Skip to main content

View Diary: ACA News Coverage - The "Liberal" Media Strikes Again (82 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Paying more for higher deductibles (5+ / 0-)

    is what the CBS article reports.

    "Before I had a plan that I had a $1,500 deductible," she said. "I paid $199 dollars a month. The most similar plan that I would have available to me would be $278 a month. My deductible would be $6,500 dollars, and all of my care after that point would only be covered 70 percent."
    That is not junk insurance and millions of people are forced to pay more for worse coverage. That is going to have political blowback, it doesn't do any good to deny it.
    •  Buy why was her coverage cheaper? (5+ / 0-)

      What didn't it cover? Cheap med insurance comes with a hidden price.

      Just another underemployed IT professional computer geek.

      by RhodeIslandAspie on Sat Oct 26, 2013 at 07:41:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not necessarily so (5+ / 0-)

        It has been repeatedly reported that the premiums of younger people are being raised above what they previously had to subsidize the premiums of older, sicker consumers and those with pre-existing conditions who couldn't get insurance before.  So, it isn't necessarily so that the previous coverage was inferior.  

        And, the whole gist of this diary seems off.  If I'm 25 it might very well make sense to opt for a high deductible policy and lower premiums.  I'm not likely to get sick, and between student loans and the lower pay that must of us have when we're starting out it could make great economic sense to have a less complete policy.  But, now these people are being forced to pay for insurance instead of other things they might need.

        •  I had my first heart surgery at 26 (6+ / 0-)

          Had no heads up about it. Faulty valve.  
          And accidents happen.

          Thinking something makes sense doesn't necessarily make it so.

          "This is the best bad idea we have by far..." ~Argo

          by MsGrin on Sat Oct 26, 2013 at 02:54:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sure, but your atypical (0+ / 0-)

            Of course, bad things can happen to young people.  And three pack a day smokers who pound Wild Turkey can live to 100 without problems.  But, in general that's not the case either time.

            The insurance rates for younger citizens have been jacked up beyond what may make economic sense for them to pay.  Throw in the pre-existing injury waiver and why doesn't it make more sense to blow off the insurance until you need it?

        •  One of the weaknesses of the system we have (6+ / 0-)

          had up to now is that is pits us against each other. Young invincibles who believe are told they shouldn't have to subsidize older and healthier people. It's reminds me of older people without children who feel they shouldn't have to pay for the cost of schools. We are all this together.

          Just another underemployed IT professional computer geek.

          by RhodeIslandAspie on Sat Oct 26, 2013 at 02:57:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly (0+ / 0-)

          And if enough young, healthy, well off people do not sign up? This has a very fragile foundation. It is asking the young and the healthy to subsidize the old and unhealthy (to some degree). Which is similar to what the Insurance industry (not just health) has always done. Excerpt the high risks (teen drivers, pre existing conditions, etc.) paid extra freight instead of the other way around.

    •  You don't know that (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ferg, MsGrin, Lujane

      While I agree the diary is kind of a mess...there is no reason to think she didn't have junk insurance before

      Her deductible was lower, so what? There are a lot of things in an insurance policy, the biggest one that probably (but not necessarily) affected is policy caps

      If the insurance didn't cover anything expensive, then it's "low deductible" was a joke to begin with

      Lot's of other things in there too

      The only way to really know is to look at both policies

      For most people it seems this is going to help a lot

      •  I don't know that? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jedennis, Lujane

        Correct. That's why asked "Why was it cheaper?" Maybe her previous provider was truly altruistic and only went Ayn Rand in reaction to that horrible Obamacare. But I somehow doubt that is the case. I would be willing to bet the rent that there were some gaping holes in that previous coverage she had.

        Just another underemployed IT professional computer geek.

        by RhodeIslandAspie on Sat Oct 26, 2013 at 08:16:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  annual limits (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ferg, MsGrin, Lujane

          like wvmcl says up above, it might be the annual limits that are a gaping hole. Hit that limit in one year and you are effectively uninsured.

          •  However, if one hit the limit, the person (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            annecros, T Maysle

            can then purchase health insurance that fully conforms to ACA, so there are no annual or lifetime limits.

            While this would be gaming the system, it is far less gaming than the person who goes without insurance and just pays the annual penalty.

            There will be a political price to PBO's claims that people could keep their current insurance being shown to be false.

