HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The Affordable Care Act i...

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 06:17 AM

The Affordable Care Act is devastating to seniors

Did I say "devastating"? I meant "incredibly beneficial".

79 replies, 10822 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 79 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Affordable Care Act is devastating to seniors (Original post)
Scuba Dec 2013 OP
unhappycamper Dec 2013 #1
dipsydoodle Dec 2013 #2
Laelth Dec 2013 #3
MADem Dec 2013 #53
dipsydoodle Dec 2013 #55
MADem Dec 2013 #56
dipsydoodle Dec 2013 #59
MADem Dec 2013 #61
dipsydoodle Dec 2013 #65
enlightenment Dec 2013 #57
MADem Dec 2013 #58
enlightenment Dec 2013 #66
MADem Dec 2013 #74
enlightenment Dec 2013 #78
MADem Dec 2013 #79
Boudica the Lyoness Dec 2013 #71
MADem Dec 2013 #73
Boudica the Lyoness Dec 2013 #75
MADem Dec 2013 #76
enlightenment Dec 2013 #54
Thirties Child Dec 2013 #69
totodeinhere Dec 2013 #43
dotymed Dec 2013 #4
Stellar Dec 2013 #9
boomersense Dec 2013 #33
Stellar Dec 2013 #51
boomersense Dec 2013 #60
dotymed Dec 2013 #77
boomersense Dec 2013 #31
grasswire Dec 2013 #42
totodeinhere Dec 2013 #44
RebelOne Dec 2013 #50
totodeinhere Dec 2013 #62
h2ebits Dec 2013 #70
grasswire Dec 2013 #68
daybranch Dec 2013 #5
Scuba Dec 2013 #6
Hubert Flottz Dec 2013 #7
KansDem Dec 2013 #17
deafskeptic Dec 2013 #25
Snotcicles Dec 2013 #8
BlueJazz Dec 2013 #11
Scuba Dec 2013 #12
truebluegreen Dec 2013 #20
truebluegreen Dec 2013 #19
bearssoapbox Dec 2013 #14
Scuba Dec 2013 #15
malaise Dec 2013 #18
brush Dec 2013 #27
grantcart Dec 2013 #35
rhett o rick Dec 2013 #64
moosewhisperer Dec 2013 #13
Omnith Dec 2013 #41
Ikonoklast Dec 2013 #16
Demit Dec 2013 #26
pangaia Dec 2013 #22
mockmonkey Dec 2013 #24
auntAgonist Dec 2013 #29
Shivering Jemmy Dec 2013 #30
Callmecrazy Dec 2013 #38
Logical Dec 2013 #39
riverbendviewgal Dec 2013 #45
eppur_se_muova Dec 2013 #47
BrainDrain Dec 2013 #10
bullwinkle428 Dec 2013 #21
pangaia Dec 2013 #23
HelenWheels Dec 2013 #28
ananda Dec 2013 #32
zipplewrath Dec 2013 #37
boomersense Dec 2013 #34
Whisp Dec 2013 #36
Omnith Dec 2013 #40
Name removed Dec 2013 #46
PeaceNikki Dec 2013 #48
Scuba Dec 2013 #52
freshwest Dec 2013 #72
Progressive dog Dec 2013 #49
Liberal_in_LA Dec 2013 #63
duggie99 Dec 2013 #67

Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 06:29 AM

1. After I turned 65. I was enrolled Medicare.

My health plan changes: a new HMO card, same HMO, same doctors, same everything.

My monthly heath care insurance went from $450 a month (single, no kids living at home) to $109/month.

Single payer is the way to go.

BTW, Obamacare was written by the Heritage stinktank - written by Republicans for insurance companies. I would expect anything written by Republicans was written by their pwners. Their corporate pwners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unhappycamper (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 06:36 AM

2. For comparison - in the UK

when we reach retirement age, 60 women / 65 men, national health payments cease and all prescriptions become free at 60 for both sexes anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 06:44 AM

3. I am quite jealous of the NHS.

We need a Tony Benn in the United States.

-Laelth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:29 PM

53. They aren't free--you pay for them via Inland Revenue.

You don't see the bills, but you do pay. It's a worthwhile tax, but it is something you all pay for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #53)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:35 PM

55. Pardon ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #55)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:38 PM

56. Health Care doesn't come down from the sky--it's funded via taxes. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #56)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:47 PM

59. If anything

the prescriptions are paid from accruals from when NH payments were due prior to retirement age.

