The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50

Thread: Universal Health Care

  1. #21
    Senior Member menmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,275

    Default

    Buzz.....it is wasted breath on this bunch! They have there minds made up and even if the exchange would help them, they would not use it.

  2. #22
    Senior Member M&K's Retrievers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Royse City, TX
    Posts
    5,156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by menmon View Post
    Buzz.....it is wasted breath on this bunch! They have there minds made up and even if the exchange would help them, they would not use it.
    As long as you two continue to spout uniformed tripe, no one will listen. Why should we? I'm sure you were great at banking and I'm sure Buzz is a great engineer but you don't know squat about the health system and refuse to learn from the experience of others. Let's all agree to disagree.

    Dead horse regards,
    M&K's HR UH Tucker of Texoma JH
    M&K's SHR Prime Black Angus
    M&K's Miss Jessie Girl JH
    Sir Jacob of Lakeview-Jake
    Freeway JYD

    Mike Whitworth

  3. #23
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by menmon View Post
    Buzz.....it is wasted breath on this bunch! They have there minds made up and even if the exchange would help them, they would not use it.
    It's simply about the math, menmon. We'll have to see how the math plays out.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  4. #24
    Senior Member menmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    It's simply about the math, menmon. We'll have to see how the math plays out.
    I think the math is working! What is cool now is the health insurance companies are running ads on TV. Wonder why?

    All of them have plans on the heathcare.gov and they want you to pick them over their competition.

    Sounds pretty free market to me.

    I can not stress enough that you should go on the exchange and see what you can get. When I worked for corporations, I had 2 maybe 3 choices. Now I can get cheap coverage or expensive. If I was young I would pick the 70/30 plans but since I old I pick the 90/10 plan.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,922

    Default

    Glad this works for you, menmon. I still think that we do not know whether the math will prove out in the end.

    Was wondering about the young people who HAVE signed up for the exchanges. We have no info on whether they are the younger people who are the healthy ones (needed to balance out the older, sicker people). What if the young ones that have signed up are the ones who are NOT healthy, i.e. the ones who have illnesses and need the coverage most. Age, alone, is not going to break the bank. Healthy, young people often opt out of health insurance even before there was ACA.

    I am now on Medicare. My rates increase every year. If you fail to join the first year you are eligible, you enter at a higher rate than if you had entered in the first year.

    I haven't yet had to find out what treatments Medicare will or will not pay for ... at what point any affliction I develop will be considered not compliant with the cost-benefit ratios.

    Yes, private insurance can present the same problem. We have had many examples of how difficult it can be to deal with an insurance company on issues like that (treatments being covered or not covered). I cannot imagine that it will be less difficult to wrangle with a govt bureaucrat over these same issues. Also, insurance companies have been taken to court for their screw-ups or malfeasance of their powers;but if you are contending with a govt program and bureaucrat, what leverage will there be?

    While we do know that your options in ACA are working out for you, we do not yet have broad, documented knowledge of how ACA is working out for the majority of people affected by it.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  6. #26
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,703

    Default

    Nice read.............

    Surprise! Walmart health plan is cheaper, offers more coverage than Obamacare



    By RICHARD POLLOCK | JANUARY 7, 2014 AT 5:05 AM

    Topics: Watchdog Obamacare Health Care Accountability Walmart

    Consumers shop at the new Walmart Neighborhood Market, opening its 34,000 square foot store in... New Obamacare health insurance enrollees may feel a pang of envy when they eye the coverage plans offered by Walmart to its employees.

    For many years, the giant discount retailer has been the target of unions and liberal activists who have harshly criticized the company's health care plans, calling them “notorious for failing to provide health benefits” and "substandard.”

    But a Washington Examiner comparison of the two health insurance programs found that Walmart's plan is more affordable and provides significantly better access to high-quality medical care than Obamacare.


    Click here to see an infographic comparing Obamacare's health insurance premiums to Walmart'sIndependent insurance agents affiliated with the National Association of Health Underwriters and health policy experts compared the two at the request of the Examiner.

    Walmart furnished employee benefit information to the Examiner. Neither Obamacare advocate Families USA nor the United Food and Commercial Workers, which backs anti-Walmart campaigns, responded to Examiner requests for comment.

    Walmart offers its employees two standard plans, a Health Reimbursement Account and an alternative it calls "HRA High" that costs more out of employees' pockets but has lower deductibles. Blue Cross Blue Shield manages both plans nationally.

