Obama's "You can keep your plan" failed to anticipate how much Americans love cheap crappy plans

[PeaceNikki]

that cover nothing.

OMG you guys! Did you hear that under Obamacare, everybody is losing all their insurance and has to buy new insurance that costs a million times more and it is bad? Why did Obama lie to us and tell us that if we liked our plan we can keep our plan, when he knew, HE KNEW!!!! that a lot of Americans have really shitty insurance that only pretends to be “insurance,” but is cheap? THAT insurance is going away now, because socialist commie Obamacare won’t allow insurance companies to sell plans with enormous deductibles and very little coverage. If we want to keep our terrible shitty insurance, we can’t keep it now, because insurance companies are being forced to stop their bait and switch games. BUT WE LIKED THE BAIT, WAAAAAH! Why do you lie so much, Obama?



Tommy Christopher at Mediaite has been all over the misleading coverage of the ACA rollout; the “Obama Promised Nothing Would Ever Change” story has actually gotten loud enough that even the rightwing Newsbusters website is acknowledging that Obamacare is not the only reason that some people’s policies are changing.

And for what is already a very slim slice of the private insurance market — people covered by what Consumer Reports calls “junk insurance” — some insurers are just plain pulling those plans even though technically they were “grandfathered in.” Holders of shitty plans can keep them, but only if the insurance companies choose to continue selling them. But since they can’t sell new policies in those crappy plans, it makes more sense for the companies to discontinue them altogether, a detail that gets left out of most coverage.

Still, this is a bit of an unforced error for Team Obama — instead of the unqualified “if you like your insurance plan, your doctor, or both, you will be able to keep them,” it probably would have been better to have added “if your insurance doesn’t cover essentials like hospitalization, we’ll help you get on a plan that does while still being affordable.” But the narrative du jour now takes that “you can keep your plan” and turns it into “Obama lied, because insurance companies are cancelling our shitty plans!”

Read more at http://wonkette.com/532898/obamas-you-can-keep-your-plan-failed-to-anticipate-how-much-americans-love-cheap-crappy-plans-that-cover-nothing#qSViwXWAssFtpMud.99

[PeaceNikki]

2. And for many in the stupid states that refused to expand Medicaid.

Including my own.

I think it will get better. It has to. This is a huge change.

[Puzzledtraveller]

6. Did some states that did not start their own exchanges expand medicaid

or was that a package deal?

[PeaceNikki]

8. WI did neither. I think some states refused expansion and did set up exchanges (I think KY?).

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. $50 a month for crap insurance that caps out at $2000 is not having Insurance...

[Skidmore]

9. ACA establishes floor by setting policy standards

and everyone who can is expected to contribute.

[VanillaRhapsody]

4. they were going to get Sticker Stroke if they saw the bill for a major illness without healthcare.

also they should understand...this is on AGI not on Gross.

[VanillaRhapsody]

20. I am near that age...live in a major city (with rents as high as that) and make that much myself.

I don't even have a mortgage to deduct. I put your figures for that city and that salary in the calculator...

Household income in 2014:406% of poverty levelMaximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:None Health Insurance premium in 2014 (for a silver plan, before tax credit):$7,072 per year You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$0 per year
(which covers 0% of the overall premium) Amount you pay for the premium:$7,072 per year
(which equals 11.23% of your household income and covers 100% of the overall premium)
OTHER LEVELS OF COVERAGE

The premium amounts above are based on a Silver plan. You could purchase other levels of coverage, such as a Gold plan (which would be more comprehensive) or a Bronze plan (which would be less comprehensive).

^^^ that is $589 a month...for the Silver plan (and this is if their Adjusted is $63,000 you quoted.)

So you are not being honest.

http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/#state=ca&zip=94115&income-type=dollars&income=63%2C000&employer-coverage=0&people=2&alternate-plan-family=individual&adult-count=2&adults%5B0%5D%5Bage%5D=21&adults%5B0%5D%5Btobacco%5D=0&adults%5B1%5D%5Bage%5D=21&adults%5B1%5D%5Btobacco%5D=0&child-count=0&child-tobacco=0

[VanillaRhapsody]

25. I did put it in for 2 people!

that helps not hurt them...

[VanillaRhapsody]

26. its NOT on gross income....

Result for San Jose...with your figures..and it gets even better for them!

results
Because your income is more than 400% of the poverty level, you would not qualify for subsidized exchange coverage. The information below is about unsubsidized exchange coverage.