And by the way its been HMRC since April 2005 : not Inland Revenue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #59)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 04:01 PM

61. People don't use the "Inland Revenue" term anymore?

Funny, I thought they did, despite the merger:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Revenue

The Inland Revenue was, until April 2005, a department of the British Government responsible for the collection of direct taxation, including income tax, national insurance contributions,capital gains tax, inheritance tax, corporation tax, petroleum revenue tax and stamp duty. More recently, the Inland Revenue also administered the Tax Credits schemes, whereby monies, such as Working Tax Credit (WTC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC), are paid by the Government into a recipient's bank account or as part of their wages. The Inland Revenue was also responsible for the payment of child benefit.
The Inland Revenue was merged with HM Customs and Excise to form HM Revenue and Customs which came into existence on 18 April 2005. The former Inland Revenue is thus now part of HM Revenue and Customs, but it is still the name by which the tax gathering department of government is commonly known by British people and is often referred to as "the Tax Man".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #61)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 04:49 PM

65. Despite the fact HMRC is short

its still a bit of mouthful. Yes some do still refer to the Revenue same as some still refer to Customs & Excise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #53)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:38 PM

57. Seriously?

You are going to tell a UK national how the NHS works? That really comes under the heading of "don't try to teach your granny to suck eggs", you know . . .

lordloveaduck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enlightenment (Reply #57)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:42 PM

58. I used to live in UK--do point out the falsehood in my comment.

The NHS is a fine system, but it isn't "free" and to pretend it is, is just not accurate. Everyone pays into the system via taxes, except for people who have an authorization to use the service as a consequence of international agreements, like a SOFA--and if you're accessing a doctor who doesn't understand that, it can be a pain in the ass to get services.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #58)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 04:50 PM

66. You are arguing two different scenarios.

Yes, it is a tax. However, as dipsydoodle said, it CHANGES when you reach retirement. You responded to his post with an argument that did not address what he was discussing.

https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age

People of pensionable age no longer pay into the national tax (unless their pension income and other income exceeds the personal allowance). They still get healthcare - so yes, technically, at that point in their lives it is "free" - after they spent a lifetime paying into the scheme they generally do not have to contribute more as pensioners.

Address what is said; if you want to discuss the NHS in its totality, you've got a leg to stand on - but suggesting he is wrong is nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enlightenment (Reply #66)

Thu Dec 5, 2013, 02:02 AM

74. No, I'm not. The bottom line is that people who are using the NHS have paid for the privilege.

If I pay off my mortgage and I am living in my house without having to make a payment every month, I'm not living "for free." I've paid the debt off. I earned my place in that home--no, I don't have a monthly expenditure NOW, but I have paid, already. It's the same deal with NHS.

Also, if a UK pensioner retires to sunny Spain, and stays away for more than half a year, he or she will have to PAY for NHS service, starting in April of next year. The NHS is gearing itself towards customers who live IN the UK, not people with Her Majesty's passports who think they can zip in whenever they feel like it and get some of that "free" healthcare.

Further, NHS trusts can now make up to 49 percent of their operating costs through "private" patients, up from a limit of TWO percent. If you don't think that is changing the dynamic of patient care in UK, I don't know what to tell you.

The paradigm is shifting. I know some people might not like this, but no shooting the messenger. Paradigms usually shift because--like it, or not--the present models are either outdated or unsustainable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #74)

Thu Dec 5, 2013, 09:09 AM

78. The poster was very specific.

You are insistent that the conversation needs to shift to a much broader area - the changing face of the NHS. You are attempting to do this by arguing something I said in my last post (that pensioners pay into the system their entire working lives) - which tells me you aren't reading what I wrote - and by shifting your own argument to discuss people who are not living in the UK; something that was never addressed, or ever alluded to by anyone but you. Further, you are moving the discussion to what is going to happen or may happen in the future of the NHS - again, nothing to do with the poster's comment or any attempt on my part to address the poster's comment.

What the poster said is the point of this particular discussion. What they said and how you responded, which is something you are trying to ignore and defend at the same time - a fascinating, but tedious exercise.

I do not disagree that the NHS model is changing; part of it is a necessary retooling and part of it is the sordid manipulations of the current political leadership. However, that really has little to do with what Dipsydoodle said.

