So how much is your insurance going up due to Obamacare?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kib

Even as one in favor of a more communal outlook, I can't find much to like about ACA.

I keep likening our public policy to a very stupid person's approach to their life circumstances: if you have an $8000 electric bill each month and half a brain, the first thing you do is not to take a second job to pay the bill, OR ask your neighbor to pay some of it for you. You look at the bill and see why on earth it's so high. You turn out lights and put on a sweater. In fact maybe you even go down to the electric company with a cattle prod.

The question of "how shall the country pay its healthcare bill" should be absolutely secondary to, "where on earth did this bill amount come from, are they nuts?"


ETA: I'm not suggesting that each of us can take on the task of analyzing our health care / health insurance costs on our own, but that if our administration is actually for the people, that should be the first order of business, not paying some insane fee and then casually asking why when the money's already gone.

---

Everyone who has a medical treatment knows why things costs so much--because the patient takes no active role in consuming the service, there is a disconnect between the service and paying the bill. Patients don't have enough skin in the game to work toward reducing costs. That's is a mistake and we all need to take more responsibility in non-emergency situations and just say "no."

The last medical treatment I had was for a dog bite on my knuckle. I probably could have got by with no treatment at all, but DH urged me to go get stitches, so I did. As it turns out, the bite never became infected.

But the urgent care doc who sewed me up then sent me to the hand doctor in the same building. That was completely unnecessary and I should have said "no, unnecessary" but the hand doctor has got to get his cut for this small event. He told me that I didn't need to come back a second time, he wanted to save me the $50 co pay. That's nice of him but $50 is nothing, what was the insurance company paying him? I don't even know, and that is wrong.

Our medical event before this was when DH fainted--twice--at a party. We were surrounded by medical professionals who urged him to go to the hospital. 24 hours later and god knows how many thousands of dollars later, he was fine, tests revealed not one bloody thing wrong with him. Two years after this event later he is completely fine and nothing has ever come of that.

Ugh, it's all a racquet.

I don't believe I'd be in any position to negotiate or say no if they were prescribing chemo or something and I wouldn't. And even the end of life stuff is being paid for mostly by Medicare rather than insurance. So there's really very little excuse for pre-Medicare healthcare being the ripoff it is. As for the scam that is much of modern pharma, maybe they should just reduce demand by banning t.v. advertising haha. Leave the doctors and patients free to seek what they want as far as prescriptions (whether insurance covers ah well that's another can of worms), but no direct to consumer advertising.

To make consumers more responsible for paying for their own healthcare is actually one of the GOALS of Obamacare, whether or not they state it that way. They tell the lies they think we want to hear, but it's definitely in the economic structure that is emerging. It's a very conservative plan in many ways (it's trying to force a marketbased solution). It's why many of the plans on the exchanges are high deductible which is only bad if you 1) dont' have the deductible in cash savings - if you don't then why the heck are you going for a high deductible plan you can't use anyway? maybe because it's the only one you can afford and you have to get insurance :\ 2) need years of expensive medical treatment which will wipe out most people's savings. These plans are going for premiums that are really too high for barely cover anything plans ... they're fairly high deductible plans with non high-deductible premiums.

Another way that Obamacare will make consumers more responsible for paying for their own healthcare is that employers will continue to drop healthcare (especially those "Cadillac" plans which if healthcare inflation continues is pretty much going to be all the PPOs, but employers will also continue to drop even the non-"Cadillac"). So hooray they'll no longer be an employer middleman, we'll all be liberated from our health insurance! (which mostly reminds me of the joke about Iraqis being liberated from their lives - although I really don't regard it as at all comparable in scale - that was genocide afterall, this is just crummy insurance policies). So consumers will be left to buy their own health insurance. But if employers have minimal bargaining power with insurance companies, what kind of bargaining power will consumers have? Competition in the oligopoly world of health insurance will solve everything? The consumers will be cost sensitive but this may lead more to penny wise and pound foolish than actual good decision making (ie go with the cheapo plan with cheap premiums and go bankrupt should you have medical emergency).

Maybe one of the major objectives of Obamacare is to get the cost of healthcare off employers. Because employers in the U.S. have trouble competing with all those countries where employers don't have to pay for healthcare. They solve it by socialized medicine. We'll solve it by everyone having to buy their own expensive HMO insurance policies that pay for very little until you reach some high deductible and that still leave you open to medical bankruptcy should you wind up in the hospital and see an out of network specialist. They'll sell fear more than actual product (one might say they already do, but at least the few decent plans remaining actually cover some routine things and provide *some* protection). As less and less is covered they'll be selling pure protection from fear itself with a mandate.

