Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
ObamaCare aka "Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act" (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Johnny Rock
- Start date
tri-man 47
Footballguy
Our HR director mentioned recently that in Illinois, insurers will be raising their basic rates by something like 3.5% to offset new costs coming under ACA ...and that's just the starting point.
tri-man 47
Footballguy
Absolutely. I believe this was the premise of the Republican plan that John McCain was touting back in the day. He just did a lousy job of it. I think the concept of employers providing coverage started back in the 1930's maybe? You're right that there are benefits to decoupling the two (e.g., you don't lose coverage when changing jobs or out of work).
Mr Two Cents
Footballguy
There is absolutely no reason to argue. RUN THE NUMBERS for your household and compare Obamacare to what you have now.
In addition to the premium, don't forget ALL the deductibles and the Maximum Out of Pocket for the entire family.
If you take a family of four making 50K a year, add in everything and the AFFORDABLE CARE ACT would cost the family upwards of 50% of their NET income for healthcare.
RUN THE FREAKING NUMBERS, it is all you have to do.
In addition to the premium, don't forget ALL the deductibles and the Maximum Out of Pocket for the entire family.
If you take a family of four making 50K a year, add in everything and the AFFORDABLE CARE ACT would cost the family upwards of 50% of their NET income for healthcare.
RUN THE FREAKING NUMBERS, it is all you have to do.
the moops
Footballguy
Rush Limbaugh Fan
Footballguy
How about a real article on this?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/18/us-healthcare-exchanges-private-idUSBRE98H03120130918
These are private exchanges, not public ones. The companies essentially subsidize the benefit for their employees, who get more choice and flexibility.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
I love how some of you will swim through the sewage in the bowels of the internet to find an "article" to support your crazy worldview.
badmojo1006
Footballguy
bigbottom
Footballguy
Didn't need to search the net.
Per the Blue Cross correspondence this month - Your plan will no longer be allowed under ACA.
"If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."
— President Barack Obama, Aug. 11, 2009
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
Fixed, and likely correct. The cost is still there, it's just being fit by other people paying for a subsidy that this family receives.
matttyl
Footballguy
Maybe he didn't need coverage for maternity or drug rehab. Maybe he wants that choice. Doesn't matter now.
Ran the numbers as Mr 2cents says and well I was below 50%, I even made it below 40%, It just must be crazy to think I was under 30%, holly #### I was under 20%, and no fricken way I am under 10%. But I was for a family of 4 with income around 80k. Of course we have to see how the state of Texas will screw us, but running the numbers as Mr. 2cents says and well under 10% is a long way from that 50% that he is promoting!
Yes, the whole point of this is to keep the amount that comes out out of your pocket below a certain percentage of your income. For people that make 40K in your situation their health care makes up about 28.5% of their income. But they only have to pick up 5% of that while the general public gets the other 23.5%. At 30K a year, it's about 38% of their income. But they only have to pay 2% of that (only 5% of their overall premium) and the public picks up the other 36% (95% of the overall premium). At the 50K numbers that Mr 2 suggested, health care makes up about 22%. But yeah, only 6.73% of that is the responsibility of the insured, the other 15% or so comes from the general public.greenroom said:
What makes this really strange is that it starts to create situations where making more money actually ends up hurting you financially. For instance, if you made 94,200 a year you'd actually get about 2500 in subsidies still. At 94,300 a year you have to pay for all of your insurance so it actually cost you $2400 to get a raise.
Last edited by a moderator:
johnnycakes
Footballguy
Every week in the WSJ there's an article about another big company going to these exchanges. It's a cost-cutting measure, let's face it, and most employees aren't willing to pay the additional money for better coverage. We won't be going this route at my place. We want healthy, happy employees, and good 80%-paid point-of-service plan, that covers both the employee and family, helps keep the best employees with us.
Dr Oadi
Footballguy
They are still going to subsidize it. Their employees just pick plans out of an exchange. Employees could wind up paying more or less depending on what they select.
Mr Two Cents
Footballguy
Monthly premium is $633 for the Silver plan for 7598greenroom said:
the dedcutible is 2000 per person for another 8000
Copay is 15% until you reach a maximum of 6,400 per person.