    Also offered is a Health Savings Account plan that includes high deductibles but allows tax-free dollars to be used for coverage.


    Click here to see an infographic comparing Obamacare's health access to Walmart'sFor a monthly premium as low as roughly $40, an individual who is a Walmart HRA plan enrollee can obtain full-service coverage through a Blue Cross Blue Shield preferred provider organization. A family can get coverage for about $160 per month.

    Unlike Obamacare, there are no income eligibility requirements. Age and gender do not alter premium rates. The company plan is the same for all of Walmart's 1.1 million enrolled employees and their dependents, from its cashiers to its CEO.

    A Journal of the American Medical Association analysis from September showed that unsubsidized Obamacare enrollees will face monthly premiums that are five to nine times higher than Walmart premiums.

    JAMA found the unsubsidized premium for a nonsmoking gouple age 60 can cost $1,365 per month versus the Walmart cost of about $134 for the same couple.

    The medical journal reported a 30-year-old smoker would pay up to $428 per month, in contrast to roughly $70 each month for a Walmart employee.

    A family of four could pay a $962 premium, but the same Walmart family member would pay about $160.

    Low premiums are not the only distinguishing feature of the Walmart plan. The retailer's employees can use eight of the country's most prestigious medical facilities, including the Mayo Clinic, Pennsylvania's Geisinger Medical Center and the Cleveland Clinic.

    At these institutions, which Walmart calls "Centers of Excellence," Walmart employees and their dependents can get free heart or spinal surgery. They can also get free knee and hip replacements at four hospitals nationwide.

    Many top-rated Walmart hospitals — such as the Mayo and Cleveland clinics — are left out of most Obamacare exchange plans.

    But the real difference between Obamacare and Walmart can be seen in the levels of day-to-day access to doctors and hospitals.

    Robert Slayton, a practicing Chicago independent insurance agent for 11 years and the former president of the Illinois State Association of Health Underwriters, described to the Examiner the differences between Walmart and Obamacare provider networks.

    Slayton said the BlueChoice exchange network for President Obama's hometown has very limited hospital participation. “In downtown Chicago, the key is the number of hospitals: 28,” he said.

    “Now we’re going to the national network — this is what the Walmart network would most likely be — and you have 54 hospitals. That’s a big difference,” he said.

    Former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey, a Republican who is now a health care advocate, said Obamacare's lack of first-class hospitals is a big problem.

    “It’s not just the number, but who they are. You’ll find under the Obamacare exchanges that the academic hospitals have declined to participate, along with the specialists who practice at those hospitals. The same is true of cancer hospitals,” she said.

    “People who are seriously ill need to stay away from these exchange plans,” McCaughey said.

    Slayton said the gap between doctor availability in Chicago under the Obamacare and Walmart plans is dramatic.

    “You will notice there are 9,837 doctors [under Obamacare]. But the larger network is 24,904 doctors. Huge, huge difference,” he said.

    Walmart also offers a free preventive health plan that mirrors the Obamacare plan. Its employees can take advantage of a wide range of free exams and counseling, including screenings for colorectal cancer, cervical cancer, chlamydia, diabetes, depression and special counseling for diet and obesity.

    Their children can get more than 20 free preventive services, ranging including screenings for genetic disorders, autism and developmental problems to obesity, lead poisoning exposure and tuberculosis. There are also 12 free vaccinations, and free hearing and vision testing.

    Walmart employees pay as little as $4 for a 30-day supply of generic drugs and only $10 for eye exams through a separate vision plan.

    “It’s a lot better program than people, I think, might assume without looking, just because Walmart has gotten such a bad reputation by some of the labor groups and other groups for its general activities,” said Gail Wilensky after reviewing the retailer's plan.

    Wilensky was head under President George H.W. Bush of the federal Health Care Financing Administration, the predecessor to the the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. CMS is the agency in charge of implementing a large part of the Affordable Care Act, and it oversaw the rollout of the troubled healthcare.gov website.

    David Todd, an independent insurance agent based in Little Rock, Ark., also compared the health plans for the Examiner. Walmart’s corporate headquarters is in Bentonville, Ark., and the company has 58,000 workers in the state.

    Todd pointed to stark differences between the government plan and Walmart: “If I buy a family plan on the exchange, it’s still $1,000 a month. And I can buy this for ... [$160] on Walmart.”

