05-01-2013, 08:30 AM | #91 |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,002
|
My co-pay is the same no matter who I see. Hmmm...
|
05-01-2013, 01:18 PM | #92 |
I think this line's mostly filler.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
|
Health Care Exchange application forms: (Under Forms/April 30, 2013)
__________________
_________________ |...............| We live in the nick of times. | Len 17, Wid 3 | |_______________| [pics] |
05-01-2013, 01:38 PM | #93 |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
|
Probably so, but my rant above was about how much your physician bills
the government (Medicare) or your insurance company when you are seen by a Medical Assistant. You, yourself, might not see any of this until the billings exceed the amounts Medicare or your insurance company is willing to pay for that service. For those of us that are retired and on Medicare, we get a statement every month from US Social Service showing the dates of medical care, the amounts billed by the service provider, and the amounts paid by the patient. Sometimes, the service provider charges are ridiculous ... e.g., $500 for one of our office visits was less than 30 min. but we had paid only the co-pay of $15. |
05-01-2013, 01:42 PM | #94 |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,002
|
I was thinking it should be cheaper than 25 bucks when I see the nurse and she barely looks at my throat, though I hadn't thought of that until your posts. It's just the cost for an 'office visit' I guess.
I honestly must take insurance for granted, I never thought about if it actually costs less. And I certainly won't complain about my insurance: I've made good use of it. Then again, about 13 years ago I was paying the same premium for a 'family' plan (just me and my husband) as the guy whose wife was on baby number 10. I guess it all comes out in the wash, usually, eventually. (Which makes me wonder what my options will be if I am soonly unemployed!) Dammit. |
05-01-2013, 01:54 PM | #95 |
Back in 10
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,684
|
Your options would be stay healthy or else
__________________
Speaking simply... do not confuse this with having a simple mind. |
05-01-2013, 02:37 PM | #96 |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
|
|
05-01-2013, 02:38 PM | #97 |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,002
|
I know, then I would have to think about stuff, and stuff. Ugh. I'm not good at doing real life grown up stuff, like planning.
|
09-28-2013, 08:54 AM | #98 | |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
|
Regardless of the mindless mindset of the GOP to shut down our government,
Obamacare will finally become a reality in people's lives next week. It is time to truly understand what it is and how to make it's many facets work for the BEST EFFECT on our own personal lives. If someone is lazy and puts it off until after March 31, 2014, they will have only themselves to blame if things don't go the way they hope/expect. Here is an very good article that can be a gateway into understanding the "whats-in -it-for-me" and "what-should-I-do"... NY Times ARA SIEGEL BERNARD 9/27/13 A Guide to the New Exchanges for Health Insurance Quote:
|
|
09-28-2013, 08:51 PM | #99 | |
The future is unwritten
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
|
Some interesting questions about Obamacare.
Quote:
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump. |
|
09-28-2013, 09:15 PM | #100 | ||
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
|
Quote:
or at least it was not the primary raison-d'etre for the Affordable Care Act. Most the issues in that link are based on a thesis of "saving $". For example: Quote:
the (15 ?) millions of people who did not have their own health insurance, and then to support these newly "insured" by inducing larger numbers of relatively healthy (working younger people) to buy into their own health insurance instead of going without. It's a matter of POV. |
||
09-29-2013, 12:24 AM | #101 |
The future is unwritten
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
|
AFFORDABLE Care Act.
No, the idea was to get skyrocketing medical costs under control by getting everyone covered and having more efficiency. That should have been single payer instead of the hodge-podge we got. But as I said before, it can be fixed as we go.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump. |
09-29-2013, 08:19 AM | #102 |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
|
I agree that getting "skyrocketing medical costs under control" is part of the ACA,
but that was proceeding under Medicare even before the ACA was passed. My issue was with the premise of the various "observations" in the link. We are probably in agreement also on "should have been single payer instead of the hodge-podge we got." But that was just one of the options being considered, but that obviously would have been far more of a upheaval in the US economy than the more limited transformations of the current form of the ACA. |
09-29-2013, 12:51 PM | #103 | |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
|
This editorial is from Forbes...
Forbes Todd Essig 9/29/13 Let's Get Personal: Obamacare Really Is Good For The Young And Healthy Quote:
and sensible approach to health insurance... . . |
|
09-30-2013, 03:39 AM | #104 |
Lecturer
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 796
|
Just heard on the radio that Aetna (CA's biggest medical insurer with 48% of the market), has dropped out of the exchange for ObamaCare.
This is going on in many states: Iowa (lost their largest insurer), New Hampshire and West Virginia have no health care provider, at all. The larger health insurers are reluctant to get into this because it's unknown territory for them. On the one hand, the law prevents them from raising the rates above a certain level, but on the other hand, they have to provide a certain level of care to those that they cover. To top it off, if the healthy people don't need to buy it (maybe paying the IRS penalty will be a better alternative for them), then the whole insurance plan idea, goes out the window. Insurance can't work that way. The risk has to be spread around an adequate base of subscribers. The national health care plan is a good one, but I wish they would have done more planning and studying, before they decided to pass it into law. So many things - like all these exemptions, etc., they make for a very poor start for it. |
09-30-2013, 07:26 AM | #105 | |
™
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,717
|
Quote:
Debating Obamacare is kind of funny that way, because it's only being phased in slowly, so it will be a few years before we know exactly how it's going to pan out. |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|