2014 Health Insurance Premiums - Ouch!

[ericad]

Why does everyone want to move to France with Erica, but no one wants to be in Australia with me?

We have socialized medicine
We have socialized education
We have the only economy in the world that sailed through the GFC without stalling
We have great relations with everyone
We have the most kickass flora and fauna
We have two seasons of weather: perfect and just a little less perfect
We have the most beautiful beaches in the world
Oh yeah, and we speak English so you don't even have to learn anything more than driving on the other side of the road.


Seriously, for whomever asked about other countries' successful healthcare programs, find the link I posted back around page 5/6. It is a direct MSN Money comparison of about 15 different countries - their percent of GDP spent on health, life expectancy, obesity rates, smoking rates, etc. It is clear to see which systems are working, in terms of cost and life expectancy (hint: it's socialized medicine).

Thanks justginger, cuz I've been scratching my head trying to figure out how to marry everybody and I can't work out the numbers.

On a serious note, it's been my dream forever to visit Australia. Something about your country really stirs my soul. I hope to make it there one day soon.

 

[monarch64]

I tried to gain some actual insight into what's happening with everyone's premiums by reading this thread that AMC80 started. I posted again today, wondering if anyone hear is actually experiencing any luck with the online marketplace. I'm feeling pretty frustrated right now that my post has gotten lost among all the freaking arguing over whether it's a want or a need to have a cell phone. Seriously?

If all you can do is argue your point over and over again without coming up with new ideas or solutions (like Matata mentioned) then by all means, DO leave the thread when you start getting upset. Some of us are trying to actually learn something.

 

[justginger]

Why does everyone want to move to France with Erica, but no one wants to be in Australia with me?

We have socialized medicine
We have socialized education
We have the only economy in the world that sailed through the GFC without stalling
We have great relations with everyone
We have the most kickass flora and fauna
We have two seasons of weather: perfect and just a little less perfect
We have the most beautiful beaches in the world
Oh yeah, and we speak English so you don't even have to learn anything more than driving on the other side of the road.


Seriously, for whomever asked about other countries' successful healthcare programs, find the link I posted back around page 5/6. It is a direct MSN Money comparison of about 15 different countries - their percent of GDP spent on health, life expectancy, obesity rates, smoking rates, etc. It is clear to see which systems are working, in terms of cost and life expectancy (hint: it's socialized medicine).

Thanks justginger, cuz I've been scratching my head trying to figure out how to marry everybody and I can't work out the numbers.

On a serious note, it's been my dream forever to visit Australia. Something about your country really stirs my soul. I hope to make it there one day soon.

You know I'll be here to show you around! It's fun to have people down here - such an excuse to do the touristy things.

makhro - everyone is aghast that our unemployment is at 5.8% now, the highest in years. So the ball's been dropped there. Funnily, I don't know anyone who is looking for a job? Wine and cheese is pretty average, but we have sausage rolls and Tim Tams instead! Homes are bloody expensive, but it's because everyone has champagne taste these days. DH and I will have our place paid off in 10 years, so if you're not a princess you can certainly find something suitable.

 

[ericad]

I tried to gain some actual insight into what's happening with everyone's premiums by reading this thread that AMC80 started. I posted again today, wondering if anyone hear is actually experiencing any luck with the online marketplace. I'm feeling pretty frustrated right now that my post has gotten lost among all the freaking arguing over whether it's a want or a need to have a cell phone. Seriously?

If all you can do is argue your point over and over again without coming up with new ideas or solutions (like Matata mentioned) then by all means, DO leave the thread when you start getting upset. Some of us are trying to actually learn something.

I mentioned upthread that our exchange has been down due to high volume, so I haven't been able to get on to price out premiums. I briefly was able to access the site earlier in the week and was quoted around $300/month for some different high deductible plans ($5k annual deductible) and around $550/month for lower deductible plans, but then the site froze up on me, so I don't know how accurate that was, or what the details of those plans are.

I have no desire to leave the thread, but thanks for your invitation to skedaddle. I'll pass.

And I absolutely will respond to any post I like (assuming your post was directed at me). It's my right as a member of PS. I'm entitled like that.

 

[ruby59]

I am slow. I just realized the person above me is Erica from Erica Grace. Gotta delete some posts.

But seriously, I have a question about turn around time to see a doctor in France or Australia. You read about all these situations where when you have socialized medicine you can wait forever to get in to see a doctor. Is that true?

Also another question and not trying to be a smart a**, but in other countries where all this and that is done for you, do you feel that maybe some people might lose their incentive to work hard, thinking what is the point?

 

[monarch64]

I tried to gain some actual insight into what's happening with everyone's premiums by reading this thread that AMC80 started. I posted again today, wondering if anyone hear is actually experiencing any luck with the online marketplace. I'm feeling pretty frustrated right now that my post has gotten lost among all the freaking arguing over whether it's a want or a need to have a cell phone. Seriously?

If all you can do is argue your point over and over again without coming up with new ideas or solutions (like Matata mentioned) then by all means, DO leave the thread when you start getting upset. Some of us are trying to actually learn something.

I mentioned upthread that our exchange has been down due to high volume, so I haven't been able to get on to price out premiums. I briefly was able to access the site earlier in the week and was quoted around $300/month for some different high deductible plans ($5k annual deductible) and around $550/month for lower deductible plans, but then the site froze up on me, so I don't know how accurate that was, or what the details of those plans are.

I have no desire to leave the thread, but thanks for your invitation to skedaddle. I'll pass.

And I absolutely will respond to any post I like (assuming your post was directed at me). It's my right as a member of PS. I'm entitled like that.

Thank you for reiterating. I really appreciate having this thread and hearing from others some points of comparison, vague though they may be.

You are free to do whatever you want. I wonder if you could take a minute and think about how frustrated you were over some things that were said a few pages back, and then maybe you will know how frustrated I am that this thread has gone so far off topic. My post was not directed at only you, but others who are arguing the same things over and over again. Oh, forget it. I don't even disagree with most of your points, Erica, but I'm so tired of wading through argumentative comments here, on other sites, FB, etc. that my patience is pretty much threadbare altogether at this point. I hope you have a nice weekend. I certainly did not mean to offend you personally, and I am very sorry if I have.

 

[crown1]

Almost everyone in my neighbourhood still uses their landlines.

I do too. I don't trust cell phones as a primary, but I know many many people who do.

I guess the point is I don't see the objection. Help for having A phone has been going on for a long time. Pretty uncontroversial in most circles. Until of course, it's a CELL phone, perceived as being distributed like candy by a brown president, then the railing begins. Of course, when you read up on the program, you see that it's EITHER a landline or a cell, because in some markets, apparently, cell is actually cheaper.

I have a land line. No cell phone. I do not consider either necessary but convenient. An elderly relative taught me about turning wants into needs. My parents taught their children to live on what they made. My husband and I lived by that code. We taught our child the same. That child has a doctorate degree and is not too proud to work any job if need be. I am thankful each day for what I have and try my best to share that with others. I get email from someone who has as a tagline: the government can not give you anything it does not take from someone else. That has given me something to think about.

eta: i understood your point that the government does not pay for the phones. the government referenced tagline does not refer to the government paying for phones. just another thought i had.

What if you have an emergency and need police or fire or ambulance? Is access to a phone really a want and not a need? I could care less what people did 50+ years ago when emergency services were very different, and technology was very different, so please don't tell me that your grandpappy lived without a phone, etc.

In present day, is a phone necessary for one's safety and health? What about children in the household, in the event of an emergency? Let the kid who is having a seizure just croak, because the family is poor and a phone is a want, and not a need?

I'm utterly sickened by the callousness I'm reading on this thread.

You miss the point entirely! And I find it callous that you make fun of my grandfather, who I did not reference. My grandfather had neither phone, electricity nor running water and died in 1957. That is not the point. The point is for all to live within their means. That includes the federal and state government. There is no free lunch nor pie in the sky. We are in trouble now because some people seem to think that if they have children the government is automatically going to make them have everything they need to care for those children. It is simply not financially possible. We need to learn to manage to take care of ourselves again. I am sorry if that hurts you but we all need to try our best to work on becoming a family who can care for itself and not count on the government. If you think I am without fears for my own survival you would be wrong. That does not mean I think someone else is going to step up and do it for me. We are living in a time when some even complain that cash is to hard to deal with. I say they should be grateful to have it to pay with. Wants and needs they are two different things.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

My son-in-law is self employed and has a BCBS high deductible policy that is under $200 a month. So I am not exactly seeing that these new polices are a great bargain. They might be for a poor person who doesn't have to pay for the whole premium, but WE are paying the rest of the $300-500 a month that they don't have to pay. The health insurance and medical care pricing needed to be dealt with before the universal coverage idea was put into place. My son-in-law has a minimal coverage policy that he can afford, while he'll be subsidizing others who'll have better coverage than him and won't be paying but a fraction of the cost. Something is wrong with that picture.

 

[msop04]

The point is YOU can verify your own musings with a magical tap of a key. You can actually support your stances when asked to or before having to be asked, with CORRECT and complete info, not with half-truths, because while you are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to half-correct or made up facts. Or to ask everyone else to find them for you or "correct you if you're wrong". You can even determine that there is NOT a 28th amendment before you make this history teacher's wife wonder why he bothers every day.

If you are unprepared to back your own stances and do some of your own research, be prepared then, to get "corrected when you're wrong", because I and others on here - as you're finding - only have so much patience with intellectual laziness.

If I were at home, I could do this... however I am using a breakroom computer, which limits the sites that I can go to (Pricescope, yes... many other news type sites, strangely no... not a lot of them). Also, any time we go to an "unknown" or barred site, it sends a flag to corporate. Not good or bad, just a flag -- but I don't want to be under the microscope any more than I can help it, ya know?

I can ask if I'm correct, it is the choice of others if they'd like to share any info... and your claims of intellectual laziness are funny to me. I'm intellectually lazy for not being able to check up on something (while asking if I'm correct), but I'm a "bad person" who doesn't care about others well-being because it irritates me of the laziness of those who defraud the welfare system.

As far as the "28th Amendment," that is totally my fault. I admit to falling for that one, as I was at home and could have easily looked it up. Although after being corrected, I recalled learning about the "27 Amendments" in grade school -- but still felt rather stupid, as I had succumbed to the media propaganda.

I don't see it necessary to resort to name calling or eluding that one's educators must have wasted their time because I failed to look some things up (whether I was in a situation where I could do so or not). With such accusations, you sound as if you have never been wrong or asked for clarification. I'm sorry you got so upset over my mistake. Again, my mistake.

On a more positive not, maybe this thread has already shown an upside to the ACA with all the heart palpitations, anxiety, loss of sleep, and rage issues it has been said to cause! Yes, ma'am!! Get right up and go straight to your cardiologist, PCP, or psychiatrist and we'll all be covered! LOL (and just so no one gets all hysterical, I mean this as nothing more than a joke)

Whew!! ...now where's that martini??!! (don't worry, my health care plan is required to cover substance abuse, should I get a little CRAAAAAZAAAYYYY!!!)

 

[recordaras]

But seriously, I have a question about turn around time to see a doctor in France or Australia. You read about all these situations where when you have socialized medicine you can wait forever to get in to see a doctor. Is that true?

I am neither from France or Australia, but have lived in countries with socialized medicine my whole life before moving to the US. You can't imagine how shocked I was when I tried to schedule my first physical in the US. When I called, I thought that I had some free time coming up later that week, and it would be very convenient if I could go see the doctor then. Turns out physicals are scheduled 6 months out. Never in my life have I had to wait more than a couple of days for an appointment with a generalist. If it's a non-urgent visit to a specialist, 7-14 days waiting at most. If it's urgent, your generalist calls and you are able to see a specialist the same day or the next day.
So yes, I find it moderately amusing when I hear Americans tell stories of "waiting in line for months" to see a doctor in Canada et al.

 

[ericad]

I am slow. I just realized the person above me is Erica from Erica Grace. Gotta delete some posts.

But seriously, I have a question about turn around time to see a doctor in France or Australia. You read about all these situations where when you have socialized medicine you can wait forever to get in to see a doctor. Is that true?

Also another question and not trying to be a smart a**, but in other countries where all this and that is done for you, do you feel that maybe some people might lose their incentive to work hard, thinking what is the point?

Naaaah, don't be silly! I love a spirited debate, and concede that not everyone on earth will agree with me, despite my compulsive need to have the last word.

I've spoken to many people in France. They work hard, but don't have the same mentality that we have here in the sense that they don't strive to work loads of OT, or to work 60 hours a week for more money or to climb a corporate ladder. They're hard working but not to the same degree of ambition that we see here. The people I know generally want a comfy life, but they don't seem to strive for wealth. My husband, for example, has a strong sense of "good enough." I, on the other hand, am never satisfied with what we have. I feel constantly driven to have more, more, more. Is it my nature? Is it my culture? Probably some of both.

 

[ericad]

Almost everyone in my neighbourhood still uses their landlines.

I do too. I don't trust cell phones as a primary, but I know many many people who do.

I guess the point is I don't see the objection. Help for having A phone has been going on for a long time. Pretty uncontroversial in most circles. Until of course, it's a CELL phone, perceived as being distributed like candy by a brown president, then the railing begins. Of course, when you read up on the program, you see that it's EITHER a landline or a cell, because in some markets, apparently, cell is actually cheaper.

I have a land line. No cell phone. I do not consider either necessary but convenient. An elderly relative taught me about turning wants into needs. My parents taught their children to live on what they made. My husband and I lived by that code. We taught our child the same. That child has a doctorate degree and is not too proud to work any job if need be. I am thankful each day for what I have and try my best to share that with others. I get email from someone who has as a tagline: the government can not give you anything it does not take from someone else. That has given me something to think about.

eta: i understood your point that the government does not pay for the phones. the government referenced tagline does not refer to the government paying for phones. just another thought i had.

What if you have an emergency and need police or fire or ambulance? Is access to a phone really a want and not a need? I could care less what people did 50+ years ago when emergency services were very different, and technology was very different, so please don't tell me that your grandpappy lived without a phone, etc.

In present day, is a phone necessary for one's safety and health? What about children in the household, in the event of an emergency? Let the kid who is having a seizure just croak, because the family is poor and a phone is a want, and not a need?

I'm utterly sickened by the callousness I'm reading on this thread.

You miss the point entirely! And I find it callous that you make fun of my grandfather, who I did not reference. My grandfather had neither phone, electricity nor running water and died in 1957. That is not the point. The point is for all to live within their means. That includes the federal and state government. There is no free lunch nor pie in the sky. We are in trouble now because some people seem to think that if they have children the government is automatically going to make them have everything they need to care for those children. It is simply not financially possible. We need to learn to manage to take care of ourselves again. I am sorry if that hurts you but we all need to try our best to work on becoming a family who can care for itself and not count on the government. If you think I am without fears for my own survival you would be wrong. That does not mean I think someone else is going to step up and do it for me. We are living in a time when some even complain that cash is to hard to deal with. I say they should be grateful to have it to pay with. Wants and needs they are two different things.

Lol, how could I have made fun of your grandfather when you didn't even mention him in the first place? I said to please not tell me about the olden days when people lived without phones because that's not relevant to what people need in order to be safe TODAY. I meant the collective "grandpappy". That's all. You're reading too much into what I said.

I simply disagree as to whether a phone is a need or a want. Indoor plumbing, IMO, is a need and not a want. So is electricity. And clean running water. And nutritious food. Education. A roof over one's head/shelter. Access to emergency services (via phone). And affordable health care (see how I came full circle?) IMO, these are all needs and not wants. You are free to disagree, of course. But now we're just beating a dead horse.

 

[ericad]

I tried to gain some actual insight into what's happening with everyone's premiums by reading this thread that AMC80 started. I posted again today, wondering if anyone hear is actually experiencing any luck with the online marketplace. I'm feeling pretty frustrated right now that my post has gotten lost among all the freaking arguing over whether it's a want or a need to have a cell phone. Seriously?

If all you can do is argue your point over and over again without coming up with new ideas or solutions (like Matata mentioned) then by all means, DO leave the thread when you start getting upset. Some of us are trying to actually learn something.

I mentioned upthread that our exchange has been down due to high volume, so I haven't been able to get on to price out premiums. I briefly was able to access the site earlier in the week and was quoted around $300/month for some different high deductible plans ($5k annual deductible) and around $550/month for lower deductible plans, but then the site froze up on me, so I don't know how accurate that was, or what the details of those plans are.

I have no desire to leave the thread, but thanks for your invitation to skedaddle. I'll pass.

And I absolutely will respond to any post I like (assuming your post was directed at me). It's my right as a member of PS. I'm entitled like that.

Thank you for reiterating. I really appreciate having this thread and hearing from others some points of comparison, vague though they may be.

You are free to do whatever you want. I wonder if you could take a minute and think about how frustrated you were over some things that were said a few pages back, and then maybe you will know how frustrated I am that this thread has gone so far off topic. My post was not directed at only you, but others who are arguing the same things over and over again. Oh, forget it. I don't even disagree with most of your points, Erica, but I'm so tired of wading through argumentative comments here, on other sites, FB, etc. that my patience is pretty much threadbare altogether at this point. I hope you have a nice weekend. I certainly did not mean to offend you personally, and I am very sorry if I have.

It's ok monarch, sorry if my tone was snippy. I agree that we've gone off the rails. Let's just all vow to bring it back on topic.

Has anyone else out there gotten any rate quotes via the exchange yet?

 

[ruby59]

I am slow. I just realized the person above me is Erica from Erica Grace. Gotta delete some posts.

But seriously, I have a question about turn around time to see a doctor in France or Australia. You read about all these situations where when you have socialized medicine you can wait forever to get in to see a doctor. Is that true?

Also another question and not trying to be a smart a**, but in other countries where all this and that is done for you, do you feel that maybe some people might lose their incentive to work hard, thinking what is the point?

Naaaah, don't be silly! I love a spirited debate, and concede that not everyone on earth will agree with me, despite my compulsive need to have the last word.

I've spoken to many people in France. They work hard, but don't have the same mentality that we have here in the sense that they don't strive to work loads of OT, or to work 60 hours a week for more money or to climb a corporate ladder. They're hard working but not to the same degree of ambition that we see here. The people I know generally want a comfy life, but they don't seem to strive for wealth. My husband, for example, has a strong sense of "good enough." I, on the other hand, am never satisfied with what we have. I feel constantly driven to have more, more, more. Is it my nature? Is it my culture? Probably some of both.

Just me, but I would find that robotic and a stagnant way to live. Part of what makes America great, imo, is the desire to work hard and better yourself. Challenging yourself is not only to obtain wealth but important for personal growth, imo.

 

[ericad]

I am slow. I just realized the person above me is Erica from Erica Grace. Gotta delete some posts.

But seriously, I have a question about turn around time to see a doctor in France or Australia. You read about all these situations where when you have socialized medicine you can wait forever to get in to see a doctor. Is that true?

Also another question and not trying to be a smart a**, but in other countries where all this and that is done for you, do you feel that maybe some people might lose their incentive to work hard, thinking what is the point?

Naaaah, don't be silly! I love a spirited debate, and concede that not everyone on earth will agree with me, despite my compulsive need to have the last word.

I've spoken to many people in France. They work hard, but don't have the same mentality that we have here in the sense that they don't strive to work loads of OT, or to work 60 hours a week for more money or to climb a corporate ladder. They're hard working but not to the same degree of ambition that we see here. The people I know generally want a comfy life, but they don't seem to strive for wealth. My husband, for example, has a strong sense of "good enough." I, on the other hand, am never satisfied with what we have. I feel constantly driven to have more, more, more. Is it my nature? Is it my culture? Probably some of both.

Just me, but I would find that robotic and a stagnant way to live. Part of what makes America great, imo, is the desire to work hard and better yourself. Challenging yourself is not only to obtain wealth but important for personal growth, imo.

That's because you're projecting your cultural values onto people of a different culture. I was making broad generalizations too, just to be clear. I'm sure France is full of ladder climbers and slick go-getters too. My husband would say that you've been brainwashed into thinking that working your fingers to the bone is needed for personal growth. He'd say that he'd rather work his 35 hours and spend his 6 weeks of vacation with his family, traveling, and growing personally in a different way.

As I said earlier, not one French person I spoke with would trade places with us for anything in the world. They love their country, they love their culture, and they are happy as clams. I find that admirable and refreshing, and not robotic or stagnant.

This past Tuesday I took the day off. My daughter and I cooked a fridge full of meals together (from scratch!), we did schoolwork, we went ice skating, and we played a board game, all before 3pm. I never would have been able to do that if I were an executive working 60+ hours per week. I chose to be a small business owner so that I could live a low stress life and have flexibility to spend time on the things that are important to me. My day to day job is rewarding but I'm not driven, nor do I want to be. I certainly don't feel stagnant or robotic. I have no ambition to be the largest antique jeweler on earth. I'm content with what I have.

But as always, people vary, and what's right for you will differ from what's right for others.

 

[packrat]

Why does everyone want to move to France with Erica, but no one wants to be in Australia with me?

We have socialized medicine
We have socialized education
We have the only economy in the world that sailed through the GFC without stalling
We have great relations with everyone
We have the most kickass flora and fauna
We have two seasons of weather: perfect and just a little less perfect
We have the most beautiful beaches in the world
Oh yeah, and we speak English so you don't even have to learn anything more than driving on the other side of the road.


Seriously, for whomever asked about other countries' successful healthcare programs, find the link I posted back around page 5/6. It is a direct MSN Money comparison of about 15 different countries - their percent of GDP spent on health, life expectancy, obesity rates, smoking rates, etc. It is clear to see which systems are working, in terms of cost and life expectancy (hint: it's socialized medicine).

Ugh stop tempting me! I'd have to move w/out my husband but the kids would love it. It's my dream. Plus...you guys have shaaaarks!!!!

 

[crown1]

Almost everyone in my neighbourhood still uses their landlines.

I do too. I don't trust cell phones as a primary, but I know many many people who do.

I guess the point is I don't see the objection. Help for having A phone has been going on for a long time. Pretty uncontroversial in most circles. Until of course, it's a CELL phone, perceived as being distributed like candy by a brown president, then the railing begins. Of course, when you read up on the program, you see that it's EITHER a landline or a cell, because in some markets, apparently, cell is actually cheaper.

I have a land line. No cell phone. I do not consider either necessary but convenient. An elderly relative taught me about turning wants into needs. My parents taught their children to live on what they made. My husband and I lived by that code. We taught our child the same. That child has a doctorate degree and is not too proud to work any job if need be. I am thankful each day for what I have and try my best to share that with others. I get email from someone who has as a tagline: the government can not give you anything it does not take from someone else. That has given me something to think about.

eta: i understood your point that the government does not pay for the phones. the government referenced tagline does not refer to the government paying for phones. just another thought i had.

What if you have an emergency and need police or fire or ambulance? Is access to a phone really a want and not a need? I could care less what people did 50+ years ago when emergency services were very different, and technology was very different, so please don't tell me that your grandpappy lived without a phone, etc.

In present day, is a phone necessary for one's safety and health? What about children in the household, in the event of an emergency? Let the kid who is having a seizure just croak, because the family is poor and a phone is a want, and not a need?

I'm utterly sickened by the callousness I'm reading on this thread.

You miss the point entirely! And I find it callous that you make fun of my grandfather, who I did not reference. My grandfather had neither phone, electricity nor running water and died in 1957. That is not the point. The point is for all to live within their means. That includes the federal and state government. There is no free lunch nor pie in the sky. We are in trouble now because some people seem to think that if they have children the government is automatically going to make them have everything they need to care for those children. It is simply not financially possible. We need to learn to manage to take care of ourselves again. I am sorry if that hurts you but we all need to try our best to work on becoming a family who can care for itself and not count on the government. If you think I am without fears for my own survival you would be wrong. That does not mean I think someone else is going to step up and do it for me. We are living in a time when some even complain that cash is to hard to deal with. I say they should be grateful to have it to pay with. Wants and needs they are two different things.

Lol, how could I have made fun of your grandfather when you didn't even mention him in the first place? I said to please not tell me about the olden days when people lived without phones because that's not relevant to what people need in order to be safe TODAY. I meant the collective "grandpappy". That's all. You're reading too much into what I said.

I simply disagree as to whether a phone is a need or a want. Indoor plumbing, IMO, is a need and not a want. So is electricity. And clean running water. And nutritious food. Education. A roof over one's head/shelter. Access to emergency services (via phone). And affordable health care (see how I came full circle?) IMO, these are all needs and not wants. You are free to disagree, of course. But now we're just beating a dead horse.