That is the bottom line and I'm getting off this merry-go-round now, since it is abundantly clear that you don't want to engage in the original discussion, but the future of the NHS - and that's a topic for the UK group or even a new thread in GD if you choose to start one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enlightenment (Reply #78)

Thu Dec 5, 2013, 09:39 AM

79. I don't mean to be rude, but this thread is about the ACA--if you want to get technical.

Not the NHS. Threads, as they do, devolve and subthreads crop up to expand on issues and bring up other aspects--it's called conversation and it happens in good threads here. As for this conversation, it's wiggling around a bit to go afield here and there, but there's no "rule" that we have to hew to a narrow path of your invention--you aren't the thread nanny, here. I don't think dipsydoodle needs an interlocutor, and neither do I but thanks anyway.

I think you might want to try letting people fight their own battles.

I stand by the points I made, sorry if they bent you out of shape, but I can't really help that, now, can I? I don't think I'll be toddling off to another group to start a topic, but you're welcome to do that if it means so much to you.

Cheers...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #58)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 10:18 PM

71. NHS is totally free for some people

Not everybody pays taxes. Also there are many people who come into the country just long enough to have a baby or surgery. They are called 'Health Tourists' I believe. The government talked about trying to stop them, but the doctors said it would be unethical to do that. UK docs are not all about the money it seems.

BTW, how long were you in the UK and were did you live? I haven't lived there for 40 years.

I must say I'm very impressed with the care my parents are getting there. Both are ill and a car or ambulance is sent to take them to their treatments or just their regular appointments. My mum had to go 40 miles away for special treatment and a car would would pick her up at their house every week and take her home again. It's very good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Boudica the Lyoness (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 5, 2013, 01:54 AM

73. "Health tourists" had better have citizenship, otherwise they pay.

The government IS stopping them, and the UK doctors aren't getting in their way--in fact, many are eager to take on a cadre of private patients and raise money from "paying" customers.

And pretty soon, anyone getting free care is gonna need a UK address, too.

Sure, every country has people who don't pay taxes, but they are OUTLIERS. Most of them, the ones who aren't severely disabled and have been their entire lives, have paid into the system at some point in time and are vested in the scheme. Most countries with even marginal health care infrastructures take care of the "least of the brethren." Some do it better than others, but destitute people are cared for in most circumstances. They aren't the majority of the patients, though and they are not to whom I am referring.

That is a popular fiction in the UK, that everyone gets treated if they wind up at the hospital, and no one gets a bill, but that is not true--hasn't been for many years, now. Sure, have a heart attack in Picadilly and they'll take care of you, but don't even think about flying in to get that mole removed, or have your pesky gall bladder taken out--that is not happening.

And people are PAYING to get care, and more will be in future, too: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/the-truth-about-health-tourism-twice-as-many-foreign--visitors-pay-to-use-nhs-as-exploit-free-healthcare-in-britain-8902520.html

New research that turns the high-profile debate on its head, has found that 18 NHS trusts made a total income of £42m in 2010-11 from foreign paying patients


The study also highlights the massive potential for NHS trusts to make money from foreign paying patients, who are willing to spend large sums on care at some of the health service’s internationally renowned hospitals.

In total, 52,000 people who entered the UK in 2010 declared that the main purpose of their visit was to seek healthcare. Researchers said it was highly unlikely that any of them would be seeking to exploit the NHS for free care because it would be too easy to track them. While some will have been visiting for treatment in the private sector, a large number will have visited NHS hospitals that were willing to charge for certain procedures.

Dr Johanna Hanefeld, lecturer in health systems economics at LSHTM, said that as a result it was likely that the number of foreign patients paying for NHS care is double the number coming to the UK seeking free healthcare – a group estimated to number between 5,000 and 20,000 by government-commissioned research published earlier this week. The new research also found that, overall, the UK is a “net exporter” of patients, with 63,000 travelling abroad for treatment in 2010.

Researchers submitted Freedom of Information requests to 28 NHS foundation trust hospitals. Among the 18 trusts which responded was Great Ormond Street children’s hospital, which took an income of over £20m from 656 patients.

The potential for foreign patients to pay for care at NHS hospitals is set to increase. Under the Government’s health reforms, NHS trusts can now raise up to 49 per cent of funds through non-NHS work – a huge increase on the 2 per cent cap set by the previous government.


