individual health insurance? NObamacare

**hamchan** · 11-17-2014, 08:31 PM

Suck it up, pay for insurance and be grateful you are healthy. The only reason you were getting lower rates before was because people with serious health problems were unable to buy a private policy at any cost before. Frankly I think it's utterly selfish that some people would rather let the people who need insurance most go without than pay a little more for their own.

Alternatively you could do what millions of us had no choice but to do before, and get a job that offers insurance benefits.

**hamchan** · 11-17-2014, 08:40 PM

Also, bear in mind that if it were not for Republicans refusing the Medicaid expansion in your state you would be eligible for coverage under Medicaid. Remember that next time you vote.

**Stephen51** · 11-17-2014, 11:07 PM

Politics huh ? One would thought that they would continue provide care and concern for their citizens...

**corn18** · 11-18-2014, 05:06 AM

Originally posted by Stephen51 View Post

Politics huh ? One would thought that they would continue provide care and concern for their citizens...

Because that's the role of government, right?

**hamchan** · 11-18-2014, 07:01 AM

It is when insurance companies are free to cherry pick the people they offer coverage to, leaving the most vulnerable with no way to acquire it.

**moneysavvy11** · 11-19-2014, 04:57 AM

Originally posted by hamchan View Post

Suck it up, pay for insurance and be grateful you are healthy. The only reason you were getting lower rates before was because people with serious health problems were unable to buy a private policy at any cost before. Frankly I think it's utterly selfish that some people would rather let the people who need insurance most go without than pay a little more for their own.

Alternatively you could do what millions of us had no choice but to do before, and get a job that offers insurance benefits.

I am unsure if you are trying to take a jab at me or not, but let me just say that what you say is not entirely true. As a female I was able to get insurance at a lower rate without maternity. This new plan has maternity and is likely the reason I cannot get lower rates anymore. I am not saying that if I were sickly I would have had the same rate but I just do not need maternity coverage especially one that has a 6750 deductible.

Furthermore, what do you know of my health? I forgo dr visits etc so as not to financially ruin myself. I guess I should be punished because I don't smoke, don't overeat, wasn't born with a genetic disease and am still young enough have my health? Well most of it since I am in need of a proceedure my insurance likely won't cover. Medicaid is a joke for parents of children in my state for a family of 3 it is maxed out at 450$ per month.

And I am unsure if you are calling me selfish because I refuse to 'foot the bill for others' I am a big supporter of universal coverage as I lost my mom to cancer due to a lag in her coverage and her low income forcing her to choose food over routine preventative care.

Sure I could go get a job that provides insurance allowing me to just make daycare payments and putting me over the daycare subisdy due to my income of child support. Funny how when it comes to assistance child support is considered but when it comes to health care subsidy I have to put 0$ as my income.

My youngest is 3, I don't plan to raise them at home forever but for the next 2 years I would like to not spend 25% of my income in the form of child support to have the insurance deductibles as I do now.

Last I checked this was a frugual forum and not a forum to judge others and make assumptions due to their life circumstances. Perhaps I was wrong

**Joan.of.the.Arch** · 11-19-2014, 06:53 AM

It sounds as if you have a complicated enough situation that giving you good advice would be difficult without understanding the details. I think it would be good if you could make contact with a non-governmental agency that might be able to advise you-- something like family services of a religious group, perhaps? Where I live there is a charitable agency that helps some people in my state who make too much for Medicare but too little for a subsidy. They actually help meet the payments on health insurance. They do that while taking into account how their help may affect government based benefits, so as not to "rob Peter to pay Paul."

In the meantime, for actual illness or minor accidents, there may be urgent care centers in your area. I'm talking about walk-in doctor services, no appointment needed. There maybe one associated with a pharmacy, as at some Walgreens stores. Or they may be free-standing businesses. For well-woman check ups, you might be able to get an appointment with Planned Parenthood. For general screening like blood pressure, cholesterol, blood glucose watch your newspaper for health fairs, or set a google alert to watch for announcements of health fairs. If you are in an urban area there may be clinics that will see you for medical and dental regardless of ability to pay. Again, I think a private family charity would be able to counsel you on that.

**hamchan** · 11-19-2014, 10:23 AM

I don't have a lot of patience for people slamming Obamacare because their premiums are going up. My husband has end stage kidney disease. He is 38. Without insurance his medical care would cost us over $100,000 a year. We don't make that much in a year. Without insurance he would be dead. He couldn't even get divorced from his ex wife for two years because she carried the health insurance and he would be dead without it. Luckily she wasn't selfish about it. Luckily she stayed married to him on paper for two years until he was able to find another job with insurance coverage, because no private insurer would have ever sold him a policy. These are the kinds of choices people have had to make prior to Obamacare. I no longer stay awake at night worrying about what would happen to our family if he lost his job.

You say you shouldn't be punished because you weren't born with a genetic disease. Do you think my husband should be punished because he was?

You ask what I know about your health. I know that you were healthy enough to buy a policy before Obamacare required insurance companies to sell them to people with significant health issues. I know that you are healthy enough that a bare bones policy was good enough and didn't bankrupt you.

And the Medicaid expansion was supposed to extend Medicaid coverage to anyone making less than 133% of the Federal poverty level, so if you make too much for Medicaid but not enough for the subsidy then you would indeed have qualified had your state chosen to implement the expansion.

**disneysteve** · 11-19-2014, 11:53 AM

Folks, let's discuss topics and issues without resorting to personal attacks or insults. If you can't do that, comments will be deleted and threads will be closed. Let's stick to civil conversation.

Your friendly moderator

**disneysteve** · 11-19-2014, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by hamchan View Post

I don't have a lot of patience for people slamming Obamacare because their premiums are going up.

Originally posted by moneysavvy11 View Post

I am paying 111$ per month.
the lowest of low i can now get is like 189$ per month and isn't even as good as the older one in terms of rx and dr visits.

hamchan, if your premium went up 70% like OP's did, and your coverage got worse in the process, don't you think you'd be at least a little upset about that?

**hamchan** · 11-19-2014, 01:41 PM

I don't blame her for being upset, Steve, but she's upset with the wrong party. She would have coverage with no cost to her if she lived in a state that had expanded Medicaid coverage. For the record, our premiums have gone up as well as our copays. Buy overall we're paying less per year, and I know several people who now have coverage who were not able to get it previously. One of them was recently hit by a car while riding his bike. Do I think the higher premiums and copays are worth it? Absolutely.

**disneysteve** · 11-19-2014, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by hamchan View Post

know several people who now have coverage who were not able to get it previously.

Don't forget - I'm a family practice physician. I know LOADS of people who now have coverage who didn't previously. Last month alone, I saw 55 new patients in my practice. We are being swamped with newly insured patients, which is exactly what we all predicted under ACA. It's good, but it also has its downsides.

I also know several people who had their insurance plans cancelled - my family included - because they weren't ACA-compliant. Of course, the replacement plans are more expensive and offer reduced coverage. Yes, I'm happy to have insurance. No, I'm not happy about what it's costing or what it covers.

**hamchan** · 11-19-2014, 05:09 PM

I am just going to have to take a step back from this topic I think, because it's just too close to home. When it's literally a difference of life or death for my husband I just don't have the luxury of being concerned about healthy people having to pay higher premiums for what is ultimately better coverage anyway in most cases.

I just find the whole attitude of "well it's not my fault if other people are sick and I shouldn't have to pay any more so everyone has access to healthcare" to be utterly reprehensible. And it upsets me. You and the OP have enjoyed years of insurance premiums that were artificially deflated because other people were unable to get coverage at all. Let's just be real about that, shall we?

**AnotherReader** · 11-19-2014, 06:43 PM

The reason employer based insurance has better coverage and is generally less expensive is that the pool of insured is a limited age group and is healthy enough to be employed. Large employers also have more leverage with the insurance companies. What has happened is that the healthy people not in employer pools are no longer able to buy insurance based on their health, but are forced to subsidize the less healthy people in this pool. They are offered shoddy, inferior products at higher prices by insurance companies that hold all the cards.

I have a policy that is employer based but covers only pre-Medicare retirees. Therefore it is more expensive than if I were still employed but offers much better coverage than the exchange plans. If I did not have this plan, I would adjust my MAGI so I could forego purchasing an overpriced policy with a small network of inferior doctors and not be penalized. I simply would not participate.

People like Hamchan's husband need to be in a high risk, high cost pool. They should be "assigned risk" policyholders. If they cannot afford the insurance, this is where the government could step in and be of help. If you remove the costliest people from the pool and insist that networks be broadened if a company wants to participate in the exchange, then you might have a chance of making an exchange system of some kind work. Otherwise, you will see a lot more people opting out altogether, especially healthy young people, and the cost of insurance through the exchange will skyrocket.

individual health insurance? NObamacare