Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film
View Poll Results: What % of self-identified Republicans are aware of Obamacare's conservative roots?
0 to 25%
53
77.94%
26 to 50%
5
7.35%
51 to 75%
0
0%
76 to 100%
10
14.71%
Voters: 68. You may not vote on this poll

Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Old 11-02-13, 10:47 AM
  #2526  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: frass canyon
Posts: 16,249
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by Sdallnct View Post
Seriously? Are you just making this stuff up? They are not slashing my benefits. The insurance company is raising rates. My company is still paying over 50% of the total cost. Which they have been for years.
Originally Posted by ctyankee View Post
No .... I said his company paid more than half, 25 years ago. Try actually reading posts, it will help you in "real life."
I do read his posts. Particularity the word "still."

Why are you more credible on his company's benefit packages than he is?
RoyalTea is offline  
Old 11-02-13, 11:12 AM
  #2527  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 3,960
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by RoyalTea View Post
I do read his posts. Particularity the word "still."

Why are you more credible on his company's benefit packages than he is?
Why don't you get that those two statements are necessarily contradictory.

Now, if Sdallnct wants to say that his company's share as a percent of total health care costs hasn't gone down over the last 25 years. Let him do so. I could do with a laugh.

ctyankee is offline  
Old 11-02-13, 11:41 AM
  #2528  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home again, Big D
Posts: 27,773
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by rw2516 View Post
Even a healthcare plan devised by The Tea Party would cause everyone's rates to go up. Given the premise that the goal is to insure the low income and those with existing health problems. When people with $5K/month existing health problems can get insurance for $200/month the money has to come from somewhere. If a health care system should include everybody, regardless of income or health, then wouldn't the higher costs associated with these people being in the system more accurately reflect the true cost of insurance? That previously everybody was getting a steal because the high risk/cost people were excluded?

Imagine nobody under 25 could buy liability car insurance. Wouldn't that be a deal for everybody else on their rates? If suddenly those under 25 were allowed in the system wouldn't everybody's rates go up?

To some degree aren't homeowners insurance rates based on a national level? If a hurricane costs several billion in damages and everybody's cost goes up somewhat, aren't people in Arizona, who see a premium increase paying for "hurricane insurance" they don't need?
Actually, that's not true. Arizona does not have a "hurricane" load for home insurance. Home insurance is still very much regulated at the state level. Thus Arizona would never allow that. After Katrina there was a push to do what you said, but it really hasn't gained momentum. All states have their own issues. Arizona has some of the cheapest home insurance, because they have few disasters. But they have some. California has loads for wildfires, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas for hail, etc.

It's easier to think about it like life insurance. Getting life insurance for your new born is cheap. For your 87 year old grandpa very expensive. Should it be the same?

Right now the only group that can be charged more under the ACA is smokers. Which is interesting on a number of levels (not the least of which is that some studies show that low income people smoke more).

Last edited by Sdallnct; 11-02-13 at 11:50 AM.
Sdallnct is offline  
Old 11-02-13, 11:46 AM
  #2529  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home again, Big D
Posts: 27,773
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by ctyankee View Post
Why don't you get that those two statements are necessarily contradictory.

Now, if Sdallnct wants to say that his company's share as a percent of total health care costs hasn't gone down over the last 25 years. Let him do so. I could do with a laugh.
]
You crack me up...I'm done talking benefits. I've told the story many times that I could make about 15% more in cash working for several other companies (which I review and consider from time to time). But I like where I'm at for the excellent benefits and strength of the company (stability). Not to mention opportunity within the company that I've worked hard to take advantage of.

You may think I'm overly in love with my company. But I think I've proven I'm open by continuing to look at other companies, and as I mentioned, seeing what the Exchanges can do for me. And as I guessed, they couldn't come close to what I have thru my company. Either in plan or cost (my cost) which only demonstrates how good my company is doing with benefits.

But like Obama, you may just think I'm not smart enough to realize how bad I have it and that I can't make my own decisions. And you are welcome to think that.

Last edited by Sdallnct; 11-02-13 at 11:55 AM.
Sdallnct is offline  
Old 11-02-13, 03:25 PM
  #2530  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: frass canyon
Posts: 16,249
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by ctyankee View Post
Now, if Sdallnct wants to say that his company's share as a percent of total health care costs hasn't gone down over the last 25 years. Let him do so. I could do with a laugh.
we seem to be on two different wavelengths.

he said his company pays half his healthcare costs. the insurance company recently raised its rates. his company still pays half his healthcare costs. Some people here think that means his compensation has been reduced. I was disagreeing with the notion that when a company pays half the tab, but the tab goes up, that total compensation goes down. His disposable income may go down, but his compensation does not.

I'm talking about the recently part. You seem to be stuck on what happened 25 years ago.
RoyalTea is offline  
Old 11-02-13, 04:33 PM
  #2531  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 3,960
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by RoyalTea View Post
we seem to be on two different wavelengths.

he said his company pays half his healthcare costs. the insurance company recently raised its rates. his company still pays half his healthcare costs. Some people here think that means his compensation has been reduced. I was disagreeing with the notion that when a company pays half the tab, but the tab goes up, that total compensation goes down. His disposable income may go down, but his compensation does not.

I'm talking about the recently part. You seem to be stuck on what happened 25 years ago.
My wavelength is simply what's important. And what has happened over time is that the burden of health care has increasingly shifted to the employee i.e. the company's share (as a percentage) has gone down over time. That's the big picture, not some meaningless discussion about whether most companies are paying more out of their pockets. As health care costs have risen faster than inflation ... that's a given.
ctyankee is offline  
Old 11-02-13, 05:24 PM
  #2532  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home again, Big D
Posts: 27,773
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by ctyankee View Post
My wavelength is simply what's important. And what has happened over time is that the burden of health care has increasingly shifted to the employee i.e. the company's share (as a percentage) has gone down over time. That's the big picture, not some meaningless discussion about whether most companies are paying more out of their pockets. As health care costs have risen faster than inflation ... that's a given.
And no company has increased other benefits? Or given raises? Or given more time off? Or bigger Christmas bonus? Or more profit sharing? Or retirement? Or 401k matching?

Taking an isolated item from a total benefits package is meaningless. And if anyone, at any company didn't like the way their company was handling health care benefits, they were free to not get it through their company.
Sdallnct is offline  
Old 11-02-13, 09:41 PM
  #2533  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Unknown
Posts: 4,091
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Perhaps we need another Dilbert cartoon to all get on the same wavelength?
dave-o is offline  
Old 11-02-13, 11:56 PM
  #2534  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,063
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by dave-o View Post
Perhaps we need another Dilbert cartoon to all get on the same wavelength?
JasonF is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 06:30 AM
  #2535  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,064
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

My company always seems to shift perks to higher levels of management and explains it as being competitive in the marketplace. We used to all get the same percentage bonus, but now it is a sliding scale, with a 6% base for newer workers, but 25% base for upper managers, before the base was around 10% for all. They also eliminated stock options for everyone but second level managers and above. Now that the last of the options are vesting, people are leaving in droves from our group... Coincidence?

Regarding Obamacare, I get the impression that everything that people like about the plan can be summed up in one page of legislation. Children on parents plan at an older age. Mandatory catastrophic health insurance coverage and allowance for preexisting conditions when switching plans or losing your job. Everything else can be handled by the private sector. How did this end up as 4000 pages of legislation requiring billions in bribes to get the votes they needed?
PerryD is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 06:41 AM
  #2536  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home again, Big D
Posts: 27,773
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by PerryD View Post
My company always seems to shift perks to higher levels of management and explains it as being competitive in the marketplace. We used to all get the same percentage bonus, but now it is a sliding scale, with a 6% base for newer workers, but 25% base for upper managers, before the base was around 10% for all. They also eliminated stock options for everyone but second level managers and above. Now that the last of the options are vesting, people are leaving in droves from our group... Coincidence?

Regarding Obamacare, I get the impression that everything that people like about the plan can be summed up in one page of legislation. Children on parents plan at an older age. Mandatory catastrophic health insurance coverage and allowance for preexisting conditions when switching plans or losing your job. Everything else can be handled by the private sector. How did this end up as 4000 pages of legislation requiring billions in bribes to get the votes they needed?
I think it varies by company. I get some additional bonuses I use to not get. One of the big things they did many years ago that most don't like, is they split your performance raise. In the past if you earned a 8% raise, it all went in your base salary (or hourly rate). Now if you earn 8% you get some in a one time cash bonus and the rest goes in salary. So your getting "similar" money but your base pay doesn't go up as much. Which means you next % raise isn't as much. But I do kind of like the cash. I can either pay for something I've been wanting in cash or I drop it all in my 401k which would likely earn more than what I lost by the lack of bump in salary.

I understand why they did it. It items get tough they could reduce the cash payment and it wouldn't effect your pay. Plus they are paying less in salary overalls while giving "similar" money to the employee.
Sdallnct is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 07:21 AM
  #2537  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by ctyankee View Post
2. One that offers the opportunity to lead to a better job within that company.

Believe it or not, some people think a better job comes from getting more money and more responsibility that come with a promotion. Some people don't want to do the same job their entire career and even if the move is a lateral, they find it better to do something different than another year of doing the same thing. They may also know that the combined knowledge of multiple roles makes them a better candidate for promotion. Even if they do want to do the same role forever, most understand that promoting from within is a positive thing for a company.

But their current job already has enough money and responsibility. Taking a promotion would put them into Peter Principle territory, which would make the company worse off, not better.

Last edited by grundle; 11-03-13 at 07:35 AM.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 07:25 AM
  #2538  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by Th0r S1mpson View Post
I'm fairly shocked at the recent mediastorm over Obama's comments that people "will be able to keep their plans."

It was fairly evident a long time ago that this would not be the case.

I guess people just believed Obama more than they believed the bill?

Simple logic says that if the ACA requires all policies to cover pre-existing conditions, maternity care, heroin addition treatment, and other specific things, then any policy which does not cover those things is rendered illegal, and thus, must be canceled.

So, yes, the mainstream media's sudden surprise and shock at these cancellations does indeed suggest a lack of intelligence in the mainstream media.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 07:31 AM
  #2539  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by PerryD View Post
Regarding Obamacare, I get the impression that everything that people like about the plan can be summed up in one page of legislation. Children on parents plan at an older age. Mandatory catastrophic health insurance coverage and allowance for preexisting conditions when switching plans or losing your job. Everything else can be handled by the private sector. How did this end up as 4000 pages of legislation requiring billions in bribes to get the votes they needed?
Because it was written by lawyers.

Recall the joke in one of the "Back to the Future" movies about how a criminal was arrested, charged, tried, convicted, and sentenced, all within two hours, because lawyers had been abolished.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 07:33 AM
  #2540  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

http://www.theonion.com/articles/new...35-flop,34294/

New, Improved Obamacare Program Released On 35 Floppy Disks

October 21, 2013



WASHINGTON—Responding to widespread criticism regarding its health care website, the federal government today unveiled its new, improved Obamacare program, which allows Americans to purchase health insurance after installing a software bundle contained on 35 floppy disks. “I have heard the complaints about the existing website, and I can assure you that with this revised system, finding the right health care option for you and your family is as easy as loading 35 floppy disks sequentially into your disk drive and following the onscreen prompts,” President Obama told reporters this morning, explaining that the nearly three dozen 3.5-inch diskettes contain all the data needed for individuals to enroll in the Health Insurance Marketplace, while noting that the updated Obamacare software is mouse-compatible and requires a 386 Pentium processor with at least 8 MB of system RAM to function properly. “Just fire up MS-DOS, enter ‘A:\>dir *.exe’ into the command line, and then follow the instructions to install the Obamacare batch files—it should only take four or five hours at the most. You can press F1 for help if you run into any problems. And be sure your monitor’s screen resolution is at 320 x 200 or it might not display properly.” Obama added that the federal government hopes to have a six–CD-ROM version of the program available by 2016.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 08:38 AM
  #2541  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

This article reminds me of the following quote:

"I quit when medicine was placed under State control, some years ago. Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I would not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything—except the desires of the doctors. Men considered only the 'welfare' of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it."

- Doctor Thomas Hendricks, from Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged"


http://masonconservative.typepad.com...-patients.html

Virginia Democrat Calls For Forcing Doctors To Accept Medicare And Medicaid Patients

November 3, 2013

You would think that when your party is burying a hole that is getting harder and harder to get out of, you wouldn't want to that hole get deeper faster. But here is Kathleen Murphy, Democrat running for the House of Delegates against Barbara Comstock, telling a forum in Great Falls that she believes it should law to force doctors to accept Medicare and Medicaid patients. Forced by government decree, mind you. A birdie sent me this:

FYI last night at the Great Falls Grange debate, Democrat delegate candidate Kathleen Murphy said that since many doctors are not accepting medicaid and medicare patients, she advocates making it a legal requirement for those people to be accepted.

She did not recognize that the payments are inadequate to cover the doctors' costs. She also did not recognize there is a shortage of over 45,000 physicians now and that it is forecast to be 90,000 in a few years.

Democrats appear to want to make physicians slaves of the state, but Democrats don't admit they would just drive more doctors out of practice into retirement and other occupations. The Obamacare law and regulations are causing millions of people to lose their health insurance, drop many doctors and hospitals. The HHS internal forecast is 93 million Americans would lose their health insurance due to the Obamacare law and rules about adequacy of insurance.

Many more people will be uninsured. The penalties for being uninsured start at $95 per year, but the penalties can't be collected by the IRS if a person does not have a tax refund to attach.

The out of pocket costs required by Obamacare's Silver Plan for a non-smoking mother and father with two children making a gross before income taxes of $50,000 (roughly average salary for VA) would be $13,765 per year including the deductible of $10,400. That's 28% of their gross income -- not very affordable and about the same as guidelines for a mortgage payment. For such a family making $100,000 of gross income, The cost would be $21,431 including the deductible of $12,700, or 21% of gross income.

With such high deductibles doctors are stuck with trying to collect cash from the patients, even at regulated charge structures. Thus is makes sense for primary care doctors not to participate in Obamacare, medicare and medicaid. They should encourage patients to participate in Concierge Care and insurance programs run by the doctors themselves with patients who can do simple math. Patients can take out catastrophic insurance with high deductibles for major surgeries. Tax deductability for individual medical savings accounts would make health care more affordable.


The head of Obamacare programs, Berwick, loves the socialized medical system in the UK, but never mentions that malpractice insurance is minimal. In the UK, panels of doctors review and approve malpractice awards, rather than emotional juries misled by trial lawyers. Malpractice reform like this with caps on malpractice awards would go a long way in making health care affordable.

I hope physicians rise up and speak out for common sense, protecting quality medical care in the US and giving patients freedom to choose


THIS along with the fact that Terry McAuliffe has already said he'd go to the government shutdown mat to get a state exchange in Virginia. Unbelievable. Combine the chaos of thousands of people across Virginia losing their health insurance, we are going to add to that on the state level by forcing doctors to accept patients they can't afford to help? Unbelievable. Dark days are ahead, but there is still time. Three days to make sure this does not happen.

Democrats in Virginia will drive up health care costs, drive doctors out of the state, and then drive health care costs up even more because there will not be enough doctors practicing in the state.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 11:22 AM
  #2542  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,967
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

In the end, what bothers me the most about the disastrous rollout of HealthCare.gov was it need not have happened in the first place.

Why didn't the Obama Adminstration spend just a little more money and get someone with major experience on large scale data processing such as IBM, who has a long track record of large-scale data processing even before the electronic computer started to be developed from the middle 1940's on? And also has a long history of working on Federal contracts for large-scale computing?
RayChuang is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 11:53 AM
  #2543  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,200
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

So a bit over $600 million wasn't enough? This is government. They don't go out and give jobs to the best available, they give them to friends and allow them to go 400% over budget. It's a scam.
kvrdave is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 12:11 PM
  #2544  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home again, Big D
Posts: 27,773
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
Simple logic says that if the ACA requires all policies to cover pre-existing conditions, maternity care, heroin addition treatment, and other specific things, then any policy which does not cover those things is rendered illegal, and thus, must be canceled.

So, yes, the mainstream media's sudden surprise and shock at these cancellations does indeed suggest a lack of intelligence in the mainstream media.
If it is simple logic, why did Obama say it? Was it part of a sales job? That is my take.

You tell people "you don't know it, but your insurance sucks and I'm going to introduce something better. You will have to give up yours for mine and it might cost more but it is better" and I don't think the ACA would have gotten off the ground.
Sdallnct is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 01:29 PM
  #2545  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home again, Big D
Posts: 27,773
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Best way to reduce your individual health care costs? Well I'd argue this very well maybe it,

http://healthland.time.com/2013/10/0...ease-diabetes/

I've told the story of my Dr. putting me on high BP and even w/insurance was $30 per month. When I asked about a $4.00 generic, he balked and got me a card from the pharm company that I could use to get a 90 day supply for $45 (IIRC). Well instead, I took up more vigorous exercise and got off the BP all together.

I'm done with insurance companies or the government trying to be in my best interest (tho I trust a private company over a government). Since losing weight and regular exercise, I now rarely get sick (and when I do it is minor) no longer get sinus infections (that I use to get 1-2 per year), no longer have spring or fall allergies at all, even my eye sight is better (meaning I don't have to spend extra on astigmatism correcting contacts in one eye). Not to mention being on no meds and rarely go to the Dr.

Of course even world class athletes can have issues as well. But those issues are less and easier to take care of thanks to their condition.
Sdallnct is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 03:32 PM
  #2546  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by RayChuang View Post
In the end, what bothers me the most about the disastrous rollout of HealthCare.gov was it need not have happened in the first place.

Why didn't the Obama Adminstration spend just a little more money and get someone with major experience on large scale data processing such as IBM, who has a long track record of large-scale data processing even before the electronic computer started to be developed from the middle 1940's on? And also has a long history of working on Federal contracts for large-scale computing?

Maybe because the person who runs IBM didn't attend Princeton with Michelle Obama.

They spent more than half a BILLION dollars on it. Why do you think spending more money is the solution?

The website eHealthInsurance.com has been successfully selling health insurance since 1998. I seriously doubt they spent half a billion to write the code for their website.

Do you think these guys spent half a billion dollars to do this?


http://www.theatlanticwire.com/techn...caregov/71195/

Three Guys Built a Better Healthcare.gov

November 2, 2013

The Affordable Health Care act rollout was an unmitigated disaster thanks in large part to a cluttered website that both didn't work and was offensively ugly. Maybe things would not have gone so poorly if HealthCare.gov looked something like this.

No one knows the resources that went into building HealthCare.gov, but the government quickly realized it wasn't enough after that terrible first day, so they decided to bring in a crew of leading tech experts to fix the website's many, many problems. But the job was already at least partially completed by three unknown coders living in San Francisco.

Meet the Health Sherpa, the website HealthCare.gov probably should have been. George Kalogeropoulos, Ning Liang and Michael Wasser saw the troubled launch and decided they could do a better health care enrolment website better than the government and, by golly, they succeeded. The Health Sherpa makes it ridiculously easy for anyone to compare health care plans covered under Obamacare in 34 states. (They left out the 16 states with existing marketplace sites, though it seems support for those states is coming soon.) The result is a simple, beautiful, remarkably responsive website that anyone could use.

(more at link)

Last edited by grundle; 11-03-13 at 03:41 PM.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 03:39 PM
  #2547  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

Originally Posted by Sdallnct View Post
If it is simple logic, why did Obama say it? Was it part of a sales job? That is my take.

You tell people "you don't know it, but your insurance sucks and I'm going to introduce something better. You will have to give up yours for mine and it might cost more but it is better" and I don't think the ACA would have gotten off the ground.

Obama use logic?

Obama admits he can't do 9th grade math:

grundle is offline  
Old 11-03-13, 10:45 PM
  #2548  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

This is really sad:


http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...71710423780446

You Also Can't Keep Your Doctor

I had great cancer doctors and health insurance.My plan was cancelled. Now I worry how long I'll live.


By Edie Littlefield Sundby

Nov. 3, 2013

Everyone now is clamoring about Affordable Care Act winners and losers. I am one of the losers.

My grievance is not political; all my energies are directed to enjoying life and staying alive, and I have no time for politics. For almost seven years I have fought and survived stage-4 gallbladder cancer, with a five-year survival rate of less than 2% after diagnosis. I am a determined fighter and extremely lucky. But this luck may have just run out: My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31.

My choice is to get coverage through the government health exchange and lose access to my cancer doctors, or pay much more for insurance outside the exchange (the quotes average 40% to 50% more) for the privilege of starting over with an unfamiliar insurance company and impaired benefits.

Countless hours searching for non-exchange plans have uncovered nothing that compares well with my existing coverage. But the greatest source of frustration is Covered California, the state's Affordable Care Act health-insurance exchange and, by some reports, one of the best such exchanges in the country. [b]After four weeks of researching plans on the website, talking directly to government exchange counselors, insurance companies and medical providers, my insurance broker and I are as confused as ever. Time is running out and we still don't have a clue how to best proceed.

Two things have been essential in my fight to survive stage-4 cancer. The first are doctors and health teams in California and Texas: at the medical center of the University of California, San Diego, and its Moores Cancer Center; Stanford University's Cancer Institute; and the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

The second element essential to my fight is a United Healthcare PPO (preferred provider organization) health-insurance policy.

Since March 2007 United Healthcare has paid $1.2 million to help keep me alive, and it has never once questioned any treatment or procedure recommended by my medical team. The company pays a fair price to the doctors and hospitals, on time, and is responsive to the emergency treatment requirements of late-stage cancer. Its caring people in the claims office have been readily available to talk to me and my providers.

But in January, United Healthcare sent me a letter announcing that they were pulling out of the individual California market.
The company suggested I look to Covered California starting in October.

You would think it would be simple to find a health-exchange plan that allows me, living in San Diego, to continue to see my primary oncologist at Stanford University and my primary care doctors at the University of California, San Diego. Not so. UCSD has agreed to accept only one Covered California plan—a very restrictive Anthem EPO Plan. EPO stands for exclusive provider organization, which means the plan has a small network of doctors and facilities and no out-of-network coverage (as in a preferred-provider organization plan) except for emergencies. Stanford accepts an Anthem PPO plan but it is not available for purchase in San Diego (only Anthem HMO and EPO plans are available in San Diego).

So if I go with a health-exchange plan, I must choose between Stanford and UCSD. Stanford has kept me alive—but UCSD has provided emergency and local treatment support during wretched periods of this disease, and it is where my primary-care doctors are.

Before the Affordable Care Act, health-insurance policies could not be sold across state lines; now policies sold on the Affordable Care Act exchanges may not be offered across county lines.


What happened to the president's promise, "You can keep your health plan"? Or to the promise that "You can keep your doctor"? Thanks to the law, I have been forced to give up a world-class health plan. The exchange would force me to give up a world-class physician.

For a cancer patient, medical coverage is a matter of life and death. Take away people's ability to control their medical-coverage choices and they may die. I guess that's a highly effective way to control medical costs. Perhaps that's the point.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-04-13, 07:05 AM
  #2549  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,978
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

In less than two minutes, here are more than 20 different instances of Obama saying what some of his supporters swear he never said:


grundle is offline  
Old 11-04-13, 07:33 AM
  #2550  
Moderator
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,126
Re: Health Care discussion continues - part 9

It has become the "read my lips... no new taxes", of presidential promises made and then broken.
nemein is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.