Ha. At the eleventh hour, after *many* frustrating days/hours on the web site and the phone, my wife finally managed to get us signed up for "something".

The nice lady on the other end of the phone didn't know *exactly* what "something" was, what was covered, what deductibles or co-pays were, or if our local doctors would take "something" (or if we'd have to travel an entire day and spend $100+ to see a non-local doctor), but heck, progress, right?

And the good news is, it appears "something" will be completely free, courtesy of Alan, so thanks there, Big Guy! Mind you, we have no clue what we are getting for "free". I wonder if it is as good as the plan we had selected of our own free will and bought with our own hard-earned dollars, which our government informs us we are too child-like to select on our own, and arranged to be cancelled for us?

So, if January 1st I get hit by a bus, heck, "something" will be covered by "someone" "somewhere".

I guess I'll have to use it to see what's in it....

My insurance is increasing by $4 a month and a 3-month supply of a generic drug prescription is going up from $10 to $12. We are also getting a new vision plan. It doesn't look like much else has changed.

The latest plan I am considering is a Blue Cross bronze level plan that is $464/month with a $6000 annual deductible, a 20% co-insurance and $60 co-pay for doctors visits (I forget how much meds co-pay is but ER and hospital co-pays are $250). That's approx. $300/month more for premiums than my previous catastrophic plan was and I had a lower deducible of $4000 and I had no co-insurance costs before. But it's the lowest price plan I could find that has a reasonable co-insurance amount. A lower (the lowest I could find) plan wouldn't cost that much less (around $410/month with a $5,500 deductible) but it has a 40% annual co-insurance and higher co-payments. I don't qualify for subsidies so I'd be paying for the full premium - which is about 1/3rd of my monthly income. Guess I'll have to go off retirement and get one of those job-thingies :-)! Nah...will just dip into the rainy-day fund! Of course I am still contemplating just using the VA for all my medical care (very little needed fortunately). It's low cost to me and Alan will just pick up the rest. Thanks Alan :-)!

Alan, for the ~$15k/year you are paying for me, if you are ever in the area, I'll cook you a nice dinner, maybe take you out on the yacht to see some whales, get some fishing in. You let me know, Patrón! I mean, that's a good chunk of The Offspring's Oxford tuition. I owe ya!

Something I am noticing is that the costs of the plans available are not uniform across all 50 states, and here in Arizona one can get a Platinum plan in Maricopa County - i.e, the Phoenix metro area, for around $330/month with HealthNet. I am noticing this is cheaper than in many other states. The plan that Spartana refers to above sounds much more expensive and less patient friendly than what is on offer in Maricopa County, Arizona. This is one area in which I don't have much expertise in health care - I don't understand the rationale for some areas being so much cheaper for premiums and some areas being so much higher. Rob

It looks like the "plan" they may be offering me, Rob, requires me to travel an entire day to see a doctor, and spend $70 or so on travel to do so. Such a win over the "bad" plan they told me I couldn't have.

Still though, with the savings, I may be able to buy a plane to fly over there. Gotta crunch some numbers.

First World Problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife

Something I am noticing is that the costs of the plans available are not uniform across all 50 states, and here in Arizona one can get a Platinum plan in Maricopa County - i.e, the Phoenix metro area, for around $330/month with HealthNet. I am noticing this is cheaper than in many other states. The plan that Spartana refers to above sounds much more expensive and less patient friendly than what is on offer in Maricopa County, Arizona. This is one area in which I don't have much expertise in health care - I don't understand the rationale for some areas being so much cheaper for premiums and some areas being so much higher. Rob

---

I think they are age related - us "old" folks must pay more then you young uns (I think you said you were 40). Plug in the numbers in AZ for someone older 45 - 65 and the rates will likely be higher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartana

I think they are age related - us "old" folks must pay more then you young uns. Plug in the numbers in AZ for someone 50 - 65 and the rates will likely be higher.

---

Spartana, thanks for replying. I will go to healthcare.gov and plug in the numbers for 50 years of age in Maricopa County AZ and see what turns up. Rob

To Spartana - I just went to healthcare.gov and plugged in the following for Maricopa County, AZ - two adults, household income 70K, looking for a Platinum Plan, 55 years of age and found that for $435/mo. I could have a Platinum HealthNet of AZ plan with 0 deductible, max $3000 out of pocket annually, 15/30 for PCP/Specialist visits. Ouch - pricey indeed but yet a much better deal it would seem than your Bronze plan in CA. Why the lack of uniformity in pricing is my question? Rob

I came back to add that I just plugged in the numbers for someone 47 - my age - two adults, Maricopa County, AZ, 70K household income and the premium magically decreased to $305/mo for each person on the same plan as above. It seem as if the magical age of 50 bumps you up on premiums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife

To Spartana - I just went to healthcare.gov and plugged in the following for Maricopa County, AZ - two adults, household income 70K, looking for a Platinum Plan, 55 years of age and found that for $435/mo. I could have a Platinum HealthNet of AZ plan with 0 deductible, max $3000 out of pocket annually, 15/30 for PCP/Specialist visits. Ouch - pricey indeed but yet a much better deal it would seem than your Bronze plan in CA. Why the lack of uniformity in pricing is my question? Rob

I came back to add that I just plugged in the numbers for someone 47 - my age - two adults, Maricopa County, AZ, 70K household income and the premium magically decreased to $305/mo for each person on the same plan as above. It seem as if the magical age of 50 bumps you up on premiums.

---

Yeah I fiddled around with some of the ages myself (having an upcoming B-Day in Feb so will likely see a price increase then too). But I was using www.ehealthinsurance.com and not the Calif Exchange since I can't buy a plan off of that except Medicaid. So I didn't need to put in income at all - just looked at the full cost with no subsidies. The plans really varied widely (there were 45 of them) and when I looked into them individually there were often extra costs that were associated with the lower priced plans (around $425 for the lowest for me with a high deductible and co-insurance). I haven't bought a plan yet (still planning to just use the VA healthcare system until I do).

I'm wondering if other's have been able to buy a plan (or get Medicaid) as of today since that is the cut off. I haven't heard if the fed exchange was fully up and running so maybe some people who had their policies cancelled haven't been able to sign up yet. Has anyone besides Bae had any luck yet? Did you get a plan? An insurance card? Subsidies guareented? Or are you still waiting?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife

To Spartana - I just went to healthcare.gov and plugged in the following for Maricopa County, AZ - two adults, household income 70K, looking for a Platinum Plan, 55 years of age and found that for $435/mo. I could have a Platinum HealthNet of AZ plan with 0 deductible, max $3000 out of pocket annually, 15/30 for PCP/Specialist visits. Ouch - pricey indeed but yet a much better deal it would seem than your Bronze plan in CA. Why the lack of uniformity in pricing is my question? Rob

I came back to add that I just plugged in the numbers for someone 47 - my age - two adults, Maricopa County, AZ, 70K household income and the premium magically decreased to $305/mo for each person on the same plan as above. It seem as if the magical age of 50 bumps you up on premiums.

---

I went to ehealthinsurance.com, and plugged in Maricopa County. I'm 56, wife is 52, both non smokers. I only saw plans running from $880 to $1136 in the platinum level.

In St. Louis the rates run from $990 to $1323. I currently pay $1330 per month.

My worry is what do you think the rates are going to jump to next year. Obama keeps changing the rules daily. The insurance company's are not going to lose money.

I guess I could move to Sweden. But I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to pay $75,000 or more a year in taxes so part time workers can coast along. Its bad enough here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dmc

I went to ehealthinsurance.com, and plugged in Maricopa County. I'm 56, wife is 52, both non smokers. I only saw plans running from $880 to $1136 in the platinum level.

In St. Louis the rates run from $990 to $1323. I currently pay $1330 per month.

My worry is what do you think the rates are going to jump to next year. Obama keeps changing the rules daily. The insurance company's are not going to lose money.

I guess I could move to Sweden. But I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to pay $75,000 or more a year in taxes so part time workers can coast along. Its bad enough here.

---

I'm not saying you are wrong, DMC, but if you go to www.healthcare.gov and plug in all the variables I did for Maricopa County, Arizona, you will see the rates I quoted. My question is this - why the difference between healthcare.gov rates and the rates you are being quoted on ehealthinsurance? I find this very scary - it's like whose quote is real? And under what circumstances? I do think I have one answer for why the quotes are so different. HealthNet of AZ is the plan with the lowest rates - Blue Cross and Meritus and others are much higher. I don't know is this is legal but it does seem to me that HealthNet of AZ has underpriced the market - they also were awarded a contract by AHCCCS - or Medicaid in Arizona - for providing Medicaid in Arizona, too. If you are interested, check out the difference between HealthNet plans and their competitors and you will see a difference, at least on healthcare.gov. Rob

PS I came back to add that I just priced the cheapest HealthNet Platinum Plan for Maricopa County for someone aged 56 and male and it came back at $455/mo. on healthcare.gov. With the same variables I mentioned before. I have a question - were the rates you were quoting for two people, yourself and your wife, or just for yourself? This would explain the big difference as I was quoting a rate just for one person - being single, this is going to be how I shop for insurance. Naturally if you are adding a second person onto the quote it is going to be much higher. Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartana

Yeah I fiddled around with some of the ages myself (having an upcoming B-Day in Feb so will likely see a price increase then too). But I was using www.ehealthinsurance.com and not the Calif Exchange since I can't buy a plan off of that except Medicaid. So I didn't need to put in income at all - just looked at the full cost with no subsidies. The plans really varied widely (there were 45 of them) and when I looked into them individually there were often extra costs that were associated with the lower priced plans (around $425 for the lowest for me with a high deductible and co-insurance). I haven't bought a plan yet (still planning to just use the VA healthcare system until I do).

I'm wondering if other's have been able to buy a plan (or get Medicaid) as of today since that is the cut off. I haven't heard if the fed exchange was fully up and running so maybe some people who had their policies cancelled haven't been able to sign up yet. Has anyone besides Bae had any luck yet? Did you get a plan? An insurance card? Subsidies guareented? Or are you still waiting?

---

I have as of yet not received an insurance card and have read in the Arizona Republic (the Phoenix newspaper) that acceptance letters for Medicaid are being mailed out in January 2014. I will admit I don't like this. I'd much rather have the card earlier and have it not be valid until January 1st. I was told by the person who accepted my application over the phone that I qualified for Arizona Medicaid. Since so much time had passed and I had heard nothing, I also went to a local navigator a few weeks ago and reapplied and was also told there that I qualified for Arizona Medicaid. I am still waiting on DES confirmation, though, and my HealthNet of AZ card - this is the Medicaid provider I chose. Rob

OK, I went to healthcare.gov. A gold plan in Maricopa Co for @ family of 2 is $756 for a gold plan with $12,000 out of pocket, which is a HMO, or you can pay $853 for a HMO with a $6,000 deductable. If you want to go to a PPO with a $1500 ded, $2,500 OP you can pay $1032.

The insurance in Maricopa co. is cheaper than my area outside of St. Louis. The healthcare website pretty much agree's with ehealthinsurance.com.

I don't know why you are getting different results. Are you basing the premiums on just 1 adult? In your post above you said 2 adults.

I could buy a condo and claim residency in arizona for the $600 or so difference in insurance rates. And thats before I work on getting my income worked around for a subsidy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore

I don't believe I'd be in any position to negotiate or say no if they were prescribing chemo or something and I wouldn't. And even the end of life stuff is being paid for mostly by Medicare rather than insurance. So there's really very little excuse for pre-Medicare healthcare being the ripoff it is. As for the scam that is much of modern pharma, maybe they should just reduce demand by banning t.v. advertising haha. Leave the doctors and patients free to seek what they want as far as prescriptions (whether insurance covers ah well that's another can of worms), but no direct to consumer advertising.

To make consumers more responsible for paying for their own healthcare is actually one of the GOALS of Obamacare, whether or not they state it that way. They tell the lies they think we want to hear, but it's definitely in the economic structure that is emerging. It's a very conservative plan in many ways (it's trying to force a marketbased solution). It's why many of the plans on the exchanges are high deductible which is only bad if you 1) dont' have the deductible in cash savings - if you don't then why the heck are you going for a high deductible plan you can't use anyway? maybe because it's the only one you can afford and you have to get insurance :\ 2) need years of expensive medical treatment which will wipe out most people's savings. These plans are going for premiums that are really too high for barely cover anything plans ... they're fairly high deductible plans with non high-deductible premiums.

Another way that Obamacare will make consumers more responsible for paying for their own healthcare is that employers will continue to drop healthcare (especially those "Cadillac" plans which if healthcare inflation continues is pretty much going to be all the PPOs, but employers will also continue to drop even the non-"Cadillac"). So hooray they'll no longer be an employer middleman, we'll all be liberated from our health insurance! (which mostly reminds me of the joke about Iraqis being liberated from their lives - although I really don't regard it as at all comparable in scale - that was genocide afterall, this is just crummy insurance policies). So consumers will be left to buy their own health insurance. But if employers have minimal bargaining power with insurance companies, what kind of bargaining power will consumers have? Competition in the oligopoly world of health insurance will solve everything? The consumers will be cost sensitive but this may lead more to penny wise and pound foolish than actual good decision making (ie go with the cheapo plan with cheap premiums and go bankrupt should you have medical emergency).

Maybe one of the major objectives of Obamacare is to get the cost of healthcare off employers. Because employers in the U.S. have trouble competing with all those countries where employers don't have to pay for healthcare. They solve it by socialized medicine. We'll solve it by everyone having to buy their own expensive HMO insurance policies that pay for very little until you reach some high deductible and that still leave you open to medical bankruptcy should you wind up in the hospital and see an out of network specialist. They'll sell fear more than actual product (one might say they already do, but at least the few decent plans remaining actually cover some routine things and provide *some* protection). As less and less is covered they'll be selling pure protection from fear itself with a mandate.

---

As your last paragraph gets worse and worse over time I do believe more people will find the courage to do the math and will start voluntarily leaving the US for at least permanent residency elsewhere with much less expensive healthcare. Countries like Ecuador, Nicaragua, Chile, Peru, Panama, Malaysia, Cambodia (I know someone who had fled there not due to healthcare but due to being priced out of the US in old age) etc. are all going to look more interesting and I would think these places will be able to be picky as to who they will accept as there will be so many people fed up and willing to run. Eventually the math is going to get to the point where denial isn't going to work for as many people any more. Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dmc

OK, I went to healthcare.gov. A gold plan in Maricopa Co for @ family of 2 is $756 for a gold plan with $12,000 out of pocket, which is a HMO, or you can pay $853 for a HMO with a $6,000 deductable. If you want to go to a PPO with a $1500 ded, $2,500 OP you can pay $1032.

The insurance in Maricopa co. is cheaper than my area outside of St. Louis. The healthcare website pretty much agree's with ehealthinsurance.com.

I don't know why you are getting different results. Are you basing the premiums on just 1 adult? In your post above you said 2 adults.

I could buy a condo and claim residency in arizona for the $600 or so difference in insurance rates. And thats before I work on getting my income worked around for a subsidy.

---

Please check platinum plans and look under the HealthNet HMO platinum choices and you will see the rates I have been quoting - are you only looking in the more expensive PPO plans? To get the rates I quoted yeah you are going to have to deal with an HMO - I thought this was understood? Rob

OK I found the answer. Yes I am basing the premiums on just one adult. If this was not clear then I apologize. As I stated a post or two above, if you add a second person on, yes it is going to be much more expensive. Yes indeed. Given that I am single, I only checked for the prices for one person. Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dmc

I went to ehealthinsurance.com, and plugged in Maricopa County. I'm 56, wife is 52, both non smokers. I only saw plans running from $880 to $1136 in the platinum level.

In St. Louis the rates run from $990 to $1323. I currently pay $1330 per month.

My worry is what do you think the rates are going to jump to next year. Obama keeps changing the rules daily. The insurance company's are not going to lose money.

I guess I could move to Sweden. But I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to pay $75,000 or more a year in taxes so part time workers can coast along. Its bad enough here.

---

I agree with something you have stated in here. Obama does seem to change the rules daily and I can see why this lends less confidence to the ACA overall. I know that what I am about to state will never happen, I get this. But I often wonder that with US healthcare not working for so many US citizens, wouldn't it be more cost effective for the US government to give financial assistance to those wishing to leave to start over somewhere else with saner healthcare prices? Yes to me things are really getting that bad that this would be a sane and cost effective solution - as much as I appreciate the ACA it remains a fact that there is no mechanism in it that I can see anyway to keep health care costs from spiraling. Financial assistance to start over in another country for those interested would likely save the US government some cash over time, though it would be equivalent to admitting that the US doesn't work for a segment of it's population and I can't ever see such an admission taking place. Rob

PS I came back to add - maybe this would save the US government more money as they could scale future SS payments back in return for such financial assistance, so this could be win/win in a way.

Quote:

---

HealthNet of AZ is the plan with the lowest rates - Blue Cross and Meritus and others are much higher. I don't know is this is legal but it does seem to me that HealthNet of AZ has underpriced the market - they also were awarded a contract by AHCCCS - or Medicaid in Arizona - for providing Medicaid in Arizona, too. If you are interested, check out the difference between HealthNet plans and their competitors and you will see a difference, at least on healthcare.gov.

---

You get what you pay for. Now I don't know about AZ but in CA HealthNet has the most narrow networks of them all (it's been widely reported - they have negative brand recognition with me now due to this), I personally would actively warn people against Healthnet unless they have no other choice (might be better than no insurance).

"For example, Health Net will offer the lowest cost coverage options in Southern California, but policyholders who purchase a Health Net exchange plan will have access to less than one-third of the insurer's network of providers for employer-based plans. In addition, Blue Shield of California's exchange plans will include only 50% of the insurer's usual provider network". So even Blue plans have less providers than their employer provided alternatives (getting insurance through a job is still the most sensible choice) but I've read enough about Healthnet they have MUCH less providers than the Blues, even on the exchange:
http://www.californiahealthline.org/...r-of-providers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore

You get what you pay for. Now I don't know about AZ but in CA HealthNet has the most narrow networks of them all (it's been widely reported), I personally would actively warn people against Healthnet unless they have no other choice.

"For example, Health Net will offer the lowest cost coverage options in Southern California, but policyholders who purchase a Health Net exchange plan will have access to less than one-third of the insurer's network of providers for employer-based plans. In addition, Blue Shield of California's exchange plans will include only 50% of the insurer's usual provider network". So even Blue plans have less providers than their employer provided alternatives but I've read enough about Healthnet they have MUCH less providers than the Blues, even on the exchange:
http://www.californiahealthline.org/...r-of-providers

---

I have myself heard horrible things about HealthNet too, I will give you that. But when my mother had major neck surgery in January of 2012 with HealthNet Ruby Medicare as her insurance, I have to say I was impressed with the overall care she received and their willingness to pay for extended physical therapy. Dealing with HealthNet Medicare for my mother's fairly intense surgery was not the ordeal I expected it to be at all.

That said, Health Net does not have a good rep in Arizona at all. Rob Something that I don't feel is getting understood here though is that Health Net is better than no insurance at all - put yourself in my shoes for a minute or two if you'all would and you'll see I have a point. If something dramatic happens to you and you don't have the time needed to get to Mexico for care, Health Net will at least get you into a hospital and start some kind of care for you at pre-determined rates, so at least when you come to you have some idea of what a financial nightmare you will be facing and can then do your is it worth it to remain in the US math.

More info on HealthNet:

"But Health Net also has the fewest doctors, less than half what some other companies are offering in Southern California, according to a Times analysis of insurance data.

In Los Angeles County, for instance, Health Net customers in the state exchange would be limited to 2,316 primary-care doctors and specialists [wait 2316 doctors TOTAL in Los Angeles COUNTY? Well I don't know their enrollment but this sounds completely insane]. That's less than a third of the doctors Health Net offers to workers on employer plans. In San Diego, there are only 204 primary-care doctors to serve Health Net patients.

Other major insurers have pared their list of medical providers too, but not to Health Net's degree. Statewide, Blue Shield of California says exchange customers will be restricted to about 50% of its regular physician network."
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/sep...works-20130915

It's hard to say the quality of the insurance from any given experience, although if it's horrible that doesn't help, the question of narrow networks is: the more minor one 1) will you be able to see a primary care physician, what will the wait be etc..? 2) the more major one: if you get a major disease what specialists are covered? If you get cancer say, how many onocologists are there for instance, are there any, are there an adequate number? Or do you just consider cancer a death sentence anyway?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife

I agree with something you have stated in here. Obama does seem to change the rules daily and I can see why this lends less confidence to the ACA overall. I know that what I am about to state will never happen, I get this. But I often wonder that with US healthcare not working for so many US citizens, wouldn't it be more cost effective for the US government to give financial assistance to those wishing to leave to start over somewhere else with saner healthcare prices? Yes to me things are really getting that bad that this would be a sane and cost effective solution - as much as I appreciate the ACA it remains a fact that there is no mechanism in it that I can see anyway to keep health care costs from spiraling. Financial assistance to start over in another country for those interested would likely save the US government some cash over time, though it would be equivalent to admitting that the US doesn't work for a segment of it's population and I can't ever see such an admission taking place. Rob

PS I came back to add - maybe this would save the US government more money as they could scale future SS payments back in return for such financial assistance, so this could be win/win in a way.

---

Maybe if we had more people contributing we wouldn't be in this mess. Maybe if everyone payed something to the Feds, they would expect more accountablility. Instead its easier to vote for more stuff if you don't have to pay.

I don't understand why you havn't moved yet. I'm don't know how many other country's are out there willing to take care of you. But if you can find one that expects nothing in return, let me know, I'll come visit and check it out myself.

But since I can't get out of paying US taxes no matter where I am, I'm afraid it will make more sense to stay here. Healthcare is not my problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore

More info on HealthNet:

"But Health Net also has the fewest doctors, less than half what some other companies are offering in Southern California, according to a Times analysis of insurance data.

In Los Angeles County, for instance, Health Net customers in the state exchange would be limited to 2,316 primary-care doctors and specialists. That's less than a third of the doctors Health Net offers to workers on employer plans. In San Diego, there are only 204 primary-care doctors to serve Health Net patients.

Other major insurers have pared their list of medical providers too, but not to Health Net's degree. Statewide, Blue Shield of California says exchange customers will be restricted to about 50% of its regular physician network."
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/sep...works-20130915

It's hard to say the quality of the insurance from any given experience, although if it's horrible that doesn't help, the question of narrow networks is: the more minor one 1) will you be able to see a primary care physician, what will the wait be etc..? 2) the more major one: if you get a major disease what specialists are covered? If you get cancer say, how many onocologists are there for instance, are there any, are there an adequate number?

---

Honestly? If I had cancer? I would probably end out going to Mexico for my care. I hope Iris Lillies sees this as I'm going to agree with something she stated on another thread. Going to Mexico in such a situation if I could swing it would mean retaining control over my health care more than I could in the US. I sure hope she sees this as I understand in this case how retaining control would apply and how much it would mean to me. Rob

And about the narrow networks and cuts to the number of providers - dead on. I'm just glad that when my mom entered rehab after her surgery using Healthnet, she was able to get into a clean and decent place. It was only rated three out of five stars locally but I went to visit almost every day and the quality of care I witnessed being delivered impressed me. Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dmc

Maybe if we had more people contributing we wouldn't be in this mess. Maybe if everyone payed something to the Feds, they would expect more accountablility. Instead its easier to vote for more stuff if you don't have to pay.

I don't understand why you havn't moved yet. I'm don't know how many other country's are out there willing to take care of you. But if you can find one that expects nothing in return, let me know, I'll come visit and check it out myself.

But since I can't get out of paying US taxes no matter where I am, I'm afraid it will make more sense to stay here. Healthcare is not my problem.

---

Just out of curiosity, are you aware that in Argentina anyone on Argentine soil is welcome to use their socialized healthcare system? Even tourists. Please google this and find out yourself. Now about the quality of care received, honestly, that I do not know. But google and compare how we do health care vs. Argentina's more compassionate and humane system. If nothing else, maybe you could then begin to understand why someone in my situation would post/feel the way I do. I guess to summarize - the American way is not the only answer out there nor does it work for all. Perhaps you could say this for any country - but not every country bills itself as such a role model for the rest of the free world to follow, either. Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dmc

I don't understand why you havn't moved yet.

---

And now he wants the remaining taxpayers to *pay* him to move. Priceless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

And now he wants the remaining taxpayers to *pay* him to move. Priceless.

---

Bae, stop and think for a moment if you would. Would not paying my way out save the US government money in the long term? As far as future health care payments and future SS payments? And did I not mention I was for scaling back any future SS checks in return for the financial assistance? Please, if you would, factor these statements in too. And Happy Holidays BTW! Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

And now he wants the remaining taxpayers to *pay* him to move. Priceless.

---

Just part of the entitlement mindset in much of our country. We have politicians pushing class warfare every chance they get. If I was worried as much about healthcare as Rob, I would work on making enough money to pay for it.

I read where the unemployment rate in South Dakota was 2.6%. Plenty of work and good pay. My first job was in Wyoming, because thats where the work was at the time. But I didn't expect anyone to take care of me. And I wanted to make good money. If I was just getting out of school today I'm sure I would be heading there. The weather is brutal, but I would be self reliant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife

Bae, stop and think for a moment if you would. Would not paying my way out save the US government money in the long term? As far as future health care payments and future SS payments? And did I not mention I was for scaling back any future SS checks in return for the financial assistance? Please, if you would, factor these statements in too. And Happy Holidays BTW! Rob

---

Maybe they could expect those that are healthy to work for their benefits. If you want to leave the country they could probably have you waiting tables for our troops in Afganistan or other posts. Or at least have them do something. For as much as I have paid in taxes, I should have someone mowing my yard and washing my car at least. If your on the dole at least you can help out those of us that have been paying in all these years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dmc

Maybe they could expect those that are healthy to work for their benefits. If you want to leave the country they could probably have you waiting tables for our troops in Afganistan or other posts. Or at least have them do something. For as much as I have paid in taxes, I should have someone mowing my yard and washing my car at least. If your on the dole at least you can help out those of us that have been paying in all these years.

