Anyone ElseTerrified about Repeal of ACA Bill
Comments
-
Medicare is just a "benefit" of our getting old, lol. Well, at least there's one, lol.
0 -
Hi notbrokenjustbent, Medicare is NOT based on what you paid into it. It provides the same benefits to all after the age of 65. Hope that eases your mind a little.
0 -
bew.... yes it certainly does! Thank you much.
0 -
Pupmom, I missed your response. Yeah, never thought I would be looking forward to birthdays cuz it brings me closer to Medicare. Go figure. I see I can also ride the train for .70 as opposed to $3.20 in a few years. Also free coffee at McDonald's. Who Hoo!
0 -
Has anyone read about the Medicare X idea being talked about by Democrats? Essentially, this proposal gives consumers under 65 the ability to buy into Medicare. The plans would have the same networks and costs as Medicare plans, though low-income consumers could be eligible for subsidies. I think it sounds promising. Any thoughts?
0 -
NotBroken, don't forget the senior discount movies! So much to be grateful for!
0 -
Shells, I have only vaguely heard about it, but that plan does sound promising. Have Dems proposed an age floor for buying in?
0 -
It sounds like any age could apply. Here is link I was reading:
0 -
Medicare is based on tuning 65. A premium is taken out of social security. You can go on line medicare.com or . Gov and all the info is explained in detail.
0 -
Shells, I have seen other proposals floated about such as being able to open up Medicare to people 55 or 50 or older. (I remember Hillary entertaining that idea). They would need to pay some kind of premium but again the premise is that at around the age of 50 or 55, health issues arise. If the sicker with pre-existing could buy into the Medicare pool the prices of the ACA would go down. I personally like the idea but it seems like it is not solving the underlying problem meaning skyrocketing costs and unaffordability. It seems like it is just cost shifting expenses and subsidies from one government program to another and adding to our huge deficit. Regardless, something must be done and soon but with the split in Congress I believe we will stay in gridlock. Can we at least get prescription prices under control? Likely not given politics, money and strong pharm lobbyists. Can we crack down on fraud and waste? Likely not due to incompetence.
The advancement of medical science is a true marvel. Think about all our advancements in procedures, instrumentation and diagnostic tools, and drugs. Transplants has become a regular procedure and years ago we never heard of an MRI, CT or PET scan. Science is growing in leaps and bounds and along with advancement comes costs. It is no doubt why our insurance has gotten so out of control.
I will add one more thought. Competition leads to better care and at reduced rates. Examples of price control are Lasik and cosmetic surgery. Both are not covered by insurance and you will find that Lasik prices have become extremely competitive as is cosmetic surgery. Cosmetic surgery was once something only the rich and famous could afford, (remember Zsa Zsa Gabor) but again prices have been stabilized or dropped over the decade. Once insurance is outta the loop prices go down. I am thinking this adds to the argument of single payer?
0 -
Notbroken, if you edit your post and hit “enter/return” at the end of the link it will be “clickable”
0 -
Nope, it's mostly the tax cuts (TCJA).
Republicans' big corporate tax cut is a big reason why the deficit is growing
The deficit, which is the difference between how much tax revenue the federal government brings in and how much it spends, is on track to hit $1 trillion in 2019. The laws enacted in the last year will add $2.4 trillion to the national debt by 2027.
There are two main reasons this is the case: First is that Republicans changed the tax laws, permanently cutting the corporate tax rate by 15 percent and temporarily cutting the individual rates. In 2018, the federal government's revenue was only up 0.4 percent — one of the lowest growth rates in half a century. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan group that advocates for fiscal responsibility, the slow revenue rate is in large part due to the tax bill. Taking inflation into account, federal revenues were actually down between 4 to 9 percentthis year because of the tax cuts.
The second reason the deficit rose is because the government also increased how much it's spending. Republicans agreed to a massive budget deal with this year, in order to give the military the biggest funding boost in history. To compromise with Democrats, the budget deal also hiked up funding for domestic programs.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) graphed out the deficit, showing how the tax law (TCJA in the chart, a.k.a. the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act) is the biggest contributor to the deficit increases. The federal government came into 2018 with a base level of $515 billion in deficit spending:
0 -
Thank you Serenity! I'm hoping if/when the Senate and Presidency change in 2020, Dems can straighten out this mess.
0 -
Thanks Melissa. All fixed.
0 -
Looking like it will be two years of gridlock with nothing getting done. It was interesting to watch the drama unfold live over the wall issue. Nancy, Schumer and Trump were going at it and it was evident that there will be no meeting of minds on anything.
I remember the fear of losing Obamacare but doing nothing is hardly a solution either. 0 -
at least it's not being repealed...
0 -
Just wanted to add to some of the info above regarding Medicare and eligibility and cost. Everyone at 65 is eligible for Medicare, but you do actually qualify for your individual costs based on how many quarters you have worked, or whether you qualify based on your own work history, or the work history of your spouse. If you have not worked enough quarters, you can buy in to Part A. The other parts of Medicare also have their own premium costs which may be income based, and there are possible costs associated with Medicare supplements if individuals choose them in addition to Medicare coverage. The link below outlines the Medicare costs for 2019.
https://www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-costs/medicare-costs-at-a-glance
0 -
Obamacare thrown out
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp...
Saying still sign up for next year. Deadline is tomorrow the 15th. Will be appealed..
0 -
Sometimes I just feel like the world is chewing me up and spitting me out.
0 -
they're saying it probably won't survive on appeal..
0 -
Everyone knew how the judge would rule. It seemed obvious that without the mandate it could not be viewed as a tax and therefore the entire law was unconstitutional. I get that but don't understand what that means going forward. So now it goes to Congress to fix? Ugh... good luck with that.
0 -
Think of how many people will be throw aways!!!! As Paul Ryan may say , "Takers not Makers".
0 -
So Trump wants pre-existing to be covered and let private industry dictate price but if a BC dx can cost millions, how much would an insurance company charge for coverage? Also didn't Obamacare get rid of lifetime caps? Once that million dollar cap is reached one is cut off? Scary sh*t.
0 -
I am posting these links on a couple of threads:
If there are coverage junkies out there watching the various proposals, there is a good summary of the various Democratic proposals here: https://www.vox.com/2018/12/13/18103087/democrats-...
and an interesting libertarian-leaning proposal here: https://niskanencenter.org/blog/ahca-catastrophic-... (aspects could be promising BUT it seems to say that it achieves cost savings primarily through lifetime caps - so that's a no-go.)
0 -
Lumpie, your name cracks me up. Thanks much for your post. I have spent a good deal of time today reading everything I could find on this issue and I saw nothing as comprehensive as your links. Very interesting and informative and thanks again for sharing.
0 -
Time for another blue wave to hit in 2020!
0 -
Rosabella, that blue wave, maybe tsunami, is practically guaranteed!
0 -
Pupmom and Rosabella, I have to agree. Republicans lost the House over this issue and Congress Rep can't be happy about this ruling.
0 -
Saw this article and had to share:
Administration may put spotlight on negotiated rates for medical care
The Trump administration is exploring the possibility of requiring hospitals and other health care providers to disclose reimbursement rates negotiated with health insurers. HHS is seeking public input on whether patients should have access to the discounted prices for health care services before receiving care, and federal officials said the move marks a major step toward a possible pricing transparency rule.
{Access to full article requires a WSJ subscription.}
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-...
0
