutional right to vote. There really is not other solution to the situation

Anyway, that's my 2 pollyanna-ish cents on the issue.

Edited to add reasonable profit for the pharmas.

Edited by ouzel on 10/27/2013 17:29:22 MDT.