---

If you would be so kind, DMC, please go back through my posts. You will see that I have repeatedly stated that to get these benefits I so crave in Austria, you are expected to contribute something to society unless you are genuinely disabled. Even if it is just planting trees or picking up trash along the highway, you are expected to contribute something or your benefits get taken away eventually. And I have repeatedly posted that I am fine with that,and that I intend to volunteer somewhere at least one day a week once I get my Medicaid for sure - I am not comfortable with taking Medicaid for free and not giving something back.

My question is why make the assumption that I am unwilling to give something back and expect to be taken care of giving nothing in return? Why is this the reaction of so many Americans? Honestly, I will never understand the overall thought process and rhetoric in this country. But it is what it is. I invite you to click on my screen name and view my prior posts where I have explained how I feel the need to give something back to society if I am drawing out of it. Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dmc

Just part of the entitlement mindset in much of our country. We have politicians pushing class warfare every chance they get. If I was worried as much about healthcare as Rob, I would work on making enough money to pay for it.

I read where the unemployment rate in South Dakota was 2.6%. Plenty of work and good pay. My first job was in Wyoming, because thats where the work was at the time. But I didn't expect anyone to take care of me. And I wanted to make good money. If I was just getting out of school today I'm sure I would be heading there. The weather is brutal, but I would be self reliant.

---

Easy advice to give and not bad advice on the surface, DMC , but where would I find housing in the Dakotas? Please google housing shortage in the Dakotas and learn more about the shortage. Given that you admit the winters are brutal, where would I find housing where the wages are so high? This is a huge problem out that way, especially in North Dakota where unemployment is even lower. Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife

Easy advice to give and not bad advice on the surface, DMC , but where would I find housing in the Dakotas?

---

There's always something in the way, isn't there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dmc

Just part of the entitlement mindset in much of our country. We have politicians pushing class warfare every chance they get. If I was worried as much about healthcare as Rob, I would work on making enough money to pay for it.

I read where the unemployment rate in South Dakota was 2.6%. Plenty of work and good pay. My first job was in Wyoming, because thats where the work was at the time. But I didn't expect anyone to take care of me. And I wanted to make good money. If I was just getting out of school today I'm sure I would be heading there. The weather is brutal, but I would be self reliant.

---

Hmmmm.....just curious. You don't see any logic then in going to where healthcare is not nightmarishly expensive to begin with? As much as you mention how steep your taxes are, surely you understand the logic in being where the costs are so much less to begin with? Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

There's always something in the way, isn't there?

---

And my advice to you, Bae? Please take the short amount of time it would take to google this issue to learn more. If you are open to more than one side of the story? Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife

And my advice to you, Bae? Please take the short amount of time it would take to google this issue to learn more. If you are open to more than one side of the story? Rob

---

"Google this issue" - no, sorry Rob. I *know* people who work there. I was offered jobs there *myself*. I *know* how to arrange to live in such circumstances, working jobs that pay well.

It takes a certain amount of effort and dedication. Might want to Google that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

And now he wants the remaining taxpayers to *pay* him to move. Priceless.

---

But as purely an economic decision it might be a good idea, depending on the price tag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

But as purely an economic decision it might be a good idea, depending on the price tag.

---

A bus ticket to Mexico, and revoking his passport can't cost much :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmethesimplelife

.... I hope Iris Lillies sees this as I'm going to agree with something she stated on another thread. Going to Mexico in such a situation if I could swing it would mean retaining control over my health care more than I could in the US. I sure hope she sees this as I understand in this case how retaining control would apply and how much it would mean to me. Rob

...

---

Sure, I agree that in some situations it might make sense to go to Mexico for care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

But as purely an economic decision it might be a good idea, depending on the price tag.

---

Iris, I gotta give you credit. Thank You for seeing this. I was indeed speaking of this on an economic basis. Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

Sure, I agree that in some situations it might make sense to go to Mexico for care.

---

Gotta give you credit once again, Iris. Rob