And there IS a "crackdown" underway--even UK citizen - EXPATS are going to be required to pay for NHS care starting next April:

Expatriate Britons have been caught up in a major crackdown on ' health tourists' announced by the Government yesterday.
Under new restrictions, people who fly to Britain to exploit the NHS will be denied free care. The ban preventing visitors and failed asylum seekers from milking the system is likely to come into force by next April.
Health Minister John Hutton warned that health tourism was a 'significant' problem and swift action was needed to safeguard the NHS for taxpayers.
The new rules may lead to all patients being asked for proof of residence, such as a passport or electricity bill.
However, pensioners from the UK who live abroad for more than half the year will be denied free treatment.
No matter how much they have paid in tax and National Insurance over the years, such expatriates will now have to pay for NHS care back in Britain.
Only treatment for emergencies - such as heart attacks, accidents or sudden illness - will still be free.
The move will hit thousands who have retired to the Spanish costas, France or other European countries.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-204961/UK-expats-fall-victim-health-tourism.html#ixzz2mZyzzB6x


The system IS about the money, both making it and trying to hold in costs. It is about prioritizing the "taxpayer"--those who have or are paying into the system. There is a paradigm shift that has been happening for many years in health care, not just in USA, but all over the world--and UK as well. Everyone gets care, but not always the cutting edge treatments, and there is a queue. Remember that "Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" film? One of the characters--a racist pensioner-- goes to India for her new hip.

Medical tourism is happening all over the world--South America for plastic surgery, Brazil for dentists, India for hips, knees, and bypasses. Spend a few moments researching the concept on the internet--you'll be very surprised.

It's one of the reasons that parents raise money in UK with charity schemes (forty thousand pounds, some of them) to send their children with cerebral palsy to St. Louis, to the Children's Hospital there, to get an operation that used to not be available at all in UK, but is now "marginally" available to some--but not all-- children who need it (the doctor who does this operation trained the few doctors in UK who do the procedure). In very recent years, well over a hundred kids have left UK to get this operation. UK guidance discourages the procedure (thousands have had it, it's a frigging MIRACLE for children with debilitating spacticity) , and while they claim they have been doing it at 2 UK hospitals since 1988, they were using an old, outdated method that involved a lot of spinal compromise, had high rates of infection, and they were only doing two or three a year. See:

http://www.scope.org.uk/help-and-information/therapies/selective-dorsal-rhizotomy

http://www.stlouischildrens.org/health-care-professionals/publications/doctors-digest/septemberoctober-2010/park-performs-2000th-sel

http://www.support4sdr.org/SDRHOP.html

Dr Park has operated on people from 48 different countries and a number of those countries have trained or are training surgeons to offer this procedure. Indeed, SDR is currently performed in Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy, Poland, Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Canada and Mexico. As of 30 March 2012, 145 people from the United Kingdom have been operated on in St Louis—120 from England, 18 from Scotland and 7 from Wales.


I lived in UK for several years, most recently in the 90s for just over two years--I've been back more recently, though, for visits--I can't say I'm up on every single thing that has been happening, but as I have friends with whom I keep in touch regularly, I remain "situationally aware."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #73)

Thu Dec 5, 2013, 02:21 AM

75. About ex-pats

When I was going to Cambridge to have surgery because my US insurance had called it 'Experimental' and refused to cover it. I would have been a private paying patient, even though I'm a Brit and have a national health number. No way would they have let me have the surgery paid for by the NHS. I could have even come up with UK address. That was 6 years ago. BTW, My US doctor had a peer to peer review with the insurance co and they covered it in the end....after months of suffering on my part. I was told by the surgeon in the UK, it would cost me $14,000 there for everything. In the US it cost me $60,000. I liked the fact I was able to communicate directly with the surgeon in England. That wouldn't happen in the US. I've had 9 surgeries here.

There are plenty of people in the UK for are on benefits and have never worked and never intend to. I know of some personally.

I'm glad they are tightening up there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Boudica the Lyoness (Reply #75)

Thu Dec 5, 2013, 03:11 AM

76. Every system -- save the "cash on the table" ones -- are in the business of trying to not pay out.

It is the "new normal" to deny folks first, then you have to fight. Sometimes ya win, sometimes not.

People who can afford to pay are in a better situation, but even if they're stuck doing that, money can be saved if one takes the time to "shop around."

UK costs are lower than US ones, because the system is geared around being non-profit (and there are no insurance companies with their hand in the till, and malpractice--which is hugely expensive-- isn't the growth industry that it is in USA). The more they allow the NHS doctors to take on paying patients, though, the more those "private" costs are likely to rise. They'll still probably will be a good deal for a long while, though.

I know a Canadian (they have the all-inclusive health care too, of course) who had a bad hip and was in line for the operation, but because of where he lived, he would have either had to wait or travel across the country to get the doggone operation. His wife wanted to see India, so they combined a "trip with a hip" and it worked out well for them (I first learned about the whole heath tourism thing from them, actually--this was quite a few years back). Now, he could have gotten the hip if he'd waited a while, for free, or travelled in winter, but he was in the hurt locker, didn't want to take pain pills and wait, or have his mobility limited for several cold winter months. Apparently they have a system up there where it depends on where you live how fast the services (save the "Yer gonna die" ones, of course) are allocated. If you live in the middle of nowhere, you just might have to wait, or travel!

I do like the concept of health care for all, and I do think we're getting to it here in USA--the road to single payer is through ACA, I believe, and it's also through "state's rights" (how ironic that a construct used for racist hatred can be used for good), with VT leading the charge. It's not going to happen straight away, though--it will happen incrementally and in stages. That said, even if we do get to that point, there are going to be people who will want to jump the queue, but they'll just have to pay to do that.

I haven't had many surgeries, but the few I have had were in military settings. I was not only able to communicate directly with the surgeon, but I got a visit from the CO of the hospital afterward. I've also helped a few friends in recent years as a patient advocate for their surgeries, and they always had a surgeon consult -- I usually go along to "ask the right questions" and facilitate understanding. The surgeons have never minded and they were all pretty forthcoming. I've done all but one of these at MA General, though, so I don't really know if this is typical in all hospitals or if MGH--or Massachusetts-- is special.

I guess they have some sort of welfare-to-work scheme over there now, but it doesn't look like it's doing very well if this article is any indication (fifteen percent is a pretty lousy number, IMO): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24286806

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:33 PM

54. And you get reduced travel passes!

sigh

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 05:58 PM

69. National Health has been a godsend for my daughter

Last month she spent nine days in the hospital (in hospital) with vasculitis (inflammation of the blood vessels), saw every kind of specialist, had every organ tested, was on intravenous antibiotics, was given morphine, was finally sent home because they were worried about a hospital bug finding the open wounds on her leg. I can't imagine what it would have cost over here, or how long insurance would have let her stay in the hospital. Assuming, of course, that she had insurance. She very much wants to come back, but her British husband says they can't afford to give up National Health. He's also worried about the violence over here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unhappycamper (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:49 PM

43. If you don't mind my asking whom are you getting your Medigap insurance from?

My grandmother pays twice as much as you do and says she has been told she cannot get a cheaper premium.

(I am not doubting you one bit. I'm just trying to get helpful information for my grandmother.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 06:58 AM

4. I have medicare and have never used it.

They take payments from my disability check but I have BC/BS from Union.
Should I go on ACA site and search for a better price?
I have kept both insurances because my BC/BS has to be verified by Dr. every 6 months. I have heart failure and could not survive any lapse.
Catch 22, if I use Medicare I will lose BC/BS...
Any suggestions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dotymed (Reply #4)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 07:37 AM

9. I'm confused

I'm diabetic and I use my medicare and my BC/BS (HMO) through my employer. My understanding is that medicare pays 80% and my BC/BS pays the other 20% with some co-pay as of this year.

I'm switching to a PPO next year to go along with my medicare.

