Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Doctors: New Health Care Plans Raise Red Flags [View all]Glitterati
(3,182 posts)103. You have your first #4 wrong entirely
4. You have a struggling, adult daughter, who works part time, but doesn't qualify for Medicaid, and you'd like to help her
My 18 yr. old daughter needs health insurance. The only way for her to get it is with ACA because:
1. Because of the Supreme Court decision making Medicaid a state decision, the jackass governor of my state declined the Medicaid expansion
2. Because my daughter makes so little money, she doesn't qualify for a subsidy.
3. Without Medicaid or a subsidy she will continue to go uninsured unless *I* buy a family policy and put her on it because insurance is as much as she currently makes annually.
Additionally, your original #3 is incorrect simply because a clinic visit for me is $25.00, including labs and medical specialties, i.e., my endocrinologist. The $50.00 was only if BOTH my daughter and I went to the doctor at the same time - $25.00 each.
So the final argument, as stated throughout this discussion can only be answered as follows:
With the ACA:
1. You CAN get insurance, despite your pre-existing condition.
Yes, this is true. But I STILL can't afford it.
2. It's ILLEGAL for the HMO to charge you extra because of your condition.
Which is moot because of #1 above.
3. If you were just interested in insuring yourself, you could get complete, comprehensive medical insurance for just $20/month with the subsidy...ONE FIFTH of what you used to pay JUST FOR TESTS at the clinic.
Again, your math is wrong (because you like to change the subject instead of addressing issue #1 above) and your incorrect math and interjection that the cost excludes anything but TESTS. I never said any such thing and, in fact, explicitly stated that everything was included for $25.00 per person, per visit.
4. You now have the option of adding your daughter to your policy, and covering BOTH of you for just $56 each...JUST SLIGHTLY MORE than YOU ALONE used to spend on JUST BLOOD TESTS.
Once again, changing the subject entirely, and ignoring the fact that I cannot afford your IMAGINARY "$56 each" while making up your own set of facts.
Nice try changing the subject again, though.
But, once again not the way to win folks to ACA by calling them idiots while you make up your own set of facts.
My 18 yr. old daughter needs health insurance. The only way for her to get it is with ACA because:
1. Because of the Supreme Court decision making Medicaid a state decision, the jackass governor of my state declined the Medicaid expansion
2. Because my daughter makes so little money, she doesn't qualify for a subsidy.
3. Without Medicaid or a subsidy she will continue to go uninsured unless *I* buy a family policy and put her on it because insurance is as much as she currently makes annually.
Additionally, your original #3 is incorrect simply because a clinic visit for me is $25.00, including labs and medical specialties, i.e., my endocrinologist. The $50.00 was only if BOTH my daughter and I went to the doctor at the same time - $25.00 each.
So the final argument, as stated throughout this discussion can only be answered as follows:
With the ACA:
1. You CAN get insurance, despite your pre-existing condition.
Yes, this is true. But I STILL can't afford it.
2. It's ILLEGAL for the HMO to charge you extra because of your condition.
Which is moot because of #1 above.
3. If you were just interested in insuring yourself, you could get complete, comprehensive medical insurance for just $20/month with the subsidy...ONE FIFTH of what you used to pay JUST FOR TESTS at the clinic.
Again, your math is wrong (because you like to change the subject instead of addressing issue #1 above) and your incorrect math and interjection that the cost excludes anything but TESTS. I never said any such thing and, in fact, explicitly stated that everything was included for $25.00 per person, per visit.
4. You now have the option of adding your daughter to your policy, and covering BOTH of you for just $56 each...JUST SLIGHTLY MORE than YOU ALONE used to spend on JUST BLOOD TESTS.
Once again, changing the subject entirely, and ignoring the fact that I cannot afford your IMAGINARY "$56 each" while making up your own set of facts.
Nice try changing the subject again, though.
But, once again not the way to win folks to ACA by calling them idiots while you make up your own set of facts.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
104 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I don't know where these mythical 'high deduction' plans are supposed to be. Of the plans I looked
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#37
Yes, please post the screen captures of the plans available in Georgia. Now I'm curious.
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#41
Unless you earn more than $46,000 per year, those prices are not with a subsidy.
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#71
Okay, so the screencapture you posted is for a FAMILY plan, not an individual plan.
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#73
Incidentally, I'd follow up with HHS on those premiums if I were you, because I just entered your
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#85
Yes, it comes out to $108.75 if you count your daughter's income as part of the household income
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#92
Actually, I've read what you've said very carefully. Let's recap it, shall we?
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#94
Yes, I've admitted I was wrong about the deductible on the low-premium plans.
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#62
If you 'really cannot afford it,' what were you doing for healthcare before the ACA?
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#65
I made it about you because I assumed you were speaking from personal experience.
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#67
I think THIS idiotic comment pretty much nullifies anything sensible you might have to say.
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#91
There are many low deductible plans available on the federal exchange marketplace for Tennessee.
cheapdate
Dec 2013
#64
The source for the Op/Ed is the WSJ, but the comment is from PNHP, a Medicare-for-all advocacy group
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#23
That may be, but it can probably be fixed by adjusting the Medicare fee schedule.
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#95
"...the Obamacare model of high-deductibles, narrow networks, and payment restrictions"
cheapdate
Dec 2013
#2
Yes, it's true that "network providers" existed both before and after the ACA.
cheapdate
Dec 2013
#57
Your response does not make sense and is repulsive, unless your intention is ...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#12
If someone cannot back up their posts then people should just ignore ...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#20
If your going to start attacking DU user names...This whole thread shows you're slip sliding away!
FourScore
Dec 2013
#34
You were correct about making fun of names ... until you made the same mistake. n/t
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#97
The media, including the so called liberal media, decided not to cover the whole story...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#18
True, but there was support from a significant number of physicians ...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#27
Many doctors, including Obama's personal physician, did try and speak up ...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#98
In fact, that's exactly what the full 'comment' says. The story is from the WSJ, and the 'comment'
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#22
It has nothing to do with the failure of ACA, IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO ...with a more equitable
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#30
Any Particular Reason Why You Cut Off The Last Paragraph, Which Says...
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#21
No and thanks, just trying to abide by the narrow limits of cut and paste ...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#25
Then let's have a cadre of Federally employed physicians who are willing to heal people.
kelliekat44
Dec 2013
#28
Which political party has proposed that? Trust me, young med graduates are not lacking ...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#32
Actually, in urban areas they are, and in rural areas they're not. That's a problem that both
TrollBuster9090
Dec 2013
#38
What is the REAL point of posting all of these anti-ACA threads on Democratic Underground?
6000eliot
Dec 2013
#36
To make people aware of all the facts, too many are looking at just the monthly costs ...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#99
The words that matter: "low reimbursement rates for doctors". The rest is obfuscation.
WinkyDink
Dec 2013
#45
Some tried to voice their concerns during the debate, but they were ignored ...
slipslidingaway
Dec 2013
#100