Regarding Obamacare--You need to read this

Post Reply New Topic

Ok, im what you might consider a "casualty" of obamacare. I do believe that the bill is well-meaning, however, im part of the coverage "donut hole". Im a single male, 24 years old with no children, i earned $15,200 in 2010. In the state of maine, i make too much money to qualify for medicaid. In fact, in 2006, i made $9,870. I was rejected in 2006 as well.

One major component of Obamacare is the "personal mandate" requiring people to purchase health insurance, unless they fall into the low-income groups otherwise eligible for medicaid. My company offers health insurance...for $67 each week, not only that, the policy is "catastrophic" the deductible is $2500 per year.

Considering my good health, and that i would never make the deductible in a year, this is how the math works out:
Here is some quick math: I average 36 hours per week at work, making $7.96/hr. This equals $292 per week and $15,200 per year. Buying the company H/I would reduce my average weekly earnings to $225 for the same 36 hours worked, my pay rate would effectively be $6.25 per hour, $1.25 less than maines minimum wage of $7.50.

Congress failed to take into account people like myself. People/Couples who have decent jobs, earning better than 25K/yr would be better able to afford coverage. Someone like myself "going it alone" is barely able to get by as it is, i cannot afford an extra $67 being taken from me, with no tangible benefit in return.

When America voted for Obama, they did so with the expectation that things would get better. I knew from the start that he was a bad decision, i certainly didnt vote for him. So far, he has done an excellent job alienating the working poor, the very group that supposedly looked to him as a "messiah of the masses"

Discuss....

PS, i meant to include a 50K and up option, if you're a rich aspie, click the 35-50 option

I have insurance so it won't affect me. Overall I think it's a good idea due to the concept of sharing risk. If car insurance was only carried by the higher risk groups (the young), it would be far more expensive. We are bringing the lower risk group onboard to share costs. Which also helps them by lowering the growth in costs overall. That's the theory anyway. As to your situation:

1. The medicaid threshold is moving up to $14,000+ by 2014. So maybe you can just get under that line. Medicaid then covers all of the poor, not just a select few.

2. There will be new insurance options available by 2014 that will be targeted at the lower end. If you buy through these exchanges (make over 14k), subsidies will be available. Gives you an additional option beyond your employer's plan.

3. This is interesting. Since you'd come in around 149% or less of the poverty level on the high end, your premium cap is ~3% of income. So that would be a maximum premium (for a silver plan) of around $37 a month, paid monthly, if you make 15k. The government picks up the rest. Assuming you didnt make the medicaid cut off and assuming I read that correctly.

4. A silver plan is defined by the law as one that covers 70% of costs and has out of pocket costs (I assume this is the total yearly deductible) limited to $5,950. So the overall deductible is higher than your work plan but the 70% is possibly helping you with each transaction. All for a fraction of the cost of your work plan.

5. If you didnt want to get insurance at all, and make more than 9k, the fine is $695 year. Or ~$57 month. I'm sure the insurance companies will aggressively court this "opting out" segment of the market and attempt to get them in with deals. The first year it's only a $95 fine.

i hope both obamacare and myself make it to 2014, so i finally could get me real health coverage. as it is, i have just catastrophic coverage which covers nothing but duns me a majority of my take-home pay. i am middle-aged so i get the most punishing premiums.

Could we not use the phrase "Obamacare", please, when it's actually thoughtful discussion of the pros and cons of the Health Care Act? For some reason, the term "Obamacare" was coined and is most used by Obama opponents who want anything associated with him to fail, or oppose any kind of health care reform. I've hardly ever seen the term used except by conservative Obama opponents.

I almost didn't read the thread because I thought it was more Obama-bashing, but was glad I did because instead it's well-thought-out discussion. But please, could we call it by it's real name, the Health Care Act?

Should call it republicare considering how much the bill was changed from Obama's proposition to allow it to be passed by the reps.

I tend to naturally mandatory health insurance, as an Australian who has always had it, I find the libertarian criticism is lost on me. As to the question of quality of the new bill, I do not really know. What I can say for certain is that it is a bad idea to push for an immediate repeal. The Republicans should at least give it a go. Otherwise every person who gets sick and is not covered will naturally blame the republicans. The dems will be able to shrug their shoulders and say they tried. The republican congress, for reasons passing understanding seems determined to make a martyr of this legislation.

Ruveyn, it's called "shouldering the burden". <.<

^^^

Fair enough. Let’s make a deal.

When the government stops seizing the assets of PRODUCTIVE, WORKING people (in the form of Medicare/social security tax) to pay the expenses of 74 year old Medicare/social security recipients, PRODUCTIVE, WORKING people will stop asking for small government subsidies to help pay insurance premiums…