Am I missing something? Isn't that the way it's suppose to work? My husband used to take care of things but he's deceased now. So I might sound a little stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 11:44 AM

33. I also am a diabetic. That is excellent that you are

 

switching to a PPO next. More and more doctors are not taking HMO's although they will take MCare. I thought the payment structure between Private and MCare is based upon the number of employees in a company covered by the Private. We have MCare, but Part A only and don't use it at all; our Private pays 100 per cent of the freight, but we have a thousand dollar deductible PP. Employer insurance is probably on the way out within a few years. The older doctors are leaving and in many cases NP's are taking over--and now the Consult-by-Telephone. Wait until you do one of those. I've had the experience described to me as "unusual". Creating reall problems for pharmacists. Good luck to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boomersense (Reply #33)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:28 PM

51. OMG!

I worked for the State of Illinois for 32 years and I have Medicare part A and B. So if they get rid of employer Insurance I hope ObamaCare will pick up the slack.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Reply #51)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:59 PM

60. It will be a while unless the Republicans

 

get into the congress and the white house, which will be known next year when certain realities hit. Again, good luck to you. I too am getting older. We will both need so much more than luck. I like your handle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 5, 2013, 07:31 AM

77. I understand your confusion.

Mine seems to be a unique case.
My Union insurance does not work in tandem with any other insurance. If you have another insurance, they cancel your Union insurance (you can keep it through COBRA). When my Daughter got Insurance through her work she was no longer eligible to stay on my policy. It is their rules, their insurance is a "Cadillac plan."
If I retired because of age, I would be responsible for COBRA payments. Since I had to retire because of health, my Union pays for my insurance. I have to be re-certified every 6 moths.
It is strange but the Union has been there for me every step of the way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dotymed (Reply #4)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 11:24 AM

31. My reco would be to stay on your BC/BS. My wife

 

is going to try to work until she is 75 so she can stay on her employer-paid insurance, which is United Healthcare--not even close to your BC/BS in quality--but still leagues above Medicare. If we have to go on Medicare, we will offer our doctor a side payment (not the right word--(retainer?) so that he will keep us). My wife is the Director of Nursing Services for a large, well-known AZ hospital. Virtually all of the residents there are Private. Still, my wife keeps up with what's happening in the real world through contacts with doctors she's know for many years. Research this decision you are making. Maybe one of the most important researches you will ever do. I don't know whether you will have to see a different doctor than the one you are accustomed to in a switch to MCare, but it is an experience you do not want to go through if you can avoid it. The alternatives I saw when I did the research were not viable. Good luck to you. I have enjoyed your posts for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dotymed (Reply #4)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:45 PM

42. why can't you buy a medigap plan from BC/BS?

That means Medicare pays its share first, and then BC/BS takes care of the rest.

Medigap plans are the best supplementals of all because coverage is standardized by government regulation. Don't be fooled into an "Advantage" plan. Those are mostrinsurance.

The Medigap plan that most DUers seem to find favorable is Plan F.

Your coverage would be excellent, and that's important for you. You are already paying for Medicare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #42)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:51 PM

44. My grandmother pays more than $200 monthly for her Medigap plan. For seniors

on a fixed income that's a lot of money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to totodeinhere (Reply #44)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:27 PM

50. That is why I do not have any medigap insurance.

I have Medicare plans A & B, which is $105 monthly. That is a big chunk out of a $1400 monthly SS check.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RebelOne (Reply #50)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 04:12 PM

62. So you pay the 20% that Medicare doesn't pay out of pocket?

That could potentially be a big chunk of change too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RebelOne (Reply #50)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 09:32 PM

70. I enrolled in Medicare in March. . .

The biggest mistake I made was to listen to all of the insurance companies trying to sell me their MediGap plans. PLEASE read the annual booklet that is sent out by our government and is called: "Medicare and You."

The US government booklet lays out the requirements for the MediGap policies that the insurance companies are trying to get you to buy. (Plan F is the Cadillac plan, by the way.) If you look in the "Medicare and You" booklet you will also see various other Plan options. All of the Plans require that you be covered under Medicare Part A & Part B, which is $104 plus some change per MONTH, at this writing. The Plan offerings are regulated by the government but the premiums are all IN ADDITION to Medicare premiums and will vary by insurance company and plan type. It is my understanding that you also need to sign up for the Medicare Part D prescription plan in order to have prescriptions filled.

The booklet will also explain the other insurance plans available in your area that are acceptable to use for additional coverage. In my area, Denver, Colorado, with the exception of one PPO plan, all of the rest are HMO policies. Most, if not all, of the policies include prescription coverage so you do not have to sign up for Medicare Part D. I don't care for HMO policies because they tie me down too much as to who I can see and where I can go but I'm also a healthy 65-year old so will put up with it.