Household income in 2014:406% of poverty levelMaximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:None Health Insurance premium in 2014 (for a silver plan, before tax credit):$6,449 per year You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$0 per year
(which covers 0% of the overall premium) Amount you pay for the premium:$6,449 per year
(which equals 10.24% of your household income and covers 100% of the overall premium)
OTHER LEVELS OF COVERAGE

The premium amounts above are based on a Silver plan. You could purchase other levels of coverage, such as a Gold plan (which would be more comprehensive) or a Bronze plan (which would be less comprehensive).

For example, you could enroll in a Bronze plan for about $4,772 per year (which is 7.57% of your household income). For most people, the Bronze plan represents the minimum level of coverage required under health reform. Although you would pay less in premiums by enrolling in a Bronze plan, you will face higher out-of-pocket costs than if you enrolled in a Silver plan.

Now it's $537 for the Silver Plan a month! for 2 people!

Your out-of-pocket maximum for a Silver plan (not including the premium) can be no more than $12,700.

[VanillaRhapsody]

31. thats how much I put in!

and they still have their Standard deduction! Which for married filing jointly is $12,200!

[VanillaRhapsody]

54. Yes Kaiser...

http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/

[VanillaRhapsody]

57. Here is everything...

3.Enter annual income (dollars)?
4.Is employer coverage available??
5.Number of people in family?
6.Number of adults (21 and older) enrolling in exchange coverage
Age? Uses Tobacco? ?
Age? Uses Tobacco?
7.Number of children (20 and younger) enrolling in exchange coverage

results
Because your income is more than 400% of the poverty level, you would not qualify for subsidized exchange coverage. The information below is about unsubsidized exchange coverage.

Household income in 2014:406% of poverty levelMaximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:None Health Insurance premium in 2014 (for a silver plan, before tax credit):$6,449 per year You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$0 per year
(which covers 0% of the overall premium) Amount you pay for the premium:$6,449 per year
(which equals 10.24% of your household income and covers 100% of the overall premium)
OTHER LEVELS OF COVERAGE

The premium amounts above are based on a Silver plan. You could purchase other levels of coverage, such as a Gold plan (which would be more comprehensive) or a Bronze plan (which would be less comprehensive).

For example, you could enroll in a Bronze plan for about $4,772 per year (which is 7.57% of your household income). For most people, the Bronze plan represents the minimum level of coverage required under health reform. Although you would pay less in premiums by enrolling in a Bronze plan, you will face higher out-of-pocket costs than if you enrolled in a Silver plan.

OUT OF POCKET COSTS

Your out-of-pocket maximum for a Silver plan (not including the premium) can be no more than $12,700. Whether you reach this maximum level will depend on the amount of health care services you use. Currently, about one in four people use no health care services in any given year.

A Silver plan has an actuarial value of 70%. This means that for all enrollees in a typical population, the plan will pay for 70% of expenses in total for covered benefits, with enrollees responsible for the rest. If you choose to enroll in a Bronze plan, the actuarial value will be 60%, meaning your out-of-pocket costs when you use services will likely be higher. Regardless of which level of coverage you choose, deductibles and copayments will vary from plan to plan, and out-of-pocket costs will depend on your health care expenses. Preventive services will be covered with no cost sharing required.

OTHER COVERAGE OPTIONS

[VanillaRhapsody]

40. You DON"T Itemize with the standard deduction!

because it is the ONLY deduction you take.

[VanillaRhapsody]

49. that is NOT what I am reading...

When applying for a health insurance tax credit, you may be told that "modified adjusted gross income" is basically the same thing. It's not.

Keeping in mind that the “M” stands for “modified,” if you took certain deductions to report your AGI, you may need to add them back to report your MAGI, such as:

Deductions for IRA contributions.

Deductions for student loan interest or tuition.

Excluded foreign income.

Interest from EE(employee) savings bonds used to pay higher education expenses.

Employer-paid adoption expenses.

Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/health/2013/09/aca-need-to-know-whats-adjustable-gross-income.html#storylink=cpy

[VanillaRhapsody]

65. After FICA?

[VanillaRhapsody]

28. and I have no idea what YOU are talking about...I am posting my results...

[BlueStreak]

32. Please stop saying that. It is wrong

You have been corrected on other threads when claiming that the income was after the Standard Deduction. That is simply not true, and some of our colleagues might make a big mistake if they are misled by that.