I agree that water, electricity, indoor plumbing, phones etc. are all the thing to have. I have them, would hate to do without them. But, there are folks in the world who do not have them thus why they are wants not needs. I hope to be able to always have and afford them but we never know. This plays into the insurance debate for me because it is something that one can live without. Is it easy? NO. My point is we can not expect someone else to buy it for us. As a poster above stated, someone was buying the lesser care package and was expecting to subsidize someone else's better coverage. I do not know that is a fact but it certainly seems plausible the way things have been going. You should not be forced to help pay for my insurance. I need to take care of that myself.

 

[amc80]

I tried to gain some actual insight into what's happening with everyone's premiums by reading this thread that AMC80 started. I posted again today, wondering if anyone hear is actually experiencing any luck with the online marketplace. I'm feeling pretty frustrated right now that my post has gotten lost among all the freaking arguing over whether it's a want or a need to have a cell phone. Seriously?

If all you can do is argue your point over and over again without coming up with new ideas or solutions (like Matata mentioned) then by all means, DO leave the thread when you start getting upset. Some of us are trying to actually learn something.

Maybe we need to start a new thread where people can list what they are able to get from the exchange? And we can keep it a bit more on topic. I also have enjoyed learning what the situations are in other countries.

 

[Gypsy]

I think there is a difference between wealthy and SUPER wealthy. Like those who earn tens of thousands of dollars off of interest in just a few hours-to the point where they could give away 90% of their wealth and still live far more comfortably than many of us would ever dare to dream.

A million dollars doesn't go as far as it used to. I'm talking about the mulch-billionares and even (hundreds) millionaires. Sure they worked hard for their money (and I'm not saying they should have to give it away or share it) but how many of those people are rich bc of slave labor or ripping off the little guys (hedge fund fraud comes to mind) and still walk away with their huge bonuses while not giving their employees raises/etc?

To be honest, I don't think it matters how someone earns their money. I may not agree with the circumstances under which someone earns their income, but at the end of the day, it's still their money and it's still not fair to expect the to give it away.

Paying taxes at a rate that's appropriate for one's level of income, without dozens of tax loopholes geared towards helping the wealthy shirk their tax responsibilities, to help fund programs that help society as a whole, aimed at those in need, is not GIVING YOUR MONEY AWAY.

WORD.

 

[makhro82]

I feel like my current life is pretty stagnant and robotic: commute, work, commue, eat , sleep, rinse and repeat. I work hard but I don't think it's necessary for my personal growth while some people do. I'd much rather work a four day work week and have a life that I enjoy. I got my first job when I was 14 so I literally will have to work for 50 years and then I get the last twenty to enjoy myself when I'll probably be too old and broken down to actually do so. My grandmother worked until 72 and only stopped.because she became too busy dying from cancer. I don't want to "live" like that.

I wonder how American happiness compares to other countries.

 

[makhro82]

Almost everyone in my neighbourhood still uses their landlines.

I do too. I don't trust cell phones as a primary, but I know many many people who do.

I guess the point is I don't see the objection. Help for having A phone has been going on for a long time. Pretty uncontroversial in most circles. Until of course, it's a CELL phone, perceived as being distributed like candy by a brown president, then the railing begins. Of course, when you read up on the program, you see that it's EITHER a landline or a cell, because in some markets, apparently, cell is actually cheaper.

I have a land line. No cell phone. I do not consider either necessary but convenient. An elderly relative taught me about turning wants into needs. My parents taught their children to live on what they made. My husband and I lived by that code. We taught our child the same. That child has a doctorate degree and is not too proud to work any job if need be. I am thankful each day for what I have and try my best to share that with others. I get email from someone who has as a tagline: the government can not give you anything it does not take from someone else. That has given me something to think about.

eta: i understood your point that the government does not pay for the phones. the government referenced tagline does not refer to the government paying for phones. just another thought i had.

What if you have an emergency and need police or fire or ambulance? Is access to a phone really a want and not a need? I could care less what people did 50+ years ago when emergency services were very different, and technology was very different, so please don't tell me that your grandpappy lived without a phone, etc.

In present day, is a phone necessary for one's safety and health? What about children in the household, in the event of an emergency? Let the kid who is having a seizure just croak, because the family is poor and a phone is a want, and not a need?

I'm utterly sickened by the callousness I'm reading on this thread.

You miss the point entirely! And I find it callous that you make fun of my grandfather, who I did not reference. My grandfather had neither phone, electricity nor running water and died in 1957. That is not the point. The point is for all to live within their means. That includes the federal and state government. There is no free lunch nor pie in the sky. We are in trouble now because some people seem to think that if they have children the government is automatically going to make them have everything they need to care for those children. It is simply not financially possible. We need to learn to manage to take care of ourselves again. I am sorry if that hurts you but we all need to try our best to work on becoming a family who can care for itself and not count on the government. If you think I am without fears for my own survival you would be wrong. That does not mean I think someone else is going to step up and do it for me. We are living in a time when some even complain that cash is to hard to deal with. I say they should be grateful to have it to pay with. Wants and needs they are two different things.

Lol, how could I have made fun of your grandfather when you didn't even mention him in the first place? I said to please not tell me about the olden days when people lived without phones because that's not relevant to what people need in order to be safe TODAY. I meant the collective "grandpappy". That's all. You're reading too much into what I said.

I simply disagree as to whether a phone is a need or a want. Indoor plumbing, IMO, is a need and not a want. So is electricity. And clean running water. And nutritious food. Education. A roof over one's head/shelter. Access to emergency services (via phone). And affordable health care (see how I came full circle?) IMO, these are all needs and not wants. You are free to disagree, of course. But now we're just beating a dead horse.

I agree that water, electricity, indoor plumbing, phones etc. are all the thing to have. I have them, would hate to do without them. But, there are folks in the world who do not have them thus why they are wants not needs. I hope to be able to always have and afford them but we never know. This plays into the insurance debate for me because it is something that one can live without. Is it easy? NO. My point is we can not expect someone else to buy it for us. As a poster above stated, someone was buying the lesser care package and was expecting to subsidize someone else's better coverage. I do not know that is a fact but it certainly seems plausible the way things have been going. You should not be forced to help pay for my insurance. I need to take care of that myself.

But why because individualistic American culture says so?

As for me I didn't see anything exchange program in my state that beat my employer's cost or coverage in CA. The exchange coverage from what I saw is not good, but it is a start. If there are employer sponsored plans that are worse than that just shows me how much more work needs to go into a comprehensive plan for all.

 

[Matata]

Re: the cell phones. The people who are living out of their cars and trying to pull themselves out of hole do not have the luxury of a landline. And it's damn tough for potential employers to get ahold of them if they also don't have a computer, po box or street address. There are instances where a phone isn't a luxury. What our ancestors managed to live without is irrelevant. Times are always a changin' as are the necessities required to live in those times.

 

[monarch64]

I tried to gain some actual insight into what's happening with everyone's premiums by reading this thread that AMC80 started. I posted again today, wondering if anyone hear is actually experiencing any luck with the online marketplace. I'm feeling pretty frustrated right now that my post has gotten lost among all the freaking arguing over whether it's a want or a need to have a cell phone. Seriously?

If all you can do is argue your point over and over again without coming up with new ideas or solutions (like Matata mentioned) then by all means, DO leave the thread when you start getting upset. Some of us are trying to actually learn something.

Maybe we need to start a new thread where people can list what they are able to get from the exchange? And we can keep it a bit more on topic. I also have enjoyed learning what the situations are in other countries.

Excellent idea. I agree, a lot of what's being discussed in this thread is great. I'll start a new thread.

 

[Christina...]

I hadn't planned to post on this thread at all as I really don't have much to add regarding ACA other than I don't like it for many many reasons. However since this thread has gone off track and someone asked how Obama has specifically increased welfare programs I thought I'd post this interesting and informative article from the Policy Analysis and by Michael Tanner.

Excerpts from the article....


Since President Obama took office, federal welfare spending has increased by 41 percent, more than $193 billion per year.



Some of the increase, of course, is clearly due to the recession. Many of these programs are countercyclical, meaning that they automatically expand during economic downturns. However, increases in both participation and spending were greater during this recession than in previous ones. For example, during the 1980–82 recession, enrollment in food stamps increased by only 635,000, and spending rose by just $124 million (in constant 2012 dollars). During the 1990–92 recession and jobless recovery, enrollment increased by 5.2 million, and spending rose by $9.1 billion. During the current recession (over a comparable three-year period), enrollment increased by 12 million people, while spending increased by $30 billion.15 Of course, this recession was deeper than those previous ones—unemployment peaked at 9.8 percent during this recession versus 7.8 percent in 1992.16 But the dramatically larger increase also suggests that part of the program’s growth is due to conscious policy choices by this administration to ease eligibility rules and expand caseloads. For example, income limits for eligibility have risen twice as fast as inflation since 2007 and are now roughly 10 percent higher than they were when Obama took office.17 More- over, the definition of “categorical eligibility” for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program was expanded substantially in the 2008 farm bill and led to the asset test for eligibility being relaxed, as values of vehicles, retirement accounts, and education savings accounts began to be excluded from the test. Categorical eligibility allows states to declare large numbers of families eligible for food stamps without actually going through the individual eligibility process. Coupled with the fact that Congress allows states to use this determination for families with incomes up to 200 percent of the poverty line, the combination of the two rules allows large numbers of non poor persons to qualify. 18 The same holds true for other welfare programs. For example, the stimulus bill included a provision that created a new “emergency fund” to help states pay for added welfare recipients, with the federal government footing 80 percent of the cost for the new “clients.” This was an important change because it undid many of the incentives contained in the 1996 Clinton welfare reform, which helped states to reduce welfare rolls. Under the new rules, states that succeed in getting people off welfare lose the opportunity for increased federal funding. And states that make it easier to stay on welfare (by, say, raising the time limit from two years to five) are rewarded with more taxpayer cash. The bill even let states with rising welfare rolls continue to collect their “case-load reduction” bonuses.20 According to Obama administration projections, combined federal and state welfare spending will not drop significantly once the economy fully recovers. As we have seen, welfare spending has continued to increase.21 By 2014 this spending is likely to equal $1 trillion per year and will total $10.3 trillion over the next 10 years.22 According to these projections, over the next 10 years, federal and state governments will spend $250,000 for every American currently living in poverty, or $1 million for every poor family of four.23 And that does not include spending under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which will dramatically increase the number of low-income Americans participating in Medicaid.