So lets assume your family is relatively healthy and you only accrue a total of 1000 per person over th e year . 15% of 4K is only another $600.
So lets add up the premiums, the deductibles and 15% of a normal healthy family.
I come up with a total of $16,198 for a healthy family of four. That is still 20 percent of your NET income.
Can you afford 20% of your NET income for a healthy family of four?
I guess if you pay no taxes and don't eat much you will do ok. But don't get sick or injured.
If you dispute these figures, you are a liar, period.
If that is affordable healthcare you can have it. It is cheaper to pay the tax and pay for your own healthcare.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Yeah, you're cleary insane. You think a family of four who is maxing out all 4 of their deductibles every year is going to spend less than $16k total?
I hope your wife manages your family finances.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr Two Cents
Footballguy
You know when the unions are #####ing about it and Congeress and their staffs familys get a 75% taxpayer subsidy, it sucks ###.
You don't really need to worry about whether your employees have coverage. Either they get it, or they'll have to pay fines.
Mr Two Cents
Footballguy
So you are okay with that huh. That was by the way a healthy family of four with no accidental injurys or medical problems.
Tell me Tommy how much have YOU specifically paid for healthcare this year.
Also bear in mind that is with a subsidy that will get smaller every year.
ACA is a freaking lie, it is not affordable and for the poor it it is even worse. This was for a middle class family. It will absolutely crush the poor and if you fail to realize that then you refuse to deal with the reality of millions of American.
A long while ago I asked you to run the numbers and compare Obamacare to what you pay. You never replied, I wonder why?
Last edited by a moderator:
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
B/c I have no idea what I currently pay. The benefits at my wife's companies are ever so slightly better than mine, so I'm on her plan. I have no idea what comes out of her checks, and I have no idea how much the company subsidy is.
johnnycakes
Footballguy
Mr Two Cents
Footballguy
For some reason that does not surprise me. You should get informed and speak with knowledge instead of what they want you to think.
I atually am amazed that you spout your crap on the ACA and have no clue what you are comparing what to.
Seriously you need to check yourself and REALITY before you make ignorant posts about which you admit you know nothing.
Seriously dOOd, stop the mis-information and suppositions.
Last edited by a moderator:
johnnycakes
Footballguy
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
bigbottom
Footballguy
Yeah, paying for my family's health care on my own would have set me back a cool million the past year or so. Sometimes #### happens. As for your calculations, are you assuming that greenroom's employer doesn't subsidize his health care premiums at all?
Also, if your hypo is assuming a healthy family of four, why are you assuming usage of the full $2,000 deductible for each family member?
Last edited by a moderator:
jamny
Footballguy
Well, our 30% increase in premiums has been confirmed. Of course, they say it is primarily because of ACA, but I'm sure some of that could be on their end too. My wife is working towards an alternate plan that will only increase it 20% but with more out of pocket costs per year. She says her company pays about $1 mill a year in health costs and this will add around $100,000.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Exactly. If every family member is maxing out the deductible, I'm fairly certain their out of pocket costs if they were uninsured would far exceed the $16k this numbskull is quoting as their Obamacare costs.
Johnny Rock
Footballguy
Got our Plan renewal today and our companies' premium is going up 9%. 3.5% (not 3.5% of 9%) of that is costs related to ACA. Taken at face value not a HUGE increase but for a relatively healthy group these large compounding yearly increases add up to a lot of money.
Like Johnnycakes, we will continue to offer a solid plan as it is an advantage.
Also, our broker mentioned that it looks like the "30 hours = Full-time" BS that was delayed until 2015 may be changing to a higher number of hours. I hope they keep it at the traditional 40 hours per week. Anybody else hear something like this?
Like Johnnycakes, we will continue to offer a solid plan as it is an advantage.
Also, our broker mentioned that it looks like the "30 hours = Full-time" BS that was delayed until 2015 may be changing to a higher number of hours. I hope they keep it at the traditional 40 hours per week. Anybody else hear something like this?
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
johnnycakes
Footballguy
We take the position that 1,000/yr is "full-time", but in reality, we don't have to worry about that. People are responsible for covering their duties regardless of time requirements. You can do your job in 30 hours per week? Fine... enjoy your nap time like JC... you need 80 hours per week to meet expectations? Then that's what we expect... If that's taking too much of a toll on you, then maybe somewhere else that only needs 50 hours per week and will give you one of those multiple-choice plans may be better suited for you.
Statcruncher
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
If you don't know what you pay for even your own health care coverage, how are you at all able to comment on other people?!
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
I know it's always fun to pile on Gunz, but his scenario is the same as the vast majority of people who are covered under their, or their spouse's, employer provided coverage. One of the issues with the employer care model is that it insulates the healthcare consumer from the cost of their coverage. Sure, most people probably know how much is taken out of their paycheck or the general employee contribution, and they know their co-pays and deductibles. But none of that is the actual cost of coverage or care. Then, even for people who happen to be in the individual marketplace, there are so many variables in terms of local market and individual health issues that comparing the cost of coverage and out of pocket expenses is close to meaningless.
Just because he doesn't know doesn't mean the information isn't available. It might be, it might not be, who knows. My company puts out a comprehensive benefit statement every year. Now, they don't break down the health care coverage alone but lump call health care and income protection benefits together. I haven't gotten the one for this year, but in 2012 my breakdown was as follows:
Employer Contribution: 13,944
My Contribution: 2,432
This covers the following:
Medical/Dental/Pharmacy
Vision Insurance
Life Insurance
Accidental Death and Dismemberment Insurance
Business Travel Insurance
Long-Term Disability Insurance
Medical alone is obviously the vast majority of this though. Probably about 90% of it.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Why would my anecdotal experience have any effect on the ACA as a whole? And even if I did know exactly how much our family's contribution is, how would I know exactly what my wife's employer is contributing?
Last edited by a moderator:
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
I'd ultimately like to see something like a single payer+ model. Basically have the government provide a basic healthcare plan to everyone, but administered through independent insurance companies. Have the insurance companies compete to register and underwrite people on the basic plan, and they are paid directly by the Federal government so there is less chance for people to fall through the cracks. The upside for insurers is the ability to upsell to higher grade plans once they have people in their network - faster appointments, access to higher end specialists, supplemental prescription, co-insurance, AD&D coverage, etc.
timschochet
Footballguy
The House Republicans sent their budget to the Senate this morning- without any funding for Obamacare. For months, John Boehner resisted doing this, because he knew it would only lead to a government shutdown. But the Tea Party has had its way. Fireworks about to happen.
matttyl
Footballguy
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/understanding-obamacare-bronze-silver-gold-152027179.html
A few notes from the above article which shows that even the "Affordable Care Act" isn't "affordable" at all under their own definition for many......
If you make $45,690+ as an individual, no matter your age, you will not qualify for any subsidy. The article says that even a BRONZE plan (the weakest and lowest priced plan available to anyone age 30+) would be $531 per month for a 60 year old in Indianapolis. That works out to $6,372 per year in PREMIUMS ALONE! That's 13.8% of the GROSS INCOME of a single person making $46k a year (where no subsidy is paid). I thought "affordable" was under 9.5% by the ACA's definition?! He's paying nearly 50% more than that in PREMIUMS ALONE!! I haven't even assumed the first claim!
Even a 25 year old in Vermont would pay $264 a month! That's $3,168 a year, or about 7% of a guy making that amount of money.....and he's only 25! And that's before the very first claim is made, and this Bronze plan comes with the highest deductibles and out of pocket costs (typically $4k+ in annual deductible with the $6,350 (mandated) max out of pocket). So that 25 year old breaks his leg (or fill in the blank claim) and his claim is $4k (all goes toward deductible), and his total out of pocket costs for that year were $7,168 (all before the first dollar of insurance was paid) - which is over 15% of his GROSS (before tax) INCOME. "Affordable" my butt!
As I've said all along - all these high rates will do is drive the young and healthy population OUT of the exchanges as they would rather "wing it" than pay these high premiums with high deductibles (or even higher premiums with somewhat lower deductibles as I was only looking at the weakest Bronze plan above). This will lead to an older and sicker population IN the exchanges, which will lead to even higher annual increases than we currently see today. Right now we see ~10% year to year increases in health insurance premiums (some see higher, some lower, this is a good ballpark of the average), and that's calculated on the total population which has health insurance today which we can assume is on average younger and healthier than the population that doesn't have health insurance today. What do you think the annual % increase will be in future years when it's based on an older and sicker population?! What will happen to all those 60 year olds paying $531 and those 25 year olds who paid $264 a month when next year they get a 12% increase, or 15% increase, or higher?! The healthy ones will jump ship - and the ones who didn't have insurance who had something come up in their health will jump in to replace them, further accelerating the "death spiral".
Do you think that a 2% "tax" will be enough to keep these folks in the pool (2% of $50k is only $1,000 - this "insurance" is already over 3x that for a 25 year old!!).
A few notes from the above article which shows that even the "Affordable Care Act" isn't "affordable" at all under their own definition for many......
If you make $45,690+ as an individual, no matter your age, you will not qualify for any subsidy. The article says that even a BRONZE plan (the weakest and lowest priced plan available to anyone age 30+) would be $531 per month for a 60 year old in Indianapolis. That works out to $6,372 per year in PREMIUMS ALONE! That's 13.8% of the GROSS INCOME of a single person making $46k a year (where no subsidy is paid). I thought "affordable" was under 9.5% by the ACA's definition?! He's paying nearly 50% more than that in PREMIUMS ALONE!! I haven't even assumed the first claim!
Even a 25 year old in Vermont would pay $264 a month! That's $3,168 a year, or about 7% of a guy making that amount of money.....and he's only 25! And that's before the very first claim is made, and this Bronze plan comes with the highest deductibles and out of pocket costs (typically $4k+ in annual deductible with the $6,350 (mandated) max out of pocket). So that 25 year old breaks his leg (or fill in the blank claim) and his claim is $4k (all goes toward deductible), and his total out of pocket costs for that year were $7,168 (all before the first dollar of insurance was paid) - which is over 15% of his GROSS (before tax) INCOME. "Affordable" my butt!
As I've said all along - all these high rates will do is drive the young and healthy population OUT of the exchanges as they would rather "wing it" than pay these high premiums with high deductibles (or even higher premiums with somewhat lower deductibles as I was only looking at the weakest Bronze plan above). This will lead to an older and sicker population IN the exchanges, which will lead to even higher annual increases than we currently see today. Right now we see ~10% year to year increases in health insurance premiums (some see higher, some lower, this is a good ballpark of the average), and that's calculated on the total population which has health insurance today which we can assume is on average younger and healthier than the population that doesn't have health insurance today. What do you think the annual % increase will be in future years when it's based on an older and sicker population?! What will happen to all those 60 year olds paying $531 and those 25 year olds who paid $264 a month when next year they get a 12% increase, or 15% increase, or higher?! The healthy ones will jump ship - and the ones who didn't have insurance who had something come up in their health will jump in to replace them, further accelerating the "death spiral".
Do you think that a 2% "tax" will be enough to keep these folks in the pool (2% of $50k is only $1,000 - this "insurance" is already over 3x that for a 25 year old!!).
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
This seems silly. One has to know exactly what they are spending on health care per year, as well as exactly what their company is spending on their behalf, in order to have an opinion on national healthcare legislation?
matttyl
Footballguy
Completely disagree. For someone to have posted as many times as he has in this forum, and made him self out to know more about this situation than he actually does - one would think he would AT LEAST know what his own coverage costs. Sure, many Americans obtain their coverage though an employer, and at some point they had to make a choice of which plan to take and the cost along with it. Often much or all of that cost is covered by their employer, but they still should know what that cost is.
Me personally, I pay $112 per month for a $2,250 individual deductible (HDHP) plan (I'm self employed). My wife has her coverage through her employer, and I know exactly how much that costs as at her age it may have been possible to obtain an individual policy for less than her cost, but her employer is generous and her cost is less than it would be to obtain coverage on the open market.
If someone doesn't at least know their own costs (even if it's zero) for their health coverage, they have no right to make claims about this legislation and the costs that will trickle down to millions of Americans.
