Obamacare

[henry quirk]

Clod,

I asked a question...I wasn't makin' a point by way of the question.

I didn't bring myself into the question, you did.

And: no, I resent nuthin' cause I ain't payin' nuthin.


Now...

As I understand it: the point of the fine is to cover those expenses one may incur if using medical resources without insurance.

Leaving aside that one may be able to pay his or her own way without resorting to insurance (out of pocket), at least for the first year might it be the better deal to just pay the fine?


It's just (a line of) questions, folks...I'm curious how people are doing all of this (what choices they're makin'), is all.

[DanaC]

I'd imagine that would work, if you only encountered run of the mill health problems. Antibiotics, inhalors, maybe even a bone reset after a break. But if you end up in a hospital bed for a few nights, or you have a sudden and unexpected need for chemotherapy and the like, I expect it would get cripplingly expensive quite fast.

It'd be a gamble. But then I guess that's the point of an insurance system in the first place. The insurance companies gamble that you will never need more treatment than would fall under the copay limit. And you gamble that you might just need a hospital stay at some point.

So, as long as you don't get seriously ill or have an accident requiring a complex medical response, it might well be more cost effective to pay the fine and be uninsured.

[henry quirk]

"as long as you don't get seriously ill or have an accident requiring a complex medical response, it might well be more cost effective to pay the fine and be uninsured"

I must have gotten sumthin' wrong in my readings 'cause I assumed the fine (which goes up to astronomical levels down the road) would cover you no matter the nature of a medical treatment (no matter how costly).

Again: isn't the point of the fine to cover those expenses one may incur if using medical resources without insurance?

If not: then what's the fine for?

[Happy Monkey]

It's for not following the law, liker most fines are.

The only way it "covers" you is by adding to the governments coffers, from which it pays the subsidies for poor people buying insurance. Those people having insurance makes it easier for the hospital to manage the people who get emergency care, and can't pay.

So, if you decide to pay the fine instead of getting coverage, you'll be in the same boat as you are now if you have no insurance, but a bit of the pressure is taken off of the hospitals.

[glatt]

The fine is a stick to get you to join the program. It doesn't grant you access to anything.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by DanaC

The insurance companies gamble that you will never need more treatment than would fall under the copay limit. And you gamble that you might just need a hospital stay at some point.

Strictly speaking, the insurance companies don't gamble. They are like bookies; they can adjust the rates so that they always come out with a moderate profit no matter who wins or loses. Too many people start losing, they just raise everybody's rates to cover the loss.

Originally Posted by henry quirk

As I understand it: the point of the fine is to cover those expenses one may incur if using medical resources without insurance.

Leaving aside that one may be able to pay his or her own way without resorting to insurance (out of pocket), at least for the first year might it be the better deal to just pay the fine?

The point of the fine is to help offset the medical costs of other people who did buy into the plan, a plan which only works if enough people participate. When you pay the fine, you are not securing any medical care for yourself. You will still be responsible for the entire bill should you become ill. The ER will take a bullet out of you and restart your heart, just as they do now. But they will send you a bill. And just like an uninsured person before Obamacare, you will not get life-saving surgery, you will not get cancer treatment, you will not get therapy to walk again, etc.

It's true that if you do have the means to pay out-of-pocket, you will probably save money by simply paying the fine. But very few people really have those means. They think they do, but they don't truly understand how quickly medical bills can add up. My dad is a soft libertarian who has been playing that gamble his entire life. He has excellent self-discipline, and does indeed live well below his means so that he can keep savings in the five digits earmarked for self-pay medical costs. He did even have to pay out once in a major way when he had an unexpected heart clot and spent a day in the hospital. But he never spent time in an ICU, never got cancer. Had that happened, his 5-digit savings would have been laughable, and he would have been fucked. He shrugs and says, "Well, that's life," and asserts that if he's that bad off he'd be okay with just dying. But my experience is that when face-to-face with death, most people find (too late) that they'd rather stay alive after all.