    Walmart also gives cash to its employees for any health care expense. The annual payments run from $250 to $1,000 and are given at the beginning of the enrollment year in an account that can only be used for health care expenses.

    Walmart individuals face a $2,750 deductible and families need to pay $5,500 under the HRA plan. Individuals pay $1,750 and families pay $3,500 deductibles under the HRA High plan.

    The deductibles are high, but Obamacare deductibles are higher, going up to $6,300, according to Todd.

    Todd looked at a 30-year-old woman who could qualify for the government subsidy. “The nonsubsidized premium is $205 a month for this 30-year-old. If they get a subsidy, then the premium is zero. But that person has to come up with $6,300 if something catastrophic happened,” he said.

    The Walmart monthly premium for the same 30-year-old woman would be about $40. Her deductible would be $2,750, minus $250 in cash advance, for a total net deductible of $2,500.

    Todd said some Obamacare exchange family plan deductibles can go as high as $12,000 before benefits kick in.


    Last edited by road kill; 01-14-2014 at 02:11 PM.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by road kill View Post
    Nice read.............
    Actually I would like to read the whole story, including the info graphics. However, I think this thing misses the point. Obamacare was never meant to replace large employer, large group insurance. It is for people who are stuck on the individual market, and small companies with small groups. They don't have the kind of huge numbers of mostly healthy folks to make up for a few that get sick. In small groups and in the individual market, one person getting sick can destroy you. In our small group, one person got sick and rated doubled in one year from $700 to $1400. I have no doubt that had the illness been a long and chronic & expensive one, it would have drove us out of the health insurance market. That isn't supposed to happen now.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  8. #28
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Actually I would like to read the whole story, including the info graphics. However, I think this thing misses the point. Obamacare was never meant to replace large employer, large group insurance. It is for people who are stuck on the individual market, and small companies with small groups. They don't have the kind of huge numbers of mostly healthy folks to make up for a few that get sick. In small groups and in the individual market, one person getting sick can destroy you. In our small group, one person got sick and rated doubled in one year from $700 to $1400. I have no doubt that had the illness been a long and chronic & expensive one, it would have drove us out of the health insurance market. That isn't supposed to happen now.
    Is this not counter, however, to what the law actually is doing?

    The govt is mandating what even those large groups must include in their insurance plans, but they must not be too generous or the employers/employees (not sure who pays that tax) will pay a tax on the "luxury" coverage? That's going to cost somebody more than they are paying now for exactly the same benefits. The unions belatedly realized that part of the law and raised a stink over it.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  9. #29
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    Is this not counter, however, to what the law actually is doing?

    The govt is mandating what even those large groups must include in their insurance plans, but they must not be too generous or the employers/employees (not sure who pays that tax) will pay a tax on the "luxury" coverage? That's going to cost somebody more than they are paying now for exactly the same benefits. The unions belatedly realized that part of the law and raised a stink over it.

    I would love to see the republican "perfect" approach to healthcare reform. Until then, it's all BS.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  10. #30
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,922

    Default

    Buzz, there is probably no "perfect" approach.

    However, it would have been much better to treat the problems, rather than take apart the whole system. At least if the approach turned out badly, it would be easier to fix one part of the system than keep taking a Rube Goldberg approach to a much larger, very complex delivery system.

    Why not first approach the pre-existing conditions with some kind of a risk pool, and get it to work by tweeking that one thing to find the best working model? The O-care "temporary" risk pool was not working out actuarily. They found they ran out of money quickly, even though the enrollment was much lower than expected. It might have been smart to get the data and experience from that early part of the law before launching the mammouth part of the law.

    The pre-existing conditions issue seemed to be the biggest hot button for most people who favored O-care. So why not try to solve that first? That could have provided the insights as to how this problem could integrate with the rest of the system that already served the vast majority quite well.

    Meanwhile, one could have been working on the overall Medicaid program ... what works there and what doesn't. O-care is putting more people into the Medicaid system ... a system that suffers from lack of quality care (due to low reimbursements and low provider participation), not to mention the waste and fraud. Wouldn't it be a good idea to fix that stumbling system before putting more millions of patients into it?

    If you have a flat tire, you don't have to replace the whole car. However, it also doesn't help to replace a tire with another tire that is flat, or try and re-design the car so it won't get a flat tire. Though they have designed tires that will run flat ... but they are expensive.)

    I don't make this an R or a D thing ... a bad idea is a bad idea. Both parties have plenty of them.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •