COBRA was awesome. I was disappointment I only had 18 months or so of it available. Really wish they could expanded COBRA because I'd still be using it 14 years later.
Thank you! Yes, for some people it was a great thing to have available. It wasn't forced that you accept it, but it was an option, and apparently for you it was a good option to have. If the worst part about it you had was that it was only allowed for a year and a half, then I guess it wasn't a bad thing to have during that time.
Once when I changed jobs from a large to a small company, I used my new employer insurance for myself but paid for COBRA for my wife for two years. (She is disabled and thus can go beyond 18 months.) The company reimbursed me for the amount they would have paid for her to be under their plan. That still left us paying some out of pocket every month, but it was well worth it.
I also used it at least one other time when changing jobs. It has worked out great for us.
Quoting this for the recent COBRA discussion.
I always find your perspective interesting JWB, given that we have both had personal experiences with getting dealt an unfortunate hand w/re to health issues with close family members. It's hard for me to understand how you oppose extending the same life saving healthcare coverage you have experienced with other folks who for whatever reason were not covered.
It comes down to these things for me:
1. In general, I favor less Government, not more Government.
2. In general, I do not believe our Government is effective or efficient at managing large programs (e.g., Social Security, Medicare).
3. In general, I do not agree with creating new programs unless they can be funded without increasing debt/deficit.
4. IMO it is not the Government's responsibility to provide healthcare, at least not above and beyond existing Government programs (Medicare/Medicaid). Similar to other fundamentals of life like food, water, housing, and employment (well, it is fundamental for most people).
When Obamacare came about:
1. I did not believe the premises that it was being sold on, and indeed many of them have proven false.
2. I did not believe the numbers and thus did not believe its cost would be covered as was being promised. Indeed, those numbers have been proven false.
3. I did not believe the Government could manage such a new, large program effectively or efficiently. And indeed, they have proven they cannot.
I have sympathy for anyone who goes through the kind of serious health issues we have endured with my wife's disability. But she is on Social Security disability; anyone truly in a situation like hers would have access to Medicare, as she does, and would not have been uncovered prior to Obamacare.
More fundamentally, I think you and I differ on the degree to which the responsibility for healthcare of individuals should be their own responsibility vs. the Government's responsibility. It is pretty clear that I would expect a much greater percentage of individuals to be responsible for their own healthcare than you would.
On a personal level, if my wife was forced into an ACA market plan, it would be a complete disaster. We need far ranging PPO coverage, since my wife currently sees doctors in LA, San Diego, NC, and VA on a regular basis. This move towards HMO focused coverage with smaller doctor networks would be very bad for her situation, without even dealing with the fact that both premiums and deductibles/copayments would be more expensive.
Why would I support a program that provides a lower standard of healthcare than my wife requires and currently has, particularly given it is in opposition to my general views on Government as described above?