[Happy Monkey]

I'd actually be a fan of the "fine" subscribing you to medicare, and charging you the cost.

IE, single payer.

[henry quirk]

Okay: I got it now.

Thanks.

I'll have more questions (as they come to mind).

[Lamplighter]

Even the Democrats are upset about the Obamacare website.
But does that stop them from being mistaken when it's time to shift the blame ?

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/1...815_Page2.html
Politico
10/24/13

Obamacare website hearing takeaways: Missing word was ‘sorry’

<snip>But other Democrats made it clear they weren’t about to let
the Obama administration off the hook for anything.

Anna Eshoo of California said the contractors’ explanation that
the website had high volume ”sticks in my craw.”
“I represent Silicon Valley, and I find this very hard to follow.
This is the 21st Century. It’s 2013. There are thousands of websites that handle
concurrent volumes far larger than what HealthCare.gov was faced with,” said Eshoo.
“Amazon and e-Bay don’t crash the week before Christmas, and ProFlowers
doesn’t crash on Valentine’s Day.”

Well Anna, maybe not the week before Christmas, but during this past summer.
How long have these websites been up and running, but yet:
.

(from here)

[BigV]

The Affordable Care Act is a big deal, both in it's significance to our society and government as well as a big deal in terms of it's scope. Much has been made of the crucial impact young healthy people will have on the financial aspect of the law. Of course, we all have a financial aspect to our lives, and many people make choices with the costs in mind. The immediate costs of the premiums are easy to quantify, easy to see; you pay them right away. The longer term costs of care for an illness or an injury are much harder to quantify because they're not known with nearly as much certainty. Injured? Sick? Me?? Pfffft... no way man.

But. All of us can imagine, can imagine an accident and these brilliant commercials help us envision circumstances when we take a chance, and what the consequences *might be*.

Just brilliant!

[Lamplighter]

They do get your attention !

[Griff]

Meanwhile in Vermont:Vermont is designing nation’s first universal health-care system

[classicman]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Has anyone made use of the 'exchanges' and did you get a good deal on coverage?

I have researched the exchange here for myself and my son. The bronze plan is really awful and still far more expensive than the plans we have now which are being discontinued because of UN-ACA regulations.

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Would any one just opt to pay the fine and be done with it?
As I understand: for the first year it's 95 bucks or 1% of your income.
At least for now: is that a better option than the exchanges?

Originally Posted by glatt

But then you are uninsured.
The fines are low for this first year. But they will go up the next year. They are getting phased in.

For 2014, the fine is 1% of your gross income. It appears that I will have no other choice at this time. I'm still hoping to finagle something, but currently being self-employed, there are no affordable alternatives.

[classicman]

What is looking to become the big issue is that, by far, the vast majority of those who are signing up are old and/or unhealthy. All those young healthy people needed to make this magically somehow work so that millions more get insurance while not driving up the costs (remember that?) are apparently not doing so. If thats the case come March, then the costs are going to skyrocket. Apparently all of this was known and it was a gamble.
We'll see how this works out. By next March we'll have a far better indication of what will happen in 2015.

As for the 6% who are like me and are self-employed. We're such a small group that we weren't really factored into the equation. No one cares about us ... Oh wait 6% of the US is about 15 MILLION people. Thats a pretty damn significant group. Many are getting the letters like I did. Just chalk us up as the unintended consequences.

Additionally, keep in mind that the exemption for employers will expire as well. Once that happens companies will have to determine if they can/want to continue offering coverage as an added benefit to its employees. *IF* all those young people DON'T sign up and the rates for 2015 are astronomical, then LOOK OUT! Many companies will not be able to afford the added cost.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

I must not Obama.
ObamaCare is the job-killer.
. . .
When the Obama is past, I will turn my mind's eye to see its path, where there will be nothing. Only I will remain.