The income calculations for ACA are unique to the ACA. It is neither "Gross" not "AGI" in IRS terms. It is gross income minus a few very specifically identified items. People need to go through the application process to get that right.

[VanillaRhapsody]

37. It is NOT on gross income!

When applying for a health insurance tax credit, you may be told that "modified adjusted gross income" is basically the same thing. It's not.

Keeping in mind that the “M” stands for “modified,” if you took certain deductions to report your AGI, you may need to add them back to report your MAGI, such as:

Deductions for IRA contributions.

Deductions for student loan interest or tuition.

Excluded foreign income.

Interest from EE(employee) savings bonds used to pay higher education expenses.

Employer-paid adoption expenses.

Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/health/2013/09/aca-need-to-know-whats-adjustable-gross-income.html#storylink=cpy

It IS your AGI .....but with ^^^^ those added back if you took them.

If you took the standard deduction...you wouldn't have those would you?


NOW you can stop telling me I am wrong!

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. Nope for 2 people...calculated that in...

[BlueStreak]

45. Yes, you are still wrong. It is gross income

minus a few allowable items. It has nothing to do with the standard deduction.

For most people, it is essentially gross income.

[VanillaRhapsody]

46. no it is not....

not if you don't itemize...

[BlueStreak]

58. Please stop doing this. You are confusing others.

From http://obamacarefacts.com/insurance-exchange/calculating-tax-credits.php

Why Does MAGI Matter?

Modified Adjusted Gross Income is a measure used by the IRS to determine if a taxpayer is eligible to use certain deductions, credits, or retirement plans. “Modified Adjusted Gross Income” (not "Adjusted Gross Income&quot will be used in determining eligibility for your health insurance tax credits. The IRS phases out the tax credit as your income increases. By adding MAGI factors back to your AGI, the IRS determines how much you really earned. Beginning in 2014, your MAGI determines whether you will be eligible for premium tax credits on the new Health Insurance Marketplaces

What is Adjusted Gross Income?

Generally, your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) is your household's income less various adjustments {Bluestreak ed: not DEDUCTIONS} . Adjusted Gross Income is calculated before the itemized or standard deductions, exemptions and credits are taken into account.

What is Modified Adjusted Gross Income?

Generally, your Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) is the total of your house hold's Adjusted Gross Income and any tax-exempt interest income you may have (these are the amounts on lines 37 and 8b of IRS from 1040).

None of the deductions come into play. This is all pre-deduction.

[VanillaRhapsody]

64. So then you are saying AGI IS the same as Gross?

BUT we ARE calculating on Gross and the calculations at Kaiser show....insurance is affordable.

In fact...the last job I had...before this one...I was making $30,000 a year and was offered insurance for just $500 a month just for ME (because the owner of the companies wife had breast cancer)!


So...

[BlueStreak]

73. It looks like a fair deal.

Californians have the advantage of state executives supporting the program rather than sabotaging, and a high number of legitimate competitors. Even without a subsidy, those premiums don't look exorbitant.

In some other states, not so much, but we'll just have to do our best to get through the first year. As we get through the next 6 weeks, the GOP will have to start talking about the real issues instead of just saying they are going to kill it. There are definitely some things that ought to change for 2015.

[VanillaRhapsody]

74. I readily admit there is plenty of room for improvement...

but there are just too many "freaking out" over having probably the best healthcare coverage they have had in their entire lives!

[BlueStreak]

75. I get that, but one person's "freaking out" is another person's ...

"wanting to know the whole truth before entering the debate."

I just don't see a lot of what I would call "freaking out" here. I see a lot of people wanting to support the program, but having difficulty because others seem to want to shout them down whenever they try to learn the true status of things.

[VanillaRhapsody]

76. I see it totally different....if you were paying attention to anywhere but DU you will see there is

a campaign underfoot.

[Puzzledtraveller]

5. People are afraid they will have to pay more.

[Ohio Joe]

7. I always thought the message was more then clear...

"Still, this is a bit of an unforced error for Team Obama — instead of the unqualified “if you like your insurance plan, your doctor, or both, you will be able to keep them,” it probably would have been better to have added “if your insurance doesn’t cover essentials like hospitalization, we’ll help you get on a plan that does while still being affordable.” But the narrative du jour now takes that “you can keep your plan” and turns it into “Obama lied, because insurance companies are cancelling our shitty plans!” "

This last paragraph you quoted sums it up perfectly... It was always clear to me that policies that did not meet the new minimum standards would have to change. This whole non-sense is simply more right wing bullshit to scare the stupid.

[Demo_Chris]

21. People believed the President and now you are being critical of them for doing so?

While you might like it, this is really very VERY simple. The President made a point of repeatedly saying something that turns out not to be even remotely true. The change might be understandable, it might even be for the better, but it was still not true. People should be able to trust what their elected representatives tell them, and when it turns out that those representatives were not telling them the truth they are going to be pissed off -- and you can bet your ass the media is going to report it gleefully.

That's reality. Short and sweet, if you don't want people angry at you for lying there is a very simple solution.

[BlueStreak]

41. Well, to be fair, it the GOP wasn't talking about Death Panels and insurance fairies

maybe Obama would have felt he could speak at a more precise, albeit wonky, level. I note that through that entire time, not a single prominent Republic stood up and said anything like:

"The issue is not 'death panels', 'socialism', or how many pages are in the bill. As fiscally responsible Republicans, we have a genuine concern about how this may affect Americans who are currently buying their own insurance. It seems to us that some of the crap that insurance companies are selling is so far below the minimum possible standard for real health care coverage that they may decide they simply have to discontinue offering those junk policies. And if that happens, then what the President is saying will not be true."

So where were the Republicans at the time?

Screw them. They had their chance to raise legitimate issues and help work out solutions. They have no right to come in at implementation time and bring up issues they should have been talking about 3 years ago.

It is an unforced error on Obama, which is why we know it wasn't intentional. If he knew this was a likely scenario, he would have played it out differently.

[Demo_Chris]

79. It wasn't a 'likely' scenario, it was a GIVEN.

President Obama made a mistake in making this silly and unnecessary promise, and a bigger mistake in not educating the public about this bill before it went live. I suspect that at least half the country still doesn't know what this law actually does -- I'm not even sure the members of Congress who voted for it know what's in it.

But once it passed, instead of educating the public, the White House has treated the ACA like a mystery guest at a kid's birthday party.

I just know you're gonna love it! Just wait till you see how wonderful it is! It does everything for everybody! No, no I can't tell you what it is -- that will just spoil the surprise. But you'll think it's the greatest thing ever!

[BlueStreak]

81. I don't think it was a given in the context of 2009

The insurance companies pushed for gradfathering of policies. The law accommodated that. It was reasonable to assume that the insurance companies would want to keep those junk policies alive as long as they could. Obama might have been thinking, "once people figure out the current policies are mostly crap, they won't want to keep them anyway."

Sitting here in 2013, we see it clearly was a tactical error. But I'm not even so concerned about that. The real error is not capping a spade a spade today. The administration should come out and tell people what is really happening. They should be contesting this AGGRESSIVELY:

"Look, in 2009, we made provisions that would grandfather existing policies and that's why we made the statement we made. We expected that the insurance companies would want to continue those policies as long as they could. But let everyone understand this: the policies that are being discontinued are INFERIOR insurance. They are being discontinued because they are so far below the minimum standards of the Affordable Care Act and the insurance companies have decided it is better to bring their customers up to this improved level of coverage sooner rather than later. While this means more people will need to upgrade their policies, that is good news. It means that hundreds of thousands of Americans will end up with much better insurance in 2014. And most of them will find this very affordable under the ACA framework. I am sorry I did not accurately predict exactly how some insurance companies would react, but I am not sorry that hundreds of thousands of Americans are going to have better coverage than we expected. "

[Demo_Chris]

82. Not to quibble, but any time you issue blanket guarantees you are gonna get burned...

Particularly when you are discussing something as complex as a hundred million varied health insurance policies.

In any case, they have had years to get ahead of this. It should have never been an issue. Yet here we are, less than a month after the thing has gone live, and already the ACA story is a screwed up launch of the website, white house deceptions, dropped policies, and unexpectedly high costs. Already people on other websites are starting to ask about the $2500 savings Obama promised them, so you can bet that's a talking point from someone on the right.

And if you think all this is bad, just wait until people who are barely scraping by today see the MANDATE.

[BlueStreak]

83. I don't think there has been any deception about the mandate

And in fact, the mandate the first year is very, very small, so I don't expect a great wave of outrage as people file their 2014 tax returns 16 months from now. As we go into the 2015 ACA plan, this all ramps up. I think that is one of the unspoken things that people don't really understand. This is a multi-year roll-out, just as it was in Massachusetts. A lot of people won't do this in 2014 and they will pay a nominal fine. But but 2015 and 2016 we should be seeing very high enrollment rates.

And not coincidentally, by 2015 and 2016 the markets (and computer systems) will be working more smoothly, giving us more consistent competition across the entire country. Insurance companies are working hard to maintain cartels in a lot of the states today. But by about February 2014, there will be companies saying "Why should I compete so hard in California for a $400/mo price when I can sell a policy with exactly the same risk in Indiana for $650/mo. The idea of common standards and transparent exchanges for every state fundamentally changes how insurance companies must compete. Some of them are being bastards right now, but this structure will eventually close in on them.

[Demo_Chris]

85. The fine is not as small as you think...

In 2014 it starts at $95 or 1% -- whichever is GREATER -- and it rapidly ramps up from there.

In 2015 it climbs to $325 or 2% -- whichever is greater.

In 2016 it jumps to $695 or 2.5% -- again, whichever is greater. These are per person penalties, so a family of three is looking at a $2100 hit in 2016.

We live in interesting times, both as a society and as a party. By the time the 2016 election rolls around everyone is going to understand all about these penalties, they will have experienced the wonders of Obam's excvhanges for themselves, and will have decided whether this law was a good thing or a disaster. The answer to that question might well decide not only which party wins the election, but sadly, which direction our nation needs to be headed.

We have a LOT riding on this.

In my opinion we would have been better off fighting for, and losing, the battle for single payer or an NHS, rather than passing this. Had we done so, we would have given people a reason to vote for us in 2010 rather than staying home in disgust. But we didn't do that. We didn't even try. And everyone in the country knows it. Instead of healthcare for the people, our party fought for guaranteed profits for the insurance industry and new monthly bill for those barely scraping by. And if it doesn't work, if we fucked it up, god help us as a party and a movement. This was a very risky gamble on a half-assed solution, and it better work or we are screwed.

[BlueStreak]

88. It is not a big fine.

If you have $40,000 income, the fine would be $400. But in all likelihood, that same person can get off their ass and buy good insurance on the exchange for a net cost of under $100 a month -- less than they spend on cell phones or cable teevee. You will get no sympathy from me for the person in those particular circumstances. That is a great deal and they ought to act on it.

I am not saying that everybody fits into exactly those circumstances, and I certain have more empathy for people who are hit harder than this, but I'd have to see some examples where this first-year penalty is unfair.

Let's look at some other examples. A person making $80K would face an $800 fine, and does not benefit from subsidies. So that person might be looking at the prospect of buying insurance for about $6000 or else paying an $800 fine. My empathy meter is a little higher in this case, because $6000 is a big chunk. But this is a person with a decent income, CHOOSING to be a deadbeat, and choosing to pass his health care costs on to me. I wish his costs were only about $3500, which is what we would get if we had single payer. But really, if you have $80K of income, you should not be dumping your HC costs onto your neighbors.

Can you give me an example where you think the 1% penalty is unfair and an extreme hardship?

[Demo_Chris]

89. $400 Per person in that family during the first year.

A family of three earning 40K a year could very well find themselves living paycheck to paycheck even now. If we assume a family of three, non-smokers, two aged 45 and one aged 21 (a very typical modern American family), according to the Kaiser calculator, even with subsidies, their monthly Obamacare bill will be more than $200 a month for a silver plan. That's using the national average.

And I suspect for most families living at that income range $200 is a LOT of extra money to come up with.

But if they don't they'll be paying that fine, and by 2016 that fine is going to be massive.

[BlueStreak]

90. So they should take the Bronze policy

Then they don't pay any fine. You tell me how many of those families don't spend well over $100 on cell phones. How many of them don't spend $100 or so on cable teevee and other entertainment.

What we are talking about is choices. Until now, they have had the option to dump their health care costs on me. Now they have an option to do the right thing with a GREAT DEAL of assistance from the taxpayers. And if that means they have to give up their cell phones, I don't think that is an unfair thing. It is simply a question of priorities. Food, shelter, safety, and health care should be priorities over cell phones, clothes, cars, and entertainment.

If you can give some specifics about the actual plans available in this circumstance, maybe that would put things in a different light. My assumption is that an individual (not a family) making $40K can get a basic policy for under $100 just about anywhere in the country. I may be completely wrong about that. And certainly insurance for a family of 4 is higher.

[Demo_Chris]

92. That's certainly one answer...

According to that calculator, a typical bronze plan for the family above would cost them about $75 per month (versus $200 for the silver). That might or might not be manageable, and it is of questionable benefit.

I don't like to discuss how other people spend their money, and I particularly cringe at the suggestion that others are irresponsible with it. Yes, some families spend a hundred on their cell phones, some also have internet, and might pay for cable TV. They might even go out to eat or purchase pre-packaged food from their local walmart. They might enjoy air conditioning, refrigeration, and electricity. Some also probably purchase store bought clothing rather than sewing their own. I'm sure you see where this is going.

Yes, a family earning 40K a year might well buy some music from Itunes, enjoy surfing the web, or purchasing presents on their respective birthdays and Christmas. I don't deny it. They are no doubt doing EVERYTHING they can to make this short and often miserable life as enjoyable as they can -- despite the fact that any investment in pleasure might be labelled as irresponsible.

But all of that is simply side stepping the question, which is:

How is that family going to react politically to this? While it's nice that President Obama is willing to step up and spend their money for them, on something he feels is more responsible, but some families are not going to react well to this.

[BlueStreak]

94. We need to emphasize personal responsibility. That is what this is all about.

It is not responsible to dump your health care costs on your neighbors, especially when there is a plan that makes this very affordable for you.

How will people react? I don't know. Most people don't like being irresponsible. Most people don't like being on welfare. They do it because there may not be any real alternatives available to them.

Now we have a REAL alternative to the health care thing. Explained properly, I bet a lot of people would take some real pride in knowing that they are covered and they they can hold their heads high when they walk into the doctor's office.

But I agree a sales job is needed.

[Demo_Chris]

97. In will be interesting to see how this turns out. nt

[BlueStreak]

95. And re: the bronze policy, it is the same high-quality insurance as the Platinum

You see the same doctors. It covers all the same services. It has all the same protections under ACA rules. The only difference is the out-of-pocket you are at risk for.

[Demo_Chris]

96. And that, my friend, can be all the difference in the world...

If you cannot afford the deductible and co-pay, and anyone forced by necessity to buy a bronze plan cannot, then you aren't getting healthcare. You're just paying a bill.

[BlueStreak]

98. It is still far better then the prior situation

The big problem the law is trying do deal with is such a high percentage of people getting their health care from the emergency room, which:

a) is absolutely the highest cost way of providing HS services; and
b) is mostly noncollectable, forcing the charges to be pushed onto the paying customers by a doubling or tripling of the charges.

In the Bronze policy, there are absolutely no copays for preventive care, so this hypothetical family is far more likely to visit their PCP when they are in good shape instead of waiting until they are gravely ill and heading to the ER.

Even if they can't pay a penny of the co-pays in the case of a greater illness, at least the providers are getting paid for a substantial part of their services, and that greatly reduces the burden shifting, if not completely eliminating it.

I just don't understand how anybody can argue this is a bad thing. Is it as good as single payer? Probably not. But it is still a major step forward for our society.

[onlyadream]

68. We have individual

We have individual insurance that covers 100% hospital, and treatments, zero deductible and zero copay, free well visits. We pay out of pocket for everything else. This insurance is going to be cancelled because it doesn't have the extras. The quotes I received on the exchange were horrible. The bronze plan premium was more than double what we pay now with a $6000 family deductible and 50% copays. That is much worse than what we now have. The better plans, silver and platinum, had premiums of up to $1700 per month, which had normal deductibles and copays, but look at that premium!!

The OP seems to not understand that shitty insurance was at least affordable, but now we are facing double the premiums for what amounts to even shittier catastrophic insurance.

[Xithras]

11. Too many words. "Americans love cheap" would have sufficed.

Americans generally love buying cheap things, even when spending slightly more money results in a higher quality product. To a vast percentage of the population, price trumps quality. Hell, WalMart has built their entire business model on the idea. It's a cornerstone of American commerce, and can be traced to the success of everything from Ford to Amazon and Ebay.

The angry people generally don't give a shit that they're getting a better policy. They're furious that they're being forced to spend money they don't want to spend.

[PeaceNikki]

12. These are people who used to get their highs off the baggies of oregano sold on Washington Square

because the price was so reasonable.

-my favorite comment there so far.

[NoOneMan]

17. Well shit. Who wants to pay more than the Canadians, the Germans, the French, etc?

What's wrong with cheap if it works?

Am I implying their shit plan works in this shit system the shit law can't fix? Nope.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

13. there are many "rugged individualists" who are in denial about their true motives

they really want to live as much on the cheap as possible. They can pretend they are responsible by having this low cost plan that covers virtually nothing, and then they can whine about lack of coverage when they have major illness, they can still get treated for the illness, and then they can run away from their bills and let someone else deal with it.

Pretty sad, really.

Hey, guys! Maybe if EVERYONE in each age group is having to feel the pain of health insurance prices equally....everyone will fucking DEMAND that health care providers fucking LOWER their costs!

[PeaceNikki]

14. Or, with the caps on profits, it will organically lower as a result of a bigger/healthier pool?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

16. I think they will need to also actively work on lowering typical health care costs

which are astronomical and produce no better health outcomes than much cheaper health care in other countries.

But yes, I think some of the things already put in place will at least stop the growth of health insurance premium costs.

[IronLionZion]

80. insurance has bargaining power to negotiate lower rates

if a single payer or government run system did this, they would say its socialism rationing care and controlling doctors.

But insurance companies can use their power over providers to offer fairer pricing, and then claim its private sector efficiency.

[ScreamingMeemie]

15. Happy to K&R. So glad my son's "insurance" is part of the canceled crap.

:kick:

[PeaceNikki]

19. I am so very happy that ACA is helping you, me and many others I know.

I'm able to keep my son on my policy for a few more years while he plants his feet.

[zipplewrath]

22. Many = 1%

I've yet to see anyone put numbers against these claims. In a land of 300+ million people, 1% is 3 million people. To say "many" people are having sticker shock is a bit of a distortion. There were people who had a product that could scarcely be called insurance that are having a rude awaking, but "many" of them may have already known they had crap insurance. I'd really like to know how "many" are truly surprised.

[HereSince1628]

23. Yes, I think this one is going to leave a mark.

I don't think it's the end of his presidency, but this one hits people squarely in their personal life and for some upsets their choices.

[econoclast]

27. Our cancelled plan was NOT crappy nor cheap

Have a small business. 6 employees plus myself. Everyone over 50. Most over 60. Those with kids ... The kids are grown with insurance of their own.

But our policy will not be renewed we have been informed because it does not cover maternity care nor pediatric vision and both are now required.

Really?!?!? We insure a bunch of near senior citizens. Requiring maternity and pediatric vision also requires a miracle of Biblical proportions. If it came to pass that we DID need maternity care and pediatric vision we could sell the "Miracle Birth" story to the National Enquirer for more money than the medical care cost!!!

We pay more in premiums because we are old. Fair enough. The probability of one of us needing healthcare is greater than a 25 year old. I get that. But the same logic should allow us to NOT buy insurance for an event whose probability (also because we are old) is now ZERO.

But regardless of logic, our policy won't be renewed. Looking at much higher premiums and/or deductibles.

Go figure.

[PeaceNikki]

38. So has it been your policy to always employ only those beyond child-bearing age?

And people without children who may need coverage?

[econoclast]

42. I've worked with these folks for 20 years!

When we were younger we had Family coverage. But as we got older we pared back to what we need

[PeaceNikki]

52. Yeah, obviously I can't know all of that, nor does it really matter.

It sounds like you have a very specific and unique situation. I don't know what state you're in but perhaps it would be worthwhile to shop the exchanges?

In any case, if it's an increase to you others, slight or significant, I hope it's manageable and temporary while the system is built. But I remain confident that ACA, warts and all, is still helping more people than it's hurting.

So there's that.

[econoclast]

67. Real backbreaker is DOCTORS!

Trying to work thru whose Docs are in what plan.

Details are kind'a sketchy at the moment.

We have provided health insurance since 1993. But it might be that, to allow everyone to keep their Docs, we'll have to drop our company plan and let everyone do what's best for themselves as individuals. And that SUCKS! I'm very proud of the collegial way we work. I WANT to do the right thing for these people ... They are my friends as well as employees. And terminating their insurance feels like tying Nell to the railroad tracks. (Old guy reference don't worry if you don't get it). But that might be the outcome.

