Obamacare Explained in One Sentence

Most people don't have electrician's or plumber's licenses, or a clue on the carpentry talent to actually and literally "build" their own home. If we all did, every contractor in America would be out of work and we'd be back in a huge recession or depression.

Would you advocate do-it-yourself brain surgery too?

Nate,

You mean this part?

But what Pelosi was saying is remarkably easy to explain. The Republican spin targets the phrase "so you can find out what's in it," taking it entirely out of context. It's no coincidence, though, that the next words out of the speaker's mouth were, "away from the fog of the controversy." A paragraph earlier Pelosi referenced "the controversies within the bill."

Lambeau wrote:Most people don't have electrician's or plumber's licenses, or a clue on the carpentry talent to actually and literally "build" their own home. If we all did, every contractor in America would be out of work and we'd be back in a huge recession or depression.

Would you advocate do-it-yourself brain surgery too?

Where I live, those licenses aren't required (weren't then and still aren't) for doing work on your own property. But, I have had many years of (practical) experience with all of the things involved in building mine......even though my working career was in the computer/Information Technology areas.

The brain surgery comparison is a little far fetched. It's easier to pull a nail and start over if you bend one. On the other hand, any brain (or other) surgeon had to have their FIRST one. Doctors who graduated at the bottom of their class are still called "Doctor".

From observing the "law makers" and how they have gone about their work, it would appear that they aren't very good at their trade. All you have to do is look at how many laws get challenged in courts of appeal or get overturned? Obviously, that isn't "brain surgery", either.


Den

.

NateS wrote:snip ...
So criticize the law if you don't like it, and criticize the Republican-majority Supreme Court that held it IS constitutional if you don't like their decision; but please don't make yourselves look silly by trying to shock us by calling it "THE law that was passed without Congress reading it!"

Regards, Nate

You mean the Supreme Court that just said that drug companies and Monsanto can't be sued? .... or the Supreme Court that said that corporations have the same rights as any individual person but not the other way around? Or maybe you mean the Supreme Court that recently said that Miranda Rights are no longer required? Well perhaps you think that the just because the Supreme Court decides something, it is always the right decision ... wake up!!

Silly humans ...

DreamStalker wrote:

NateS wrote:snip ...
So criticize the law if you don't like it, and criticize the Republican-majority Supreme Court that held it IS constitutional if you don't like their decision; but please don't make yourselves look silly by trying to shock us by calling it "THE law that was passed without Congress reading it!"

Regards, Nate

You mean the Supreme Court that just said that drug companies and Monsanto can't be sued? .... or the Supreme Court that said that corporations have the same rights as any individual person but not the other way around? Or maybe you mean the Supreme Court that recently said that Miranda Rights are no longer required? Well perhaps you think that the just because the Supreme Court decides something, it is always the right decision ... wake up!!

Silly humans ...

Where did you get the idea that I like this Republican-controlled Supreme Court? I am disgusted with most of their decisions, except for the one on the PPACA. I thought it was ironic that the person complaining loved all of their decisions that I disliked, hence the irony.

Best wishes, Nate

123.Shawn T.W. wrote:Nate,

You mean this part?

But what Pelosi was saying is remarkably easy to explain. The Republican spin targets the phrase "so you can find out what's in it," taking it entirely out of context. It's no coincidence, though, that the next words out of the speaker's mouth were, "away from the fog of the controversy." A paragraph earlier Pelosi referenced "the controversies within the bill."

Do you fall for every word-game twist the Repulsicans come up with? If you like all the pants-on-fire distortions and lies they come up with, then no amount of truth-telling and untwisting will change your mind.

She was telling the public that when they see the bill passed, they will see that it does not contain the nonsense of death panels and other harem-scarem nonsense babbled by people like the Sarah Palin chorus.

Regards, Nate

Wulfman... wrote:

NateS wrote:When you are proposing to build a house, you study the architect's renderings and drawings and elevations and specs - you don't look at photographs of bags of nails and screws and piles of lumber and building materials.

Respectfully, Nate

From my point of view, this was a bad analogy.
Thirty-five years ago, I built my own home (it is very energy-efficient and of minimal maintenance.....I was "green" before it was fashionable and "Mother Earth News" was one of the periodicals I subscribed to).......and I still live in it.
Anyway, I designed it, bought all the materials and know where everything is located.......because I put them there. I know where every 2x4, 2x6, 2x12, every inch of wiring and every inch of plumbing is located. I know where all the 8, 10 and 16 penny nails are and every finishing nail. That goes for everything inside and outside.

So, I guess my point is that if YOU "build it", YOU should know what's in it......every last detail.
If you contract someone to build it for you, then YOU DIDN'T BUILD IT

Den

.

Den,

Yes, from your point of view it is a bad analogy. But your point of view on building a house is, you must admit, relatively unique. Few people who want a home built possess your skills and knowledge to do it themselves.

Best wishes, Nate

hyperlexis wrote:

glen4cindy wrote:Well, that surely explains it all!

Before Obamacare was even thought of, I applied for private insurance because do contract work.

I was classified HIGH RISK because a few months prior had a surgical procedure to CORRECT acid reflux.

I was told that had I KEPT the reflux, I would not be high risk, even though acid reflux causes CANCER!

So, I was offered a plan that Illinois has called I-CHiP which is administered by Blue Cross. It is pretty much a BCBS PPO plan. Only, it is very expensive.

The bad thing is that the premium goes up about every 6 months.

About a month ago, I receive a letter, stating that.......according to the provisions of "The Affordable Care Act" and "as provided by law" my premiums are to go up
by 150%! Seeing that I already pay about $550 per month, That makes MY "Affordable Care" $825 per month!

So, I call BCBS and I am told that my plan is going up by that amount because it will not exist any longer! So, basically what I will be placed into, unless I choose something
different, is the most expensive possible coverage they can find.

And supposedly, I have to wait until October, when I will actually have "Affordable" options to chose from, and per the provisions, none of my "pre-existing" conditions will be held against me.

We shall see.

Well surprise -- but you have that plan because of one of the earliest benefits of the ACA, to have high risk plans for people too sick to even be insurable. Without the ACA you would be left with no private insurer wanting to insure you, like millions of other Americans with pre-existing conditions. Illinois has actually had a high risk plan for uninsurable people for years and yes, it's costly, but if you have cancer, it's the difference between life and death. (It was mandated by the state government, so is that State Obamacare?). Obamacare opened up such high risk plans, nationally, as a concession to a plan floated by Sen. John McCain who wanted such high risk plans.

On October 1 when the exchanges open, you will be able to buy an individual policy in a community 'risk pool' with everyone, no longer just extremely sick people as you are now. So your monthly premium should go down. Under the ACA, the only factors to consider an individual's monthly premium is his age and whether or not he smokes. Your ailments do not affect your personal premium. So you should pay no more than other people in your geographic area of the same age.

And if you are lower income you may qualify for additional subsidies on the premium costs.

".......but you have that plan because of one of the earliest benefits of the ACA......"

Really? So, the earliest parts of the "Affordable Care Act" began in 2004? So, George Bush is the author of "The Affordable Care Act" and NOT Barack Obama like everyone thought, and it really isn't Obamacare, it's Bush-Obamacare, because I've had this plan since then.......

That explains it.

glen4cindy wrote:About a month ago, I receive a letter, stating that.......according to the provisions of "The Affordable Care Act" and "as provided by law" my premiums are to go up
by 150%! Seeing that I already pay about $550 per month, That makes MY "Affordable Care" $825 per month!

So, I call BCBS and I am told that my plan is going up by that amount because it will not exist any longer! So, basically what I will be placed into, unless I choose something
different, is the most expensive possible coverage they can find.

Is that for an individual plan? If so, your current premium is not out of line at all, unless you have extremely high deductibles and copays. Current cost for BCBS standard plan for Federal Employees is about $600 per month, total. And Uncle is a huge buyer. Don't know how the $825 premium will compare with employer plans.

Why not do your own Brain Surgery, it's not Rocket Science. Just a hacksaw, sharp pin knife,needlenose pliers and soldering gun (to control blood loss), all the tools needed,(It's what they used in the hospital to install my defibulator) Jim

I support Obamacare for a few reasons.

1) My child has health care for a 'pre-existing condition' that before she was denied because of. We're not shelling out $600 an inhaler and $2,000 a set of chest xrays and an MRI

2) My friends son who had a heart transplant because of Barth Syndrome. Now has healthcare.

3) Because of Obamacare instead of being passed off for my chronic pain as 'Fibromyalgia' and a 'pre-existing condition' they are now retesting me for a Genetic Connective Tissue Disorder and insurance is covering my tests and my Rheumatologist.

For us personally? It's been good. And if we have to pay a bit more in taxes for it? I'm ok with that. My husband has no complaints either. Then again.... he's from Canada.

SleepyonMagnoliaSt wrote:I support Obamacare for a few reasons.

1) My child has health care for a 'pre-existing condition' that before she was denied because of. We're not shelling out $600 an inhaler and $2,000 a set of chest xrays and an MRI

2) My friends son who had a heart transplant because of Barth Syndrome. Now has healthcare.

3) Because of Obamacare instead of being passed off for my chronic pain as 'Fibromyalgia' and a 'pre-existing condition' they are now retesting me for a Genetic Connective Tissue Disorder and insurance is covering my tests and my Rheumatologist.

For us personally? It's been good. And if we have to pay a bit more in taxes for it? I'm ok with that. My husband has no complaints either. Then again.... he's from Canada.

Yep, that's what's got the Republicans knickers in a twist, a piece of legislation was passed when Obama was president that actually might benefit you and me. That cannot be allowed, Obama's record must not include anything that smells of success, that must be destroyed at all costs. Be nice if they applied that bulldog tenacity that they've shown to solving real problems that they can do and we need to do something about, instead of only repealing and defunding matters that are now laws. Which was overtly admitted to by Boehner the other day (repealing and defunding being their most important objectives)...a record of very little to no forward progress on any of our national problems for this Congress, remarkable in itself.

idamtnboy wrote:

glen4cindy wrote:About a month ago, I receive a letter, stating that.......according to the provisions of "The Affordable Care Act" and "as provided by law" my premiums are to go up
by 150%! Seeing that I already pay about $550 per month, That makes MY "Affordable Care" $825 per month!

So, I call BCBS and I am told that my plan is going up by that amount because it will not exist any longer! So, basically what I will be placed into, unless I choose something
different, is the most expensive possible coverage they can find.

Is that for an individual plan? If so, your current premium is not out of line at all, unless you have extremely high deductibles and copays. Current cost for BCBS standard plan for Federal Employees is about $600 per month, total. And Uncle is a huge buyer. Don't know how the $825 premium will compare with employer plans.

Wow!

Yes, that is an individual plan, not sponsored by any employer with a $1000 deductible.

I was hoping too do better, but, it does not appear that any relief is in sight.

Wulfman... wrote: From observing the "law makers" and how they have gone about their work, it would appear that they aren't very good at their trade. All you have to do is look at how many laws get challenged in courts of appeal or get overturned? Obviously, that isn't "brain surgery", either.

"Law makers" is a euphemism. Congress, especially the House, is filled with Politicians. Always has been, always will. Its interesting that while some of the framers of the Constitution (real Law Makers) went to Congress, very few stayed for long. We all have our opinions of what it takes to be a member of the House, but being an intellectual is not high on too many lists.

The details of most complex laws today are written by Lobbyists and other "experts," and explained to the politicians with Power Point.

BTW, there's a myth that the ACA is thousands of pages and impossible to read. It really isn't that bad; during the great debates I frequently went to the draft to figure out who was telling the truth. (Oddly, it was never Sarah Palin.) The problem is that when you add amendments to make political statements that subtly conflict with other parts, there are unforeseen consequences.

There are obviously parts of the bill that need adjustment, but that will be difficult as long as the Republicans will only consider full repeal. After a few years when people understand the benefits the mood will change; in a few years it won't be thought of as a government program.

"I've been on food stamps and welfare, did anybody help me out? No. No." - Craig T. Nelson to Glenn Beck
"keep your government hands off my Medicare." - said at a town meeting

The odd thing is that most of the ACA is not about "the government taking over the health system," its about the government setting standards about what must be provided and who is eligible. The person in GA will still get insurance from the same company and go to the same doctor. Its just that he won't be able to to get a "$10000 deductible, 30% copay, lifetime capped, doesn't cover half of real life issues, and gets taken away as soon as you actually get sick" policy. There's a reason why people that have those plans will see their rates go up: they didn't have what most people call "health insurance," and under Obamacare they will.

glen4cindy wrote:About a month ago, I receive a letter, stating that.......according to the provisions of "The Affordable Care Act" and "as provided by law" my premiums are to go up
by 150%! Seeing that I already pay about $550 per month, That makes MY "Affordable Care" $825 per month!
...
that is an individual plan, not sponsored by any employer with a $1000 deductible.

I was hoping too do better, but, it does not appear that any relief is in sight.

I don't know your location or age, but if you want to compare the the MA rates (current plans are pretty close to next year's ACA rates) search for Mass Health Connector. I plugged in 60 y/o man and got 50 plans, ranging from a "Bronze Low" at $471 and a Gold High at $1296 per month. The highest deductible is $2000, highest out of pocket max is $5000, all have Rx coverage. A $1000 deductible, $2000 max is "Silver Low" and ranges $654 to $938, depending on the carrier. Some of the cheaper carriers have restrictions, networks, etc. We've had no problems, though we did have to fight to get services from a particular provider that normally didn't work with our carrier. I was quite surprised at the range for essentially identical coverage and further surprised that it was sometimes cheaper for family members to have individual plans than a family plan. Its definitely worth it to do all of the comparisons. (Hopefully your state is one that actually has a variety of options.)

If your family income (AGI) is under $100,000, you could be eligible for a tax break. For two people, the cutoff is about $60000 (four times the "poverty rate"), plugging two people and $60000 into the Kaiser calculator yields a Max Premium of $5700, and ages 50 and 60 would have an average cost of $13581 ("Silver Low"), so it predicts a tax credit subsidy of $7881. You get the same subsidy even if you take a different level plan.

Just for kicks I plugged in a 25 y/o, making $20000, i.e. young adult making $10 an hour. Average annual cost is $3000, subsidy $2000, out of pocket premium cost: $1000. If go with Bronze, the out of pocket is only $500, or under $50 a month.