The American welfare state is much larger than commonly believed. The federal government alone currently funds and operates 126 different welfare or anti-poverty programs, spending more than $668 billion per year. State and local governments provide additional funding for several of these programs and also operate a number of programs on their own, adding another $284 billion per year. That means that, at all levels, government is spending more than $952 billion per year, just short of the trillion dollar mark. Yet for all this spending, we have made remarkably little progress in reducing poverty.

The federal government alone currently funds and operates 126 different welfare or anti-poverty programs.
Indeed, poverty rates have risen in re- cent years even as spending on anti-poverty programs has increased. All of this suggests that the answer to poverty lies not in the expansion of the welfare state, but in building the habits and creating the conditions that lead to prosperity.

The entire article can be read here..
http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/american-welfare-state-how-we-spend-nearly-$1-trillion-year-fighting-poverty-fail

It's hard to argue that welfare hasn't increased under Obama, regardless of whether or not it includes 'new' programs. Throwing more money at the problem hasn't, nor has it historically solved the problem.

Regarding the so called 'Obama phones'...perhaps it's unique to my cell phone provider but any cell phone I have ever had has had the ability to make a 911 call regardless of whether or not I had service on the phone. I recently upgraded phones and did a 'test' call from my old phone, and even though service had been removed I was still able to make an emergency call. I'm also able to plug a landline phone into my wall jack and make a 911 call without having residential service. Perhaps we should just be donating our old phones to people who can't afford service ensuring their ability to make an emergency call in the event it becomes necessary? Or was there some other reason taxpayers should providing this service to people who could not otherwise afford it? I don't mean to come across as angry or bitter, but my family has to make sacrifices and choices regarding what we can and can't afford, cell phone service is an elective expense, not at all comparative to electricity or running water. If financial circumstances required us to make a choice between running water and cell phone service, I thing we could collectively make that decision in 1 second flat. Some of us seem to be confusing necessity and convenience. There is no doubt that cell phones have made our lives more convenient, but it's hard to justify them as a necessity considering that most of us didn't even own them until the past 20 years.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Is that Obama's fault too? What are some examples of this administration "giving more and more to those who choose not to work"?

I don't recall any other administration in recent history giving away such luxury items as cell phones?? ...correct me if I'm wrong, please. And, no, I think Bush was another bad president who happened to be in office when terrorists attacked us. We then went to war. Blaming all of our problems on the previous administation is ridiculous. It's what's done to try to "correct" these problems that interests me. If the national debt is out of control, then don't have your administration blame the previous, yet do the exact same thing. Do something about it. Don't continue to spend just like the admins to which you place all the blame. That is all.

I received the free phone and now i'm waiting for the free car...

 

[Dancing Fire]

[quote="ericad|1380906027|
Entitlement policies have been in place for decades. Why are you blaming this administration? What about what 8 years of Bush did to our country? Where was the cap on spending then?

Is that Obama's fault too? What are some examples of this administration "giving more and more to those who choose not to work"?[/quote]



FYI...there are more Americans on welfare than ever.

 

[ksinger]

[quote="ericad|1380906027|
Entitlement policies have been in place for decades. Why are you blaming this administration? What about what 8 years of Bush did to our country? Where was the cap on spending then?

Is that Obama's fault too? What are some examples of this administration "giving more and more to those who choose not to work"?

FYI...there are more Americans on welfare than ever.[/quote]

Oddly, there are also more Americans than ever.....

 

[ericad]

Christina, tax money isn't being used to pay for the phones. See my post up-thread explaining it. The phones are paid for by a non-profit group and they fund the program via donations from telecom companies. These are not tax dollars being spent. That's a myth.

 

[Christina...]

Christina, tax money isn't being used to pay for the phones. See my post up-thread explaining it. The phones are paid for by a non-profit group and they fund the program via donations from telecom companies. These are not tax dollars being spent. That's a myth.

That isn't really true Erica...

http://blog.budgetmobile.com/2013/06/who-pays-for-free-cell-phones-aka.html

 

[Dancing Fire]

[quote="ericad|1380913324|

Some people would be horrified by the above. It's socialism! It's entitlement! But our friends' happiness and quality of life is the benchmark against which I compare life in the US. It's a high bar, and I don't actually believe that this will ever be possible here unless we completely deconstruct the system and rebuild from scratch, but it's what I dream of nonetheless. I have lofty goals, lol.[/quote]



Now go ask Greece, Italy and Spain why their economies collapsed? Two words, socialism and entitlements!