In the end, I chose a United Healthcare HMO with a -0- additional premium and it includes prescriptions. It acts as a regular insurance policy--if you have had insurance then you understand the co-pay, deductibles, and out-of-pocket expenses. This particular policy has a $10 co-pay and some deductibles but it also has a $4,200 out-of-pocket expense. This means that I won't pay more than $4,200 any given year. Divide $4,200 by 12 mo. and the cost to me, should I have a serious health problem, would be $350 per mo. in additional expense in the year of the health problem.

Please remember that you are dealing with insurance companies!!! Please arm yourself with as much knowledge as possible before making a decision. Consider contacting your local recreation center or senior center to see if they can direct you to a class or seminar in your area that is teaching people about all of this detail. And finally, please read the booklet "Medicare and You."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to totodeinhere (Reply #44)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 05:54 PM

68. but this person is employed.

Not on retirement income, apparently.

Also, the choice for seniors is a supplemental, or paying the co-pays, or qualifying for Medicaid. Of the supplementals, Medigap is the best investment. With a plan F, one DU-er's hubby had brain surgery and didn't pay a penny. I'd say that $200 is a good investment for someone who is still working.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 06:59 AM

5. You waste our valuable time when you use misleading headlines

I am busy and I have a right to kn ow what I am trying to read and what it is I want to read. I resent what you did. In your probably well intentioned attempt to draw attention to the good qualities of the ACA you wasted my right to choose what I wanted to read with your dishonesty. There are so many causes we need to work on and your misleading headlines wasted some of that time. So thanks for nothing.
Lest you think I am on the other darker side, let me tell you I circulate petitions for medicaid expansion, was neighborhood team leader for Obama, am a member of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare and am part of a group to fight Gerrymandering in Ohio, as well as a democratic precinct captain for 2 precincts
Leave the deceiving attention grabbing headlines to Fox news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 07:03 AM

6. Your concern is duly noted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 07:13 AM

7. LOL

Where's that Pizza man today?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hubert Flottz (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 08:49 AM

17. Really!

If ever there was an example of a "word salad"...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #17)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 10:16 AM

25. LOL! I was like uh? @ dayranch's post n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 07:24 AM

8. I was back out of it in eight words. About three seconds total. BUT

I don't like being tricked either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 07:58 AM

11. You owe me 13.4 seconds. I...I don't know how I'll ever make it up in life. I compare it to>>>

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueJazz (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 08:07 AM

12. Is that Rush Limbaugh?

Or a different giant, flaming, Nazi gasbag?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 09:06 AM

20. heh. Always loved that joke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueJazz (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 09:05 AM

19. Oh, the humanity!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 08:27 AM

14. How dare you have a bit of fun!!!



It took me almost 3 MINUTES to click and read your post, rec it, and read the comments.

That includes reading the comment about wasted time that probably took longer to write than it did to read the post.

Good, interesting graph though. Thanks for posting.


From someone who's time isn't as valuable as some people's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bearssoapbox (Reply #14)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 08:29 AM

15. I did notice the paradox regarding time spent to reply. Thanks for the props.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 08:59 AM

18. ROFL


This place

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 10:43 AM

27. I agree with him, misleading heds are not necessary

IMO more people are apt to read the post if you mention the benefits of the ACA in the head.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 11:57 AM

35. Lol. Kind of misses the point of your clever headlline.


It gets people to read actual news.

Now if you hadn't been posting something very important he might have had a leg to stand on.

Your point # 5 is extremely important.

It changes the whole dynamic of looking at the entitlements.

Keep it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 04:14 PM

64. For someone that doesnt like to waste time, he sure did with that post. Just sayin. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 08:13 AM

13. So then

You wasted my time...so then I'll spend several minutes writing about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moosewhisperer (Reply #13)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:31 PM

41. Maybe in hopes of saving time in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 08:37 AM

16. Are you a collective?

You only speak for yourself.

My time wasn't wasted because I knew exactly where the OP was going with it...but then again, I am not humor impaired, either.





I think that is covered under the ACA, though. You should look into it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 10:36 AM

26. With your shrewd sense of humor, you probably know that

the thread title was a cheap joke. A gimmick. Like the poster who complained, I don't like cheap gimmicks either. And, like the poster, I don't mind taking the time to say so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 09:16 AM

22. I think the title was.. sarcasm.

And then just think of the time you wasted with all that typing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 09:27 AM

24. Then you need to read this:

“I think that all good, right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being sick and tired. I'm certainly not, and I'm sick and tired of being told that I am.”
Graham Chapman

On second thought you didn't need to read that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 10:49 AM

29. Your valuable time was probably wasted when you typed out this complaint about your time

being wasted.