[econoclast]

70. And Nikki. By the way ...

Everybody's situation is specific and unique.

Took me a while to figure that out. Don't let it take you so long.

[PeaceNikki]

71. You don't have to be condescending. Read the rest of my reply.

[ReverendDeuce]

66. I feel for you... I was thunderously assaulted for sharing my similar story a few weeks back...

I am in my mid-30s and my premiums have jumped by 60%, my copay went from 0% to 50%, and my deductible went from $1,500 to $3,000.

I am really furious about it.

[onlyadream]

69. But you must be a troll

It can't be true!!

[ReverendDeuce]

86. Or it must be my JUNK POLICY... that paid $80K in medical bills in 2011... n/t

n/t

[stevenleser]

84. And you finally indicated you make too much to qualify for a subsidy. And still your premium isn't

high.

[ReverendDeuce]

87. Premium went from $160 to $234, co-pay/deductibles went WAY up... So what if I don't get a subsidy?

Last edited Wed Oct 30, 2013, 01:04 PM - Edit history (1)

ACA made Blue Cross cancel my plan because it didn't offer maternity of pediatric dental/vision.

Singler-payer or bust!

[stevenleser]

91. I would characterize your situation as a win for the ACA. You can try to spin in how you want. nt

[ReverendDeuce]

93. A win!? A win for the insurance cartels, maybe... As far as I am concerned, this sucks! n/t

n/t

[BlueStreak]

29. +1, but I would state it a little differently

Instead of "Obama failed to anticipate how much Americans love cheap crappy plans", I would say

"We all failed to recognize just how crappy so many of these individual policies were."

After all, you only really know the plan isn't worth a bucket of pee until you actually have to use it in a big way. And statistically, most of us don't have to do that. So we assumed the policies were a lot better than they actually were. And when the Insurance companies were faced with the requirement to bring them up to a bard bones standard under ACA, many of these companies are showing their true colors.

"Do you realize how much more it would cost us to actually provide REAL coverage? We can't upgrade these policies. These policies were never designed to actually provide real health care."

I predict this will very quickly become the real story -- not the tick-tock of the healthcare.gov fixes. And that is as it should be. This ends up being a much more monumental moment than most of us ever realized.

[econoclast]

34. Certainly NOT true for us

Our old cancelled plan was in almost all respects comparable to a Gold or Platinum plan. See post 27 above for details.

[BKH70041]

48. Nice try, Doktor Zoom

But it won't play on Main Street.

[DustyJoe]

60. plans

The hell with krappy plans

When you HAVE to change plans and your Doctor for the last 18yrs is NOT an approved plan provider I could give a bronze/silver crap about the plan. At my age I want the Dr. that has known and treated me for almost 2 decades to remain my Doc.

This just plain sukz !!!!!!

[Glassunion]

77. That's not 100% true.

What Obama's "You can keep your plan" failed to realize is insurance company greed.

I had a policy that would would have met, and left in the dust the ACA requirements. However the insurance company dropped the plan. They no longer offer it.

What they now offer is a plan that has:
10% less coverage
150% increase in out of pocket
50% increase in annual deductible
35% increase in premiums

All said an done, for the same services I received this year, I can look at more than a 200% increase in the coming year.

[Bozvotros]

78. I am less interested in the out of pocket max than I am about first dollar coverage.

I had an employer drop a very good local HMO plan which had a 10,000 deductible with first dollar coverage for another one which had a 10K deductible before the insurance kicked in. I think this was called a fee for service plan. For every year but one, I paid through the ass and never got a red cent in insurance coverage. This was about 10 years ago. I remember that once I hit that magic number it went from no coverage to full coverage. Whoppee.

My insurance cost was around 280 a month for my wife and I. Our medical bills ran us around 700-800 a month which meant the insurance never had to kick in for us. This was in Indiana when I made about 50K. The new plan was like taking a 15-20% cut in my salary. It was breaking me and I ended up quitting that job and taking one with first dollar coverage. I have also worked as case manager in a hospital and negotiated admissions and rates with insurance companies. There I learned that there were all kinds of crooked, deceptive insurance plans out there which cap or just didn't cover lots of health care needs.

Now I am hearing about this same kind of bullshit with the ACA. I am hoping that when I hear about 12000 out of pocket that it doesn't mean that there is no coverage until you hit your out of pocket.