            The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

            by nextstep on Sat Oct 26, 2013 at 03:41:50 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  And neither do you (0+ / 0-)

        But I'll be she knows much better than anyone here and she was happy with it.

    •  Fox News is still searching for the blowback (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ybruti, Theodore J Pickle, JerryNA

      Half the people concerned don't know they are eligible for subsidies.  This especially applies to people struggling financially.

      There are going to be many individuals who are ineligible for subsidies but will find a similar plan at the same price or cheaper on the exchanges.

      There are going to be some cases where people will pay more, but it isn't going to be that bad.  If you are a 27 year old single male making over $45,000 a year, then the $250 month bronze plan coverage is not going to break you.  In a lot of those cases, the plans will have better coverage than what they currently have anyways.

      •  Also, from what I understand, if one buys the gold (0+ / 0-)

        option, the premiums are 100% tax deductible, and for higher income people not getting a subsidy, this may be a way to defray some of the expenses of the premiums.

        Just another underemployed IT professional computer geek.

        by RhodeIslandAspie on Sat Oct 26, 2013 at 03:00:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  How many single males do you know like that? (0+ / 0-)

        I wish I was making half that when I was 27!

        •  If you make half that, then in most states you are (0+ / 0-)

          eligible for a premium subsidy, aren't you?  Gotta compare apples to apples, not tangerines.

          •  Well yeah (0+ / 0-)

            so what's the 27 year old making 20K a year going to get in :

            coverage and subsidy?

            The point of this story was that the young lady was getting a significant increase in cost, with the benefit being extra coverage she did not want. And she wasn't eligible for a subsidy.

            •  Unfortunately for my income, I know the answer. (0+ / 0-)

              I should have had twice the income as I actually did, but my company keeps my hours down so they don't have to make a commitment to give me benefits. And they've were doing this before Obamacare started kicking in so let's not blame that.

              I checked what I would have to pay based on last years income which was about 21,000 and I am a single male with no dependents, age 55.

              For a crappy bronze with no dental and high deductibles 5000.00 to 5800 a year, I would have to pay a dollar a month, I kid you not. I wouldn't recommend that option to anyone unless they just don't have the money, but it's better than nothing, and it's easy on the wallet. If you want to go up to silver, I can get that for 63 to 102 a month, without dental with deductibles of 2600 to 3000 annual. Gold will hit me for 167 to 214 a month with deductibles of 1500 to 2000 annually. Premiums and deductibles vary not only with levels I choose, but which policy option within those levels. Dental will add 26 to 51 dollars a month depending on the plan I choose.

              If you are 27, expect to pay less, because you are younger. And quite possibly less depending what part of the country you live, because Rhode Island rates have always been higher than the national average. Hope this helps.

              Just another underemployed IT professional computer geek.

              by RhodeIslandAspie on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 09:46:39 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  The point of my diary wasn't that she might not (0+ / 0-)

              experience some pain paying out for new insurance, but that the the reporter did not at all investigate what her old policy actually would have paid for, and took her word that it was a better policy. As we know, these policies are intentionally confusing so people are often unaware of how little their policies actually cover, at least until they take sick. I was hammering some lazy journalism over at CBS, with a tagline that would lead people to think that the ACA was some kind of organized ripoff.

              Just another underemployed IT professional computer geek.

              by RhodeIslandAspie on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 09:54:22 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No, you do not know (0+ / 0-)

                What her policy was. She was happy with it. There is nothing in the CBS report that is inaccurate. OTH you moly she had crappy insurance (unknown)  and would pay less now which is totally inaccurate.

                •  Of course I don't know what her policy is. (0+ / 0-)

                  Because CBS didn't bother to examine it to compare and contrast it to the plans she was being offered. My whole point here is that CBS was engaging in lazy pseudo journalism, rather than informing.

                  Just another underemployed IT professional computer geek.

                  by RhodeIslandAspie on Mon Oct 28, 2013 at 10:00:36 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well you make the claim (0+ / 0-)

                    " becomes obvious that the "coverage" people are losing is insurance in name only, due to the high deductibles." Which is simply unknown as far as coverage and untrue as far as deductbles in this case.

                    They do not make the claim that her current coverage is better or worse, only much more expensive and that she is happy with it. The point of the piece was not to compare plans but point out a problem with the original claims and current perceptions.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site