Seriously .. mountain meet molehill.


aA
kesha

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 10:54 AM

30. You are very busy...

reading an Internet bulletin board?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:06 PM

38. Dial 9-2-2 for

W-A-A.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:15 PM

39. LOL, is this a serious post? It takes you more than 15 seconds to.....

Open a post and get the topic? LOL, lighten up!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 01:11 PM

45. Hey It got me to look

I think it caught everyone's attention....so it takes a second to look and look longer than you want.

I had a post that had 2 recs and few replies but I feel good because it has had over 700 views....People were curious enough to read. and if only 2 percent really liked and absorbed the message I feel good.

Remember don't shoot the messenger , look at the message.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daybranch (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 02:17 PM

47. If even one freeper ends up reading the OP because of a Google search, it will have been worth it.

Just think how many beFoxxed low-attention voters are likely to Goggle "Obamacare seniors" and find the OP among their hits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 07:45 AM

10. ye gods.....


this is terrible...awful....earth shattering....for the Repugs that is.

Nice chart dude, thks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 09:08 AM

21. My 76-year-old Mom's Medicare premium had more than doubled over

the past 4 years, and then she was offered a new plan for 2014 which literally reduced the monthly premium to pocket change! She did say her co-pays would go up a tiny amount, but she will still see a significant overall amount of savings from what she had paid before, and it was still under $100 per month in 2013.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 09:18 AM

23. My Medicare Premiums?

The same.
Same everything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 10:47 AM

28. Scuba you stinker

I thought it was a pretty bizarre thing for you to say and I was right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 11:33 AM

32. I have a Medicare Advantage plan now.

I pay the $105 for Medicare, and $75 for the advantage plan,
which is actually a combination of Medicare, prescription drugs,
and some other stuff.

The deductible is $150, and they apply everything I pay out to it,
which is nice.

Medicare is somewhat hit and miss, though. It will cover some
things, but not others. But all in all, it's better than what I had
before, and my monthly premium that adds up to $180 a month
is $100 less than it was before... and the drugs are cheaper too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #32)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:03 PM

37. People here are switching

The folks working here are dumping their employer based health insurance for Medicare. It's cheaper and "just as good" (it always depends upon ones personal health situation). and we have a "pretty good" health insurance plan (It's gettin' worse but is better than many of my friends). Truth is, many of the retirees are dumping the retirement healthcare and switching to a combo of Medicare and an AARP "medigap" insurance. Cheaper and "just as good" (see above disclaimer).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 11:57 AM

34. I understand why you used the obverse posting method here. It

 

doesn't always work but, for me, it did this time. I might have passed your post had you stated a header summary that directly related to the post body. I will research 2 and 3 however.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:01 PM

36. haha. So many here will love your headline

and be ready to jump in boots first to agree.

then they open the thread and see...




nice, very nice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 12:28 PM

40. When I read the title, I thought that doesn't make sense.

Obamacare subsidies the sick (old) at the expense of the healthy (young) which is a good thing. So seniors should have a benefit from the ACA. But when I clicked on your thread I saw you tricked me, or just said what I already new. Your lie of a headline got me to click on your thread, well done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)


Response to Name removed (Reply #46)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 02:52 PM

48. I am anxiously awaiting my term on the Death Panel.

The first test I will administer will be grammar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #48)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:29 PM

52. Snort

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #48)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 10:59 PM

72. LOL and ROFLMAO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 03:20 PM

49. The prescription drug price drop is

a big money saver for those in the donut hole. There is a 52.5% discount for non-generic drugs and it goes to 75% by 2020. 100% counts toward the donut hole.
There is a 21% discount for generic in donut hole, increasing to 75% in 2020, but that discount doesn't count toward the hole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 04:13 PM

63. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 05:26 PM

67. Medicare

I'm turning 65 in February and going on that socialized Medicare. I'm now paying $980 a month(Self-Employed) and Healthy and my new payment will be $149 a month with same company and better benefits. I also will contribute more to more to the Democrats!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread