Was let go from a job in Oct... My benefits were covered to the end of that month. Got severance pay and only collected unemployment for a week. Started new job the middle of Nov. and thankfully only had to wait a full 30 days to start new benefits, That put me to the 1st of Jan. Have worked my whole life and only collected unemployment 3 times in all those years. Now because of the Affordable Care Act and seeing how I was NOT covered for 2 months (Nov&Dec) I was hit in penalties for $104.00 not my fault that I had to wait. You think that they will pass a new law stating you get benefits when you start the new job from day 1 of employment? I doubt it!!!!!.
Edit by moderator: Reworded post to avoid political comments. Terry
-- Edited by Terry and Jo on Sunday 15th of March 2015 08:04:47 AM
LauriGray said
09:00 AM Mar 15, 2015
Did my daughters taxes for her. She did not have coverage for Nov and Dec and did not have to pay a penalty. (Wa State) I am in the same situation this year. Was laid off in Jan but have benefit coverage through March. Thinking of waiting a few months as the penalty is less than insurance and I am pretty healthy.
Russ Ranger said
09:16 AM Mar 15, 2015
Here's the other side of the coin. The Affordable Care Act allowed us to retire early. After working for 43 years we both wanted to retire early. We used COBRA for the full 18 months ($1122.00 per month). No insurance company would have covered us for the years between the end of COBRA and 65 years old.
We now have insurance through the same company that we used for years (Group Health) using the Washington State Exchange. It's great coverage.
Without an option for medical insurance we could not have planned for early retirement. Not to be political but this Republican is grateful for the ACA.
We like being retired.
Edit by moderator: Renamed the ACA in the post. Terry
-- Edited by Terry and Jo on Sunday 15th of March 2015 06:27:24 PM
Barbaraok said
11:18 AM Mar 15, 2015
And being retired means stress goes down and chances of living longer go up.
Barb
lindy said
01:00 PM Mar 15, 2015
I can only say, BOY I'm glad I'm retired military and my Tricare covers me for the ACA!!
gypsymaus said
01:52 PM Mar 15, 2015
You may want to go to the healthcare.gov website. Here is the link. It sounds like you may have qualified for an exemption that got missed in your tax preparation.
And I pay 1300.00 monthly for 12k ded. You don't want my opinion about the ACA
Terry and Jo said
06:31 PM Mar 15, 2015
FYI. I've edited a couple of post to change the name to the Affordable Care Act. I did that to try to help keep this thread from becoming a political discussion as the "short name" might lead to that. Let's be sure that this discussion stays relevant to insurance and not any political discussions.
Terry
TheNewhalls said
08:26 PM Mar 15, 2015
Terry and Jo wrote:
FYI. I've edited a couple of post to change the name to the Affordable Care Act. I did that to try to help keep this thread from becoming a political discussion as the "short name" might lead to that. Let's be sure that this discussion stays relevant to insurance and not any political discussions.
Terry
You just made it political by editing other peoples posts and putting in your words.
Russ Ranger said
08:53 PM Mar 15, 2015
I'll try very hard not to be political. Before the ACA there were not options for Medical insurance for people in their late 50's or early 60's. Even though we had paid into medical insurance our whole working lives, the day we quit our jobs and finished the 18 months of COBRA that the law allowed, insurance companies were allowed to drop us.
It is not a matter of price or benefits, it was a matter of availability. Whether your opinion is good or bad of the ACA, a least we have an option that will allow us to retire and go RV'ing.
I could care less which party fixed the problem, I'm just happy that I can be a retired old guy.
Russ Ranger said
09:00 PM Mar 15, 2015
I want to thank Terry for keeping this post on track. Medical Insurance can be the biggest obstacle for many people wanting to enter RV'ing fulltime. It is a worthy topic. For us it was "THE" largest hurdle to get over before we could pull the plug and move into this new lifestyle.
Thank you Terry for all your work to keep us on track!!
jrzygrl64 said
10:05 PM Mar 15, 2015
I definitely do not want to be political at all, but Bill and I, both just turned 50, would NOT have been able to to what we are doing - living this lifestyle as we are - and maintain affordable health insurance without the ACA.
I do not agree with all aspects of it but am grateful that it is available for us.
bigboomer said
09:14 AM Mar 16, 2015
Sorry but I to disagree with the statements that the "ACA" (I used this so Terry did not have to go and change my real wording) is allowing folks to get insurance affordably. The whole reason the rates have gone thru the roof is because of all the mandates put in place that every policy must carry. We know plenty of folks whose policies doubled or more in premiums when the mandates kicked in last year or worse they could not renew the policy they had. We lost out ability to get health insurance in SD when these mandates kicked in and allowed the insurance companies to not have to write policies to those folks with mail forwarding addresses. This is what forced us to move to Texas which has cost us a lot of money and effort with having to register, insure and redo our licenses. If you were allowed to pick and choose what you wanted in your policy you could realize savings without subsidies. Also regardless what happens with the Supreme Court ruling in June what happens when the money runs out? And it will it is just a matter of time. Washington State' s exchange is on the verge of insolvency and other states are not far behind and don't think the Fed exchanges will always be flush with cash. Your paying for it whether you think so or not.
One additional note: Since we are under 65 and not eligible for Medicare and are not eligible for insurance due to our residency we were allowed to take a Short Term Medical Plan which is not "ACA" compliant. This policy is basically a catastrophic plan with minimal coverages that still subjects us to the "penalties" under ACA. This plan is not renewable so at the end of the year we would be out of healthcare again which is why we are now Proud Texans!
-- Edited by bigboomer on Monday 16th of March 2015 10:59:27 AM
bjoyce said
05:46 PM Mar 16, 2015
My Washington state group plan pricing did not change much when the ACA went into affect, in fact it went up less than it had been going up in prior years. I get news out of Washington state all the time and this is first I have heard of any insolvency. I just tried a web search and could not find any such info.
Personally I think this whole topic is difficult to keep apolitical.
bigboomer said
10:34 PM Mar 16, 2015
My apologies, insolvency is incorrect, more so a funding shortfall....again going back to my point that somewhere, sometime the money will run out....
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/12/washington-state-obamacare-exchange-faces-funding-shortfall/
jimindenver said
10:35 AM Mar 17, 2015
We just went thru the process of signing up and honestly almost all of the plans were paying someone hundreds a month to go broke if you really got sick. We did get lucky with a HMO plan for only $270 a month each with no co-pays, paid scrips and a total out of pocket of less than three grand if we do get sick. ( 270 after the ACA discount) Until we found that plan I was ready to just take the fines as I can't see making the co-pay plus 40% of the services after you meet a stupid high deductible.
Luckily for me one of the covered scrips is my breathing medicine that cost $250 a month so really adding the rest of the insurance is only going to cost me $20.
Now then Colorado has it's own system and getting thru it was pure heck. I had a expert mess up my app, overstate my income and yet still got me on medicaid. Once that happened I couldn't get it changed in time for the deadline because the three agencies involved had no idea what the other was doing. I ended up spending near a week on the phone and at their offices getting it cleared up.
I heard on the news that they are looking at the cost of the policies offered here as they are anything but affordable.
Russ Ranger said
10:31 PM Mar 17, 2015
WOW..... Politics and religion all getting mixed together. I hope everyone will "play nice" so that we don't give Terry gray hair.
I still believe this is an important topic to fulltime RV'ing. It is the largest expense we have in our budget, bigger than fuel, bigger than campgrounds, bigger than our food budget. It's over double any of those items for us.
I'm just happy that I can be RV'ing.
Life is good.
Edit by moderator: Removed comments related to "cause." Terry
-- Edited by Terry and Jo on Wednesday 18th of March 2015 08:17:32 AM
Terry and Jo said
08:14 AM Mar 18, 2015
When I went to bed last evening, this thread was OK to me with regards to its content. This morning, it was a completely different circumstance, so I deleted out some comments that involved getting into a political discussion. No more warnings on this one. Any more political or religious statements and I close the thread. Keep the topic on insurance and its costs or sources, not the causes for it.
For everyone's benefit that may not be involved with many forums, I've been on a fair number and politics and religion are the worst topics to discuss. Those that still allow discussions on those topics can get very contentious and users have been banned for comments that they have made. Howard and Linda have wisely set the rules that those topics not be discussed here.
Terry
Sushidog said
01:29 PM Mar 18, 2015
Here's a question for anyone who knows the facts about the ACA. I was searching the exemption requirements to avoid the penalty for not having insurance and it lists the first exemption as "homelessness." Would full time RVers qualify as being homeless under the ACA as they have no home, apartment or permanent residence? Surely a mailbox at a mail forward service can't count as being a "home" can it? It would sure be a tight squeeze at night. ;) How about those living in a car or a van? If a van qualifies, how about a class B, an old beat-up travel trailer, etc.? Where is the line drawn?
Chip
-- Edited by Sushidog on Wednesday 18th of March 2015 01:32:09 PM
TheNewhalls said
01:41 PM Mar 18, 2015
Sushidog wrote:
Here's a question for anyone who knows the facts about the ACA. I was searching the exemption requirements to avoid the penalty for not having insurance and it lists the first exemption as "homelessness." Would full time RVers qualify as being homeless under the ACA as they have no home, apartment or permanent residence? Surely a mailbox at a mail forward service can't count as being a "home" can it? It would sure be a tight squeeze at night. ;) How about those living in a car or a van? If a van qualifies, how about a class B, an old beat-up travel trailer, etc.? Where is the line drawn?
Chip
-- Edited by Sushidog on Wednesday 18th of March 2015 01:32:09 PM
Chip,
We're not homeless we're just houseless.
Sushidog said
02:59 PM Mar 18, 2015
Well I guess one could argue that FTers still have a roof over our head. But by that same argument, a bum living under an overpass is not homeless, as he's got a nice sturdy roof over his head too.
Chip
Barbaraok said
03:21 PM Mar 18, 2015
If you have an RV with toilet, sleeping, & cooking facilities, IRS says that is a eligible for home mortgage tax deduction. Living in an RV is quite different from living in a car.
There are a whole host of exemptions that were listed above - not sure what it is your looking for?
Barb
Sushidog said
07:27 PM Mar 20, 2015
"Living in an RV is quite different from living in a car." Yeah, but not much different from living in a 97sq. ft. Aliner that has these things. I guess a person living in a million dollar+ Prevost could just remove the cooking facilities (stove) from their RV (and cook outside) and qualify as being homeless, but a guy living in a $500 dilapidated Fema trailer or a 1967 Scotty with a cot, a porta-potty and a single burner electric hotplate would be a "homeowner."
My employer just changed our health insurance. We now have 2 options, both offered by Humana. Choice #1 is a "bronze" level plan that they pay 60% of and is ACA compliant. They also offer a "Gold" level plan which is similar to the one we had last year. Though considerably more money, my employer offers to pay 80% which makes it a little more affordable. However the second plan does not offer free preventative care, (as is required to make it ACA compliant). It is a new plan and Humana can not tell me if it is ACA compliant or not, (they are researching it) yet I must make my election before April 1. Meaning that I will probably be socked with a $721 tax penalty at the end of the year - unless I can find a way to avoid it. Just trying to think outside the box, so I'm not forced to select the lesser plan.
Or I could just drop my coverage, pay or the $721 penalty and bank the $3,800 difference in premium savings (after I've paid the penalty, as the 20% share of the premiums I must pay is $4,524) and use it to pay my medical expenses for the year. Last year both my DW and I were lucky and didn't have to go to the doctor. If we have to go this year we would have still had to pay up to $6,200 in deductibles and co-pays (under the gold plan) and a total of up to $12,700 under the bronze plan. I really don't have the earnings to be able to pay these outrageous fees, so the insurance really wouldn't do us much good (except for small medical expenses - which a $3,800 medical savings account would cover and any left over would be saved for next year.) Even with the best insurance, I still could not pay the co-insurance and deductibles for a major medical event, so we would not be able to get treatment anyway, making it would be the same as if we had no insurance at all. Decisions, decisions.
Chip
Barbaraok said
08:13 PM Mar 20, 2015
Where did people get the idea that health insurance was something different than other insurance? I notice that no one complains that they are forced to buy auto insurance and most will never, ever collect one penny. Insurance is meant to be a group effort, with everyone contributing and some years you use a lot and some years you use nothing. And since we aren't going to let people die in front of a hospital, we were all already paying for these treatments, just trying to get it more organized and more people into physicians offices early rather than later in their disease course where the outcomes are often much worse.
9 years of fulltiming and this is the first year that one of us (Dave) has used more than our premiums - we're at $8000 and counting that insurance has paid out for his scalp squamous cell carcinoma treatment. Added in to that will be our normal checkup costs. Hopefully next year we're back to just routine checkups - all of our meds are generic and only one of them goes over our $20 deductible every 90 days. So most years we pay more in premiums than we get in benefits.
And as long as you have health insurance, you will get treated even if it takes you time to pay off the deductibles. And if all of a sudden you have chest tightness and you need stents (~$85,000 bill for 3 stents & Dave's 23 hr hospital stay) you will be so glad you have it. I remember in 1993 when I had ovarian cancer surgery our deductible was $10K, which I paid over several months while the bills for surgery, chemo, lab work, and monthly CT scans was well over $300K.
You just never know when something bad will happen which is why we have insurance. Spread the risk out over a large group.
Barb
Sushidog said
09:54 PM Mar 20, 2015
I'm not complaining about buying insurance. I just don't want to pay for insurance and the aca penalty just because the policy didn't meet one government requirement. If I could be legitimately classed as homeless then I could get the decent insurance and not have to pay the penalty. Why should the government force me to buy a lower grade of insurance just to avoid a tax penalty? But that might be just what happens.
BTW, when I as living in California, 21 years ago, the hospital I went to get some life saving surgery for my ex-wife would not have admitted her if I did not pay the estimated bill in full in advance. No, I didn't have coverage on her as my employer wouldn't pay any portion of my wife's insurance (and her employer didn't offer her insurance), so it would have cost me about $300 week to get her covered and I just couldn't afford it. Yes, the hospital would have let her die - or sent her to another inferior hospital with the same results. As a consequence I was forced to cash in my entire 401k (which means now I must retire on social security), max out my credit cards, and take out a loan for the balance - so I understand the value of insurance.
I've never been to a doctor who didn't require the co-pay up front, before he would see you. I didn't know they would see you even with good insurance if you didn't pay your portion in advance. I know you won't get your prescription drugs without paying your (sometimes outrageous) co-pay up front, and of course skipping your meds could be quickly fatal. I assumed your deductible was handled similarly.
Glad Dave survived his heart problems and you made it through your cancer, Barb. I lost both my parents to cancer, so I understand how devastating it can be. I just figured when something really bad happens I'll make my peace with God and die. Though we all want to live to a ripe old age, we know we must pass one day - some sooner than others (my mother died much younger than I am now). If you simply can't afford the treatment, even with the best insurance you can afford, what choice do you have?
Chip
-- Edited by Sushidog on Friday 20th of March 2015 09:58:00 PM
Glenn West said
09:32 AM Mar 21, 2015
DW has a health issue and needs surgery. It is not life threatening. It is quality of life. We were told plainly, no pay no surgery. Our deductible on her is 6k. We are paying the entire amount. It is misleading to state you will be taken care of even if your have to make payments on deductible.
Barbaraok said
11:11 AM Mar 21, 2015
Glenn, I am sorry, I should have made clear I was talking about surgeries that were deemed life threatening. We've never had an elective surgery, except for the cataract removals, and when hospitalized it has always been at teaching hospitals. There are additional requirements for teaching hospitals to treat everyone as they get a substantial amount of federal funds to provide clinical education for physicians and others in the health care fields. And I was speaking just about the hospitals, not the physicians.
Barb
jlb27537 said
11:40 AM Mar 21, 2015
Don't think getting to Medicare age is going to solve all your health insurance problems. My wife and I are both over 65. We have Medicare and a Plan "F" supplement that covers 100% of what Medicare does not cover. (they (Medicare) only cover 80% of the bill, if that.)
This way we have no unexpected costs in our health coverage. For this no surprise insurance coverage it is right close to $7,000 a year in premiums.
We have no drug coverage, but between the $10 for 90 days @ Walmart/Walgreen's and Mexico it is less expensive than a drug policy.
I figure we are ahead, had my 3rd back surgery, I quit looking at the bills past $150K and the wife's stroke, 4 days in intensive care, way over $100K. My $7k a year is cheep.
Jim
-- Edited by jlb27537 on Saturday 21st of March 2015 11:44:52 AM
Barbaraok said
12:54 PM Mar 21, 2015
Jim,
That is $300/month for each of you for your supplemental and it doesn't include prescriptions? Do you have Part D coverage with Walgreen? If not, then it may be VERY expensive later when you really need the Part D coverage because the drugs you NEED are not generic.
Barb
TheNewhalls said
06:26 AM Mar 22, 2015
We are over 65 on Medicare and have Plan F high deductible. Our monthly payments are low and we pay out of pocket until our deductible is met. We save quite a bit each month. In a calendar year we would never pay more than what a regular Plan F would have cost us. We can switch to a regular Plan F anytime. We also have Part D (drugs) and the cost for that is a drop in the bucket compared to everything else. We were getting our meds through Walmart, but just switched to the plans mail order service and now our drugs are free except for the Part D cost.
The Junkman said
08:32 AM Mar 22, 2015
I'd post on this thread.. Folks know I love to give my opinion... But somehow, mine always get deleted.. so why bother.
azrving said
10:34 AM Mar 22, 2015
CJSX2fromCT wrote:
Was let go from a job in Oct... My benefits were covered to the end of that month. Got severance pay and only collected unemployment for a week. Started new job the middle of Nov. and thankfully only had to wait a full 30 days to start new benefits, That put me to the 1st of Jan. Have worked my whole life and only collected unemployment 3 times in all those years. Now because of the Affordable Care Act and seeing how I was NOT covered for 2 months (Nov&Dec) I was hit in penalties for $104.00 not my fault that I had to wait. You think that they will pass a new law stating you get benefits when you start the new job from day 1 of employment? I doubt it!!!!!.
Edit by moderator: Reworded post to avoid political comments. Terry
-- Edited by Terry and Jo on Sunday 15th of March 2015 08:04:47 AM
Regarding: Affordable Care Act For You..... No, it's not for me ...
I just turned 50 and I have been uninsured since 1995. I was self employed for more than 10 years and there was no way our business could afford healthcare insurance for my family and my employee’s families without going broke. We made sure our employees were covered under workers comp and we purchased accident insurance for everyone too. That was the best we could do and fortunately none of us needed health or accident insurance while we were in business for ourselves. In 1995 I had a new business, four young children, wife and a mortgage so I definitely needed health insurance. After my 18 months of Cobra (from previous employer) ran out I was scrambling to find insurance but all of the personal/family plans were too expensive and I couldn't purchase it through my business without offering it to all of my employees too (per state law) and our new business couldn't afford it. The only insurance we could afford were the catastrophic plans with 50K-100K deductibles so we opted for good term life insurance. I figured if something happened that was serious enough to wipe out our savings and make us sell the business and our home, I would just let nature take its course and my wife would have plenty of money to pay off all debt, live comfortably, and send the children to college. My wife and I each purchased a large term policy with riders for each of the children. If something had happened to my wife or one of the children I would have sold everything I owned and begged, borrowed, and stolen to make sure they were taken care of but I was disposable...LOL
NOT POLITICAL JUST MY OPINION: I don't believe in mandatory "Health" insurance forced down our throats. I don't believe I should be forced into paying for something I don't want and I certainly don't agree with the penalties the ACA hits us with when we can't afford to pay for health insurance. Many people say it's no different than the states mandatory vehicle insurance but that argument doesn't hold water with me. If I didn't like paying for auto insurance I just wouldn't own a car, thus no need for auto insurance and no penalty.
Although I dislike the ACA, I did plug my info into their website (now I will probably be a victim of identity theft..) because I wanted to avoid the penalties if at all possible. The prices were outrageous so I decided to pay the penalty for not having health insurance..it's still cheaper to pay the penalty than to pay a huge amount for poor health coverage.
In my opinion we should all have access to good reasonably priced health coverage but that probably won't happen in my lifetime. Frivolous lawsuits, greedy drug companies, greedy doctors, hospitals, etc. will keep us from ever having reasonably priced healthcare in this country. When I ask my auto insurance agent why my insurance went up and there were no tickets or accidents, I am told it's due to all of the other bad drivers in the state of AZ.....I am paying for others to be bad drivers! How is this a fair system? Same will happen with the ACA, the healthy people will pay for the people that may not take care of themselves. I'm already supporting the bad drivers in AZ I'll be darned if I will pay healthcare for people that may have abused their body or haven't taken care of themselves. This has become a nation of "I'm entitled to have everything without working for or earning it" and it's sad. ACA is yet another way to make the people dependent on you know who.
-- Edited by azrving on Sunday 22nd of March 2015 01:49:06 PM
bigboomer said
11:32 AM Mar 22, 2015
Azrving.....Amen....you are spot on.....
Barbaraok said
11:37 AM Mar 22, 2015
Mark,
"be darned if I will pay healthcare for people that abuse and don't take care of themselves. "
Are you suggesting that I did something on purpose to end up with ovarian cancer? That I wanted to be born with a genetic mutation that lead to polycystic ovarian syndrome which lead to ovarian cancer? That my sister, with the same genetic mutation, was to blame for that, or that she shouldn't have had the surgery when the pathology labeled the condition as pre-cancerous?
Insurance whether car, health, dental, etc. is a way to spread out the risks over a large population. Every business I know carries insurance on all sorts of things. Most of the time there is no claim. But when there is, the insurance is there to help make you whole. Did you never have insurance on your house?
It is easy to suggest that you don't need health insurance - try saying that just after you've been told you have a cancer with a 25% chance of survival.
And really, if you have a heart attack and show up at the ER with no insurance, do you expect us to let you die at the curb unless you can put up the hundreds of thousands of dollars it is going to cost to treat you (the angioplasty to see what is wrong will run upwards of $75,000)?
Everyone benefits when everyone is covered. Better coverage leads to better preventative or early intervention which leads to a reduction in costs and a healthier society - something we all should want. A lot of us want to go to universal coverage, but I'm not sure I'll live long enough to see that happen.
Barb
azrving said
12:03 PM Mar 22, 2015
Barbaraok wrote:
Mark,
"be darned if I will pay healthcare for people that abuse and don't take care of themselves. "
Are you suggesting that I did something on purpose to end up with ovarian cancer? That I wanted to be born with a genetic mutation that lead to polycystic ovarian syndrome which lead to ovarian cancer? That my sister, with the same genetic mutation, was to blame for that, or that she shouldn't have had the surgery when the pathology labeled the condition as pre-cancerous?
I never suggested you caused your medical condition. I'm glad you were able to afford health coverage in 1993 (well before the ACA)....I cannot. I am well aware that not all medical issues are self induced but many are. The point I am trying to make is I shouldn't be forced into paying for insurance for anyone other than myself and I certainly shouldn't be penalized for not wanting to contribute to the ACA. I'm not asking anyone to help me with my healthcare and I can assure you I never will. I am free to purchase auto, home, or life insurance but I am being forced into paying for healthcare I do not want. You can't justify that and still call this a free country.
I did edit my original post...as it is not my intention to offend anyone.
-- Edited by azrving on Sunday 22nd of March 2015 01:57:54 PM
Glenn West said
01:14 PM Mar 22, 2015
Lets keep this civil brothers and sisters. I am conservative, hope stating that not political. I believe in a free society. ACA is against my beliefs. We will be dropping ACA for the simple reason it is just too expensive for catastrophic coverage and that is basically what we have at $1300 monthly. We will be in a health share program and that will prevent us from penalties. We will actually have better usable coverage. Currently with ACA we have pregnancy coverage. That's a joke. Our combined ded of 12k is a joke. It does pay for preventative coverage but at the price we having to pay we are better off paying this out of pocket. Now if this offends anyone, get over it. I love all of you and think this should be civil.
azrving said
01:58 PM Mar 22, 2015
Glenn West wrote:
Lets keep this civil brothers and sisters. I am conservative, hope stating that not political. I believe in a free society. ACA is against my beliefs. We will be dropping ACA for the simple reason it is just too expensive for catastrophic coverage and that is basically what we have at $1300 monthly. We will be in a health share program and that will prevent us from penalties. We will actually have better usable coverage. Currently with ACA we have pregnancy coverage. That's a joke. Our combined ded of 12k is a joke. It does pay for preventative coverage but at the price we having to pay we are better off paying this out of pocket. Now if this offends anyone, get over it. I love all of you and think this should be civil.
Amen!
Barbaraok said
03:48 PM Mar 22, 2015
Glenn,
If you want to purchase insurance that covers ONLY you, then that isn't insurance, that is being self-insured with no insurance company involved. ALL insurance involves spreading the risk among a POOL of individuals/companies. And when you have a pool that includes people of all ages, then not all of the coverages offered will apply to you. I really think that people don't understand the principles behind a risk pool when looking at any type of insurance. Since the ACA covers people from birth to 65, it is reasonable that some in the pool will benefit from pregnancy coverage. Just the same as women will be paying premiums but not getting the benefit of prostate screenings. Pregnancy coverage means more prenatal care and a decrease in the number of premies - which saves everyone a lot of money, not only in terms of direct medical costs of supporting a premie, but also in terms of educational costs later in life. Just the same as finding any cancer (prostate screening or mammogram) early means the total cost is less and we have better outcomes.
When you get to 65, the pool no longer contains women who will need pregnancy benefits, so none are included. That is an example of a much smaller targeted insurance pool.
You don't say what state you reside in, but I do know a lot of fulltimers that have found the ACA to be very affordable and have policies with lower deductible at lower costs than what you are quoting.
Barb
Glenn West said
04:35 PM Mar 22, 2015
I am 58, dw 62. I make good money so we pay full price. People like us pay for others. I understand this. It costs too much. We will drop aca. For us health share organizations are the most cost effective and actually better coverage. Anyone one in our sisuation should check it out
The Junkman said
07:05 AM Mar 23, 2015
Seems people want to cheat the system by just buying what in needed that year or decade.. so when I'm having a kid.. ooops lets get coverage.. kid is 2.. drop pregnancy coverage, add exams.. drop exams.. add this.. drop that..modify that..
If anyone is gambling and trying to cheat the system.. it is them. As mentioned.. it's a pool based system..and some folks are finding it hard to slip through cracks.. So it's working..not that I know much about it.. other than my plan, and what I pay , and get.
read soon.. as this one is sure to be deleted..lol
Jack Mayer said
07:34 AM Mar 23, 2015
There is no question that for most people that previously had coverage that it is more expensive in almost every case, mine included. But I do get coverage for preventive care that I did not have before. With that I LOSE all prescription coverage (until my $6500 deductible is met). So for me personally it is incredibly expensive for the benefit received. Others will find a subsidy will help. I do have a subsidy that will not apply this year. WIth the subsidy it was still a little more, but just a little.
Better medical care and a better medical system is a requirement going forward. But the politicians have managed to screw this up so badly that it is amazing.
PIEERE said
09:45 AM Mar 23, 2015
I sure am happy I served in the US Army and found a great VA medical center.
Sushidog said
06:09 PM Mar 23, 2015
I heard back from the insurance agent today. She said she contacted Humana and found out that the better health insurance that I wanted to purchase (but was afraid to because one provision did not comply with the new ACA standard) was grandfathered in. So it is ACA compliant even though they charge a $30 copay for preventative care, which would disqualify it if it was a new policy. This is good news.
Chip
Glenn West said
11:18 PM Mar 31, 2015
Just update We dropped the Aca and now have Liberty Health Share. Those in our shoes should check this out.
bigboomer said
12:50 PM Apr 1, 2015
Thanks Glenn, we have bookmarked that and will certainly look into this in the near future. We looked into other faith based sharing programs and they looked like they were set up to be self pay and then you negotiate the amounts with the health providers and then submit the bills to the heath sharing for review and payment after they determined which amounts qualified, is this how Liberty is set up?
Glenn West said
01:39 PM Apr 1, 2015
Basically we tell them we are self pay and provide them with card with info for Health Share. They are paid within 30 days. Actually we find the doctors prefer this as it eliminate all the red tape with insurance companies and they get money faster. All this info is on web site though. libertyhealthshare.org
Terry and Jo said
09:10 AM Apr 2, 2015
I've mentioned in other areas about a website called "Good-RX" where one can put in the name of one's medicine and a location. The results of that search will provide area pharmacies that carry that medication, and for how much, with a Good-RX coupon. I just got a medication at the pharmacy last week with a cash price of $65 cash for just over $20.
Neither Jo or I have any insurance for prescription medicines, and this works well for us. When we first got set up with our new doctor, what she used to pay for 90 days with three prescription went from $150 down to $50.
At least it is an option that one can try. Simply print out the coupon and take it to the named pharmacy. Much better than grocery coupons.
Terry
Talensnana said
08:47 PM Apr 2, 2015
Terry and Jo you are so right about Good Rx. I have a prescription that is normally over $400 for 3 months ( that's for generic). We started getting it from Canada and saved about $100. But with Good Rx I we paid $170 for the last 3 month refill. I am definetely going to check into all our meds with them.
Have worked my whole life and only collected unemployment 3 times in all those years. Now because of the Affordable Care Act and seeing how I was NOT covered for 2 months (Nov&Dec) I was hit in penalties for $104.00 not my fault that I had to wait.
You think that they will pass a new law stating you get benefits when you start the new job from day 1 of employment? I doubt it!!!!!.
Edit by moderator: Reworded post to avoid political comments. Terry
-- Edited by Terry and Jo on Sunday 15th of March 2015 08:04:47 AM
Here's the other side of the coin. The Affordable Care Act allowed us to retire early. After working for 43 years we both wanted to retire early. We used COBRA for the full 18 months ($1122.00 per month). No insurance company would have covered us for the years between the end of COBRA and 65 years old.
We now have insurance through the same company that we used for years (Group Health) using the Washington State Exchange. It's great coverage.
Without an option for medical insurance we could not have planned for early retirement. Not to be political but this Republican is grateful for the ACA.
We like being retired.
Edit by moderator: Renamed the ACA in the post. Terry
-- Edited by Terry and Jo on Sunday 15th of March 2015 06:27:24 PM
Barb
You may want to go to the healthcare.gov website. Here is the link. It sounds like you may have qualified for an exemption that got missed in your tax preparation.
Exemptions From The Fees
FYI. I've edited a couple of post to change the name to the Affordable Care Act. I did that to try to help keep this thread from becoming a political discussion as the "short name" might lead to that. Let's be sure that this discussion stays relevant to insurance and not any political discussions.
Terry
You just made it political by editing other peoples posts and putting in your words.
It is not a matter of price or benefits, it was a matter of availability. Whether your opinion is good or bad of the ACA, a least we have an option that will allow us to retire and go RV'ing.
I could care less which party fixed the problem, I'm just happy that I can be a retired old guy.
Thank you Terry for all your work to keep us on track!!
I do not agree with all aspects of it but am grateful that it is available for us.
Sorry but I to disagree with the statements that the "ACA" (I used this so Terry did not have to go and change my real wording) is allowing folks to get insurance affordably. The whole reason the rates have gone thru the roof is because of all the mandates put in place that every policy must carry. We know plenty of folks whose policies doubled or more in premiums when the mandates kicked in last year or worse they could not renew the policy they had. We lost out ability to get health insurance in SD when these mandates kicked in and allowed the insurance companies to not have to write policies to those folks with mail forwarding addresses. This is what forced us to move to Texas which has cost us a lot of money and effort with having to register, insure and redo our licenses. If you were allowed to pick and choose what you wanted in your policy you could realize savings without subsidies. Also regardless what happens with the Supreme Court ruling in June what happens when the money runs out? And it will it is just a matter of time. Washington State' s exchange is on the verge of insolvency and other states are not far behind and don't think the Fed exchanges will always be flush with cash. Your paying for it whether you think so or not.
One additional note: Since we are under 65 and not eligible for Medicare and are not eligible for insurance due to our residency we were allowed to take a Short Term Medical Plan which is not "ACA" compliant. This policy is basically a catastrophic plan with minimal coverages that still subjects us to the "penalties" under ACA. This plan is not renewable so at the end of the year we would be out of healthcare again which is why we are now Proud Texans!
-- Edited by bigboomer on Monday 16th of March 2015 10:59:27 AM
Personally I think this whole topic is difficult to keep apolitical.
We just went thru the process of signing up and honestly almost all of the plans were paying someone hundreds a month to go broke if you really got sick. We did get lucky with a HMO plan for only $270 a month each with no co-pays, paid scrips and a total out of pocket of less than three grand if we do get sick. ( 270 after the ACA discount) Until we found that plan I was ready to just take the fines as I can't see making the co-pay plus 40% of the services after you meet a stupid high deductible.
Luckily for me one of the covered scrips is my breathing medicine that cost $250 a month so really adding the rest of the insurance is only going to cost me $20.
Now then Colorado has it's own system and getting thru it was pure heck. I had a expert mess up my app, overstate my income and yet still got me on medicaid. Once that happened I couldn't get it changed in time for the deadline because the three agencies involved had no idea what the other was doing. I ended up spending near a week on the phone and at their offices getting it cleared up.
I heard on the news that they are looking at the cost of the policies offered here as they are anything but affordable.
WOW..... Politics and religion all getting mixed together. I hope everyone will "play nice" so that we don't give Terry gray hair.
I still believe this is an important topic to fulltime RV'ing. It is the largest expense we have in our budget, bigger than fuel, bigger than campgrounds, bigger than our food budget. It's over double any of those items for us.
I'm just happy that I can be RV'ing.
Life is good.
Edit by moderator: Removed comments related to "cause." Terry
-- Edited by Terry and Jo on Wednesday 18th of March 2015 08:17:32 AM
When I went to bed last evening, this thread was OK to me with regards to its content. This morning, it was a completely different circumstance, so I deleted out some comments that involved getting into a political discussion. No more warnings on this one. Any more political or religious statements and I close the thread. Keep the topic on insurance and its costs or sources, not the causes for it.
For everyone's benefit that may not be involved with many forums, I've been on a fair number and politics and religion are the worst topics to discuss. Those that still allow discussions on those topics can get very contentious and users have been banned for comments that they have made. Howard and Linda have wisely set the rules that those topics not be discussed here.
Terry
Here's a question for anyone who knows the facts about the ACA. I was searching the exemption requirements to avoid the penalty for not having insurance and it lists the first exemption as "homelessness." Would full time RVers qualify as being homeless under the ACA as they have no home, apartment or permanent residence? Surely a mailbox at a mail forward service can't count as being a "home" can it? It would sure be a tight squeeze at night. ;) How about those living in a car or a van? If a van qualifies, how about a class B, an old beat-up travel trailer, etc.? Where is the line drawn?
Chip
-- Edited by Sushidog on Wednesday 18th of March 2015 01:32:09 PM
Chip,
We're not homeless we're just houseless.
Well I guess one could argue that FTers still have a roof over our head. But by that same argument, a bum living under an overpass is not homeless, as he's got a nice sturdy roof over his head too.
Chip
There are a whole host of exemptions that were listed above - not sure what it is your looking for?
Barb
My employer just changed our health insurance. We now have 2 options, both offered by Humana. Choice #1 is a "bronze" level plan that they pay 60% of and is ACA compliant. They also offer a "Gold" level plan which is similar to the one we had last year. Though considerably more money, my employer offers to pay 80% which makes it a little more affordable. However the second plan does not offer free preventative care, (as is required to make it ACA compliant). It is a new plan and Humana can not tell me if it is ACA compliant or not, (they are researching it) yet I must make my election before April 1. Meaning that I will probably be socked with a $721 tax penalty at the end of the year - unless I can find a way to avoid it. Just trying to think outside the box, so I'm not forced to select the lesser plan.
Or I could just drop my coverage, pay or the $721 penalty and bank the $3,800 difference in premium savings (after I've paid the penalty, as the 20% share of the premiums I must pay is $4,524) and use it to pay my medical expenses for the year. Last year both my DW and I were lucky and didn't have to go to the doctor. If we have to go this year we would have still had to pay up to $6,200 in deductibles and co-pays (under the gold plan) and a total of up to $12,700 under the bronze plan. I really don't have the earnings to be able to pay these outrageous fees, so the insurance really wouldn't do us much good (except for small medical expenses - which a $3,800 medical savings account would cover and any left over would be saved for next year.) Even with the best insurance, I still could not pay the co-insurance and deductibles for a major medical event, so we would not be able to get treatment anyway, making it would be the same as if we had no insurance at all. Decisions, decisions.
Chip
9 years of fulltiming and this is the first year that one of us (Dave) has used more than our premiums - we're at $8000 and counting that insurance has paid out for his scalp squamous cell carcinoma treatment. Added in to that will be our normal checkup costs. Hopefully next year we're back to just routine checkups - all of our meds are generic and only one of them goes over our $20 deductible every 90 days. So most years we pay more in premiums than we get in benefits.
And as long as you have health insurance, you will get treated even if it takes you time to pay off the deductibles. And if all of a sudden you have chest tightness and you need stents (~$85,000 bill for 3 stents & Dave's 23 hr hospital stay) you will be so glad you have it. I remember in 1993 when I had ovarian cancer surgery our deductible was $10K, which I paid over several months while the bills for surgery, chemo, lab work, and monthly CT scans was well over $300K.
You just never know when something bad will happen which is why we have insurance. Spread the risk out over a large group.
Barb
I'm not complaining about buying insurance. I just don't want to pay for insurance and the aca penalty just because the policy didn't meet one government requirement. If I could be legitimately classed as homeless then I could get the decent insurance and not have to pay the penalty. Why should the government force me to buy a lower grade of insurance just to avoid a tax penalty? But that might be just what happens.
BTW, when I as living in California, 21 years ago, the hospital I went to get some life saving surgery for my ex-wife would not have admitted her if I did not pay the estimated bill in full in advance. No, I didn't have coverage on her as my employer wouldn't pay any portion of my wife's insurance (and her employer didn't offer her insurance), so it would have cost me about $300 week to get her covered and I just couldn't afford it. Yes, the hospital would have let her die - or sent her to another inferior hospital with the same results. As a consequence I was forced to cash in my entire 401k (which means now I must retire on social security), max out my credit cards, and take out a loan for the balance - so I understand the value of insurance.
I've never been to a doctor who didn't require the co-pay up front, before he would see you. I didn't know they would see you even with good insurance if you didn't pay your portion in advance. I know you won't get your prescription drugs without paying your (sometimes outrageous) co-pay up front, and of course skipping your meds could be quickly fatal. I assumed your deductible was handled similarly.
Glad Dave survived his heart problems and you made it through your cancer, Barb. I lost both my parents to cancer, so I understand how devastating it can be. I just figured when something really bad happens I'll make my peace with God and die. Though we all want to live to a ripe old age, we know we must pass one day - some sooner than others (my mother died much younger than I am now). If you simply can't afford the treatment, even with the best insurance you can afford, what choice do you have?
Chip
-- Edited by Sushidog on Friday 20th of March 2015 09:58:00 PM
Barb
Don't think getting to Medicare age is going to solve all your health insurance problems. My wife and I are both over 65. We have Medicare and a Plan "F" supplement that covers 100% of what Medicare does not cover. (they (Medicare) only cover 80% of the bill, if that.)
This way we have no unexpected costs in our health coverage. For this no surprise insurance coverage it is right close to $7,000 a year in premiums.
We have no drug coverage, but between the $10 for 90 days @ Walmart/Walgreen's and Mexico it is less expensive than a drug policy.
I figure we are ahead, had my 3rd back surgery, I quit looking at the bills past $150K and the wife's stroke, 4 days in intensive care, way over $100K. My $7k a year is cheep.
Jim
-- Edited by jlb27537 on Saturday 21st of March 2015 11:44:52 AM
That is $300/month for each of you for your supplemental and it doesn't include prescriptions? Do you have Part D coverage with Walgreen? If not, then it may be VERY expensive later when you really need the Part D coverage because the drugs you NEED are not generic.
Barb
We are over 65 on Medicare and have Plan F high deductible. Our monthly payments are low and we pay out of pocket until our deductible is met. We save quite a bit each month. In a calendar year we would never pay more than what a regular Plan F would have cost us. We can switch to a regular Plan F anytime. We also have Part D (drugs) and the cost for that is a drop in the bucket compared to everything else. We were getting our meds through Walmart, but just switched to the plans mail order service and now our drugs are free except for the Part D cost.
Regarding: Affordable Care Act For You..... No, it's not for me ...
I just turned 50 and I have been uninsured since 1995. I was self employed for more than 10 years and there was no way our business could afford healthcare insurance for my family and my employee’s families without going broke. We made sure our employees were covered under workers comp and we purchased accident insurance for everyone too. That was the best we could do and fortunately none of us needed health or accident insurance while we were in business for ourselves. In 1995 I had a new business, four young children, wife and a mortgage so I definitely needed health insurance. After my 18 months of Cobra (from previous employer) ran out I was scrambling to find insurance but all of the personal/family plans were too expensive and I couldn't purchase it through my business without offering it to all of my employees too (per state law) and our new business couldn't afford it. The only insurance we could afford were the catastrophic plans with 50K-100K deductibles so we opted for good term life insurance. I figured if something happened that was serious enough to wipe out our savings and make us sell the business and our home, I would just let nature take its course and my wife would have plenty of money to pay off all debt, live comfortably, and send the children to college. My wife and I each purchased a large term policy with riders for each of the children. If something had happened to my wife or one of the children I would have sold everything I owned and begged, borrowed, and stolen to make sure they were taken care of but I was disposable...LOL
Although I dislike the ACA, I did plug my info into their website (now I will probably be a victim of identity theft..
) because I wanted to avoid the penalties if at all possible. The prices were outrageous so I decided to pay the penalty for not having health insurance..it's still cheaper to pay the penalty than to pay a huge amount for poor health coverage.
In my opinion we should all have access to good reasonably priced health coverage but that probably won't happen in my lifetime. Frivolous lawsuits, greedy drug companies, greedy doctors, hospitals, etc. will keep us from ever having reasonably priced healthcare in this country. When I ask my auto insurance agent why my insurance went up and there were no tickets or accidents, I am told it's due to all of the other bad drivers in the state of AZ.....I am paying for others to be bad drivers! How is this a fair system? Same will happen with the ACA, the healthy people will pay for the people that may not take care of themselves. I'm already supporting the bad drivers in AZ I'll be darned if I will pay healthcare for people that may have abused their body or haven't taken care of themselves. This has become a nation of "I'm entitled to have everything without working for or earning it" and it's sad. ACA is yet another way to make the people dependent on you know who.
-- Edited by azrving on Sunday 22nd of March 2015 01:49:06 PM
"be darned if I will pay healthcare for people that abuse and don't take care of themselves. "
Are you suggesting that I did something on purpose to end up with ovarian cancer? That I wanted to be born with a genetic mutation that lead to polycystic ovarian syndrome which lead to ovarian cancer? That my sister, with the same genetic mutation, was to blame for that, or that she shouldn't have had the surgery when the pathology labeled the condition as pre-cancerous?
Insurance whether car, health, dental, etc. is a way to spread out the risks over a large population. Every business I know carries insurance on all sorts of things. Most of the time there is no claim. But when there is, the insurance is there to help make you whole. Did you never have insurance on your house?
It is easy to suggest that you don't need health insurance - try saying that just after you've been told you have a cancer with a 25% chance of survival.
And really, if you have a heart attack and show up at the ER with no insurance, do you expect us to let you die at the curb unless you can put up the hundreds of thousands of dollars it is going to cost to treat you (the angioplasty to see what is wrong will run upwards of $75,000)?
Everyone benefits when everyone is covered. Better coverage leads to better preventative or early intervention which leads to a reduction in costs and a healthier society - something we all should want. A lot of us want to go to universal coverage, but I'm not sure I'll live long enough to see that happen.
Barb
I never suggested you caused your medical condition. I'm glad you were able to afford health coverage in 1993 (well before the ACA)....I cannot. I am well aware that not all medical issues are self induced but many are. The point I am trying to make is I shouldn't be forced into paying for insurance for anyone other than myself and I certainly shouldn't be penalized for not wanting to contribute to the ACA. I'm not asking anyone to help me with my healthcare and I can assure you I never will. I am free to purchase auto, home, or life insurance but I am being forced into paying for healthcare I do not want. You can't justify that and still call this a free country.
I did edit my original post...as it is not my intention to offend anyone.
-- Edited by azrving on Sunday 22nd of March 2015 01:57:54 PM
Amen!
If you want to purchase insurance that covers ONLY you, then that isn't insurance, that is being self-insured with no insurance company involved. ALL insurance involves spreading the risk among a POOL of individuals/companies. And when you have a pool that includes people of all ages, then not all of the coverages offered will apply to you. I really think that people don't understand the principles behind a risk pool when looking at any type of insurance. Since the ACA covers people from birth to 65, it is reasonable that some in the pool will benefit from pregnancy coverage. Just the same as women will be paying premiums but not getting the benefit of prostate screenings. Pregnancy coverage means more prenatal care and a decrease in the number of premies - which saves everyone a lot of money, not only in terms of direct medical costs of supporting a premie, but also in terms of educational costs later in life. Just the same as finding any cancer (prostate screening or mammogram) early means the total cost is less and we have better outcomes.
When you get to 65, the pool no longer contains women who will need pregnancy benefits, so none are included. That is an example of a much smaller targeted insurance pool.
You don't say what state you reside in, but I do know a lot of fulltimers that have found the ACA to be very affordable and have policies with lower deductible at lower costs than what you are quoting.
Barb
If anyone is gambling and trying to cheat the system.. it is them. As mentioned.. it's a pool based system..and some folks are finding it hard to slip through cracks.. So it's working..not that I know much about it.. other than my plan, and what I pay , and get.
read soon.. as this one is sure to be deleted..lol
Better medical care and a better medical system is a requirement going forward. But the politicians have managed to screw this up so badly that it is amazing.
Chip
Thanks Glenn, we have bookmarked that and will certainly look into this in the near future. We looked into other faith based sharing programs and they looked like they were set up to be self pay and then you negotiate the amounts with the health providers and then submit the bills to the heath sharing for review and payment after they determined which amounts qualified, is this how Liberty is set up?
I've mentioned in other areas about a website called "Good-RX" where one can put in the name of one's medicine and a location. The results of that search will provide area pharmacies that carry that medication, and for how much, with a Good-RX coupon. I just got a medication at the pharmacy last week with a cash price of $65 cash for just over $20.
Neither Jo or I have any insurance for prescription medicines, and this works well for us. When we first got set up with our new doctor, what she used to pay for 90 days with three prescription went from $150 down to $50.
At least it is an option that one can try. Simply print out the coupon and take it to the named pharmacy. Much better than grocery coupons.
Terry
Terry and Jo you are so right about Good Rx. I have a prescription that is normally over $400 for 3 months ( that's for generic). We started getting it from Canada and saved about $100. But with Good Rx I we paid $170 for the last 3 month refill. I am definetely going to check into all our meds with them.