ObamaCare and you? good, bad, neutral, unknown

[Kessei]

I don't know that it says that because in all the things I've read, it doesn't. That wasn't my point, though. My point was that the insurance won't be any more affordable after Obamacare. Not for those of us true middlers who can't qualify for anything else and can't pay for what they're offering. See, they THINK we're able to afford it. But, we aren't. I know because I live it. So, my point is, even if it WERE a criminal offense, that changes nothing about my situation, I still can't buy it, I will still get heavily fined because I can't buy it, and if they chose to toss my tush in jail......at least I'd get FREE everything at that point. :p

My understanding is that (1) costs of insurance will go down for most full-profit insurance companies, since there will be a cap on how much of the premiums can go towards profit/administrative costs, and (2) there are subsidies for people who can't afford the price of insurance, with gradients based on income level.

Not being able to afford the full cost of insurance now doesn't mean you won't be able to afford it when the law takes effect.

[Auress]

My understanding is that (1) costs of insurance will go down for most full-profit insurance companies, since there will be a cap on how much of the premiums can go towards profit/administrative costs, and (2) there are subsidies for people who can't afford the price of insurance, with gradients based on income level.

Not being able to afford the full cost of insurance now doesn't mean you won't be able to afford it when the law takes effect.

Yeah, actually it does. There is a website out there (migraines, I'm not gonna look for it right now), that shows you what your income level and fee range would be. It not affordable for us, at all. We are a one income family, that income is in the lower middle class range. We fall in a range where we would pay MORE for the insurance than for the fines, per year.

We are on a strict budget that does not include insurance now, nor will it include it after the law blah blah. We will be paying the fines. I'm not saying this for my health, I'm saying it because it's the truth.

[cigfran]

We are on a strict budget that does not include insurance now, nor will it include it after the law blah blah. We will be paying the fines.

My understanding is that tax credits and hardship waivers are meant to address this problem. Does the chart you reference take this into account?

[sailor]

We fall in a range where we would pay MORE for the insurance than for the fines, per year.

 
That is a feature, not a bug.  The fines were set lower than the insurance cost from the get go.

[Auress]

That is a feature, not a bug.  The fines were set lower than the insurance cost from the get go.

Which changes nothing about the situation. So, why even mention it? No kidding, it's a feature. It doesn't help us pay for the LEGALLY MANDATED INSURANCE. Which is why we'll pay the fines and move on our merry way paying out of pocket exactly as we do, now. Except, we'll be even more put out for having to pay the fines. This ISN"T socialized healthcare, it's stupid bullshit.

@ cigfran
I do not know about hardship waivers but, I would guess that that doesn't cover us. As I said, we are lower middle class people. We pay our bills and my husband goes to work all day and I stay home to take care of my severely disabled adult son. Usually, hardship waivers (in most other instances) are for poor people and the disabled. Fine and dandy if we were talking about my son, but he gets medical help automatically just for being disabled (Down Syndrome and severe Autism).

The tax credits will be used to pay the fines every year. So....well yeah, I suppose that helps us do at least that.

[sailor]

If ObamaCare is upheld as written, will that be good for you?  bad for you? you don't know?

At present the only plus I think for me, is it would keep my daughter on my insurance until she is 25.

 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303506404577444410947791758.html

Wall St Journal, pay article so you can only see part of it.

Up to 7% of college students (600,000) going to either lose insurance or see major increases (example from article was from $450 a year to $2,000 year.  HHS response was the coverage of the cheap plan was so bad that no coverage is better than poor coverage.

[Liadine (dragonflyeyes)]

If ObamaCare is upheld as written, will that be good for you?  bad for you? you don't know?

 
Well, I'm a Canadian, so maybe I don't get a say, but it does mean that one of my favourite people (who is an American) won't be calling me sobbing in pain because she can't get treatment for her severe back injuries and other problems.

Before this, we were talking about getting married just so she could get up here and actually get some treatment.

The American medical system scares the living beejesus out of me. I know the Canadian system has some major flaws, but at least I don't have to weigh 'being in pain' versus 'being able to eat'.

[Owl]

Well, I'm a Canadian, so maybe I don't get a say, but it does mean that one of my favourite people (who is an American) won't be calling me sobbing in pain because she can't get treatment for her severe back injuries and other problems.

Before this, we were talking about getting married just so she could get up here and actually get some treatment.

The American medical system scares the living beejesus out of me. I know the Canadian system has some major flaws, but at least I don't have to weigh 'being in pain' versus 'being able to eat'.

Do we need health care?  Yes.  Do we need health care without a public option so that the insurance companies can charge through the nose and we have to pay it?  No.  A single payer option like you have would be wonderful, but I doubt anything like that will be seen in my lifetime.

[Liadine (dragonflyeyes)]

Do we need health care?  Yes.  Do we need health care without a public option so that the insurance companies can charge through the nose and we have to pay it?  No.  A single payer option like you have would be wonderful, but I doubt anything like that will be seen in my lifetime.

 
Yeah, I definitely don't know all the details - being Canadian - and I'll admit that though what I've seen has been for the good (that is, I'd be glad for it if I lived there and wouldn't mind what downsides I've seen), I don't know all the issues surrounding it as well as I'd like.

I probably should have stayed out of this conversation since I'm a) not American, and b) not up to speed on everything, but I'm protective of my American family-people without health care (whose lives would be a lot easier under 'Obamacare') and tend to get a little over-righteous before my brain can tell my mouth to shut up.

[mandrina]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303506404577444410947791758.html

Wall St Journal, pay article so you can only see part of it.

Up to 7% of college students (600,000) going to either lose insurance or see major increases (example from article was from $450 a year to $2,000 year.  HHS response was the coverage of the cheap plan was so bad that no coverage is better than poor coverage.

it's important to note that the cheap plan mentioned was the one offered by the colleges before the law, not the cheap plan under the law.  Just a note.

[sailor]

Yeah, I definitely don't know all the details - being Canadian - and I'll admit that though what I've seen has been for the good (that is, I'd be glad for it if I lived there and wouldn't mind what downsides I've seen), I don't know all the issues surrounding it as well as I'd like.

I probably should have stayed out of this conversation since I'm a) not American, and b) not up to speed on everything, but I'm protective of my American family-people without health care (whose lives would be a lot easier under 'Obamacare') and tend to get a little over-righteous before my brain can tell my mouth to shut up.

 
The big question, and reason for this thread is whether your American family without health insurance (Not health Care) will actually be better off under ObamaCare.

[RandallS]

The big question, and reason for this thread is whether your American family without health insurance (Not health Care) will actually be better off under ObamaCare.

Assuming it goes through as enacted and gets FUNDED so people who can't afford insurance will actuaklly get it, it will be much better for most people without insurance -- especially if they aren't paragons of health. You know, the type of people the medical insurance system hates because they would use their insurance a lot if they had it. The people insurance executives have said in the past they do not want to cover because it would not be profitable for them to do so.

[Ocelot]

Assuming it goes through as enacted and gets FUNDED so people who can't afford insurance will actuaklly get it, it will be much better for most people without insurance -- especially if they aren't paragons of health. You know, the type of people the medical insurance system hates because they would use their insurance a lot if they had it. The people insurance executives have said in the past they do not want to cover because it would not be profitable for them to do so.

 
Exactly and well put.

Take my family for example. We haven't had healthcare for quite some time and regardless what I've heard the opposition say, it isn't as easy as just forgoing diners out, or cable TV, etc to go but private insurance. Location, age, and health status matter tremendously in the cost.

The cheapest plans we could find are still many hundreds per month and are simply not worth it anyway. Not worth it meaning that with the deductibles of thousands per year, even after going broke paying for the "cheap" insurance, you still have to pay for everything out of pocket until those thousands in deductibles are reached. The plans that actually pay for things with low deductibles would cost around and sometimes way over $1000 per month.

I obviously have significant health issues since I was even awarded full disability, but have to forgo treatments and tests due to costs, not need. and let me tell you, even with self-pay discounts, the costs of even small things are ridiculous. For example, my blood work every three months in cheap, only around $100, however a vitamin D blood test is nearly $300. Those tests are needed for me due to bone problems and deficiencies and in order to take prescription strength vitamin D, the blood tests are required to prevent heart failure from too much.  Spinal surgery to ease some pain in my cervical spine? Might as well ask me to finance the next SpaceX mission to the space station. MRI to see if there are new fractures in my lower back from the advanced osteoporosis? Forget it. It goes on and on.

Fortunately for me, since I'm on full disability I FINALLY will have healthcare (Medicare) again in October/November of this year. There is a two year wait once you become disabled.

My wife however, Still will be without insurance. We're hoping we can eventually get a better rate from the AFSME union she joined for childcare workers once they begin to offer group health insurance.

If not, then once the new healthcare law goes into full effect with the insurance exchanges and the subsidies for low income, then insurance for her might be affordable enough to squeak by paying for.

So yes, if exchanges and subsidies happen, the new healthcare law would help with my wife getting insurance.

[sailor]

Assuming it goes through as enacted and gets FUNDED so people who can't afford insurance will actuaklly get it, it will be much better for most people without insurance -- especially if they aren't paragons of health. You know, the type of people the medical insurance system hates because they would use their insurance a lot if they had it. The people insurance executives have said in the past they do not want to cover because it would not be profitable for them to do so.

The funding for actual subsidies is an entitlement I think. The govt has to spend what ever amount it takes to fully fund the program.  The preliminary grants for individual states to set up the program are budgeted items, although I don't think a single state has gotten a phase two, let alone a phase three grant for setting up exchanges.

Take a look at the linked article up thread about how subsidies are calculated.  It's based upon the cost of insurance for the head of household. So if the head of household is getting free individual medical insurance, but would have to pay for family coverage, such as in North Carolina with state employees.

[mandrina]

The funding for actual subsidies is an entitlement I think. The govt has to spend what ever amount it takes to fully fund the program.  The preliminary grants for individual states to set up the program are budgeted items, although I don't think a single state has gotten a phase two, let alone a phase three grant for setting up exchanges.

Take a look at the linked article up thread about how subsidies are calculated.  It's based upon the cost of insurance for the head of household. So if the head of household is getting free individual medical insurance, but would have to pay for family coverage, such as in North Carolina with state employees.

 
which linked article?  Vermillion didn't actually link hers.