CSN Login
Members Online: 2

You are here

ACA repeal - latest attempt.....

adman's picture
adman
Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2012

It now looks like our friends in the GOP want to take the 'pre-existing' condition provision away From the ACA. 

This sounds like such better healthcare for all, doesn't it? :) 

Hd67xlch's picture
Hd67xlch
Posts: 149
Joined: Apr 2016

IMO, the Federal Govt should not be in the health care business, other than medicare and veterans care.

adman's picture
adman
Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2012

it's always predictable & interesting that Medicare is OK.

I get the VA argument. We have to take care of our military for their service. Totally agree. 

JerzyGrrl's picture
JerzyGrrl
Posts: 760
Joined: Jun 2016

When the government wasn't involved, my monthly premiums as a fairly healthy individual were almost $700 for what was mainly catastrophic care coverage, annual checkups cost me, NO coverage for pre-existing conditions. At the time it was the best I could find. Yeesh. 

It was a fine line between paying a majority of my spendable income on premiums, and wondering if I should "bet the farm" (or, house) on "how bad could it be" to be a MIA (medically indigent adult). After seeing the bills from this surgery, I'm so glad this didn't all hit when I was insurance-less. My car is way too small to live in.

Because of the Affordable Care Act, I had insurance that made it reasonable for me to seek medical care and my RCC was found and taken care of. My first follow up scan, too. We'll see what's ahead. 

Abunai's picture
Abunai
Posts: 173
Joined: Oct 2016

There are certain places on the Internet, this place included, where I'd prefer to be able to go and not be subjected to politcal bickering. 

adman's picture
adman
Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2012

Sorry YOU think this is political. It's a fact. IMO, the GOP authors of this proposed bill, are the ones that HAVE made this political!

icemantoo's picture
icemantoo
Posts: 3284
Joined: Jan 2010

Abunai,

 

Tell that to the Kidney Cancer Association whose political trolls offrnd myself and others.

 

 

Icemantoo

Abunai's picture
Abunai
Posts: 173
Joined: Oct 2016

I've not seen that, iceman. Maybe I haven't been around long enough to have seen the Kidney Cancer Association political trolls.

I'm not saying I'm offended by anything anyone else posted, I just get enough political bickering everywhere else on the Internet. I'd hoped this would be a place I didn't have to see that.

I'll just be more discerning in the discussion threads I choose to click on.

CSN_Simone's picture
CSN_Simone
Posts: 62
Joined: Nov 2013

Just a brief reminder guys. While everything is discussed here at CSN, there are some things worth remembering in the Terms and Conditions. Politics are not off limits entirely, but all posting on CSN needs to abide by these terms. Nothing in this post has violated these terms, just a reminder of things to be aware of. 

Thanks for your cooperation.

Simone

CSN Support Team

 

"No User shall use the Service to advise or attempt to influence the political views of other Users about specific political parties, specific politicians, or specific bills, acts, laws or statues."

 

JerzyGrrl's picture
JerzyGrrl
Posts: 760
Joined: Jun 2016

The presenting of widely differing views doesn't happen very often, but I really appreciate those times when obviously different opinions are expressed on the kidney forum, people are respectful. That's what makes this such a safe and supportive site. If any of us start bickering about a topic or attacking others, we do certainly deserve to be "taken aside," have our inappropriate actions pointed out to us, and appropriate responses taken.

On the other hand, there are bound to be things related to our healthcare and treatment plans and options that we feel strongly about.  We're indeed LIVING with cancer, but that @&#% could kill us which is why we're seeking treatment. So sometimes we rant, sometimes we vent, sometimes we point out the irony, sometimes we express our gratititude, and sometimes our vulnerability about the future's uncertainty is painfully obvious. 

Thanks to all who've had a say in this thread.  It's too bad so many of us have to wait until we have a crisis like cancer to show up on a public forum like this to prove that we really can make nice. On the other hand, a whole lot of people go through life and never find that out.

Not sure that I'd ever recommend getting cancer as an entry level way to learn about communication and getting along, though. 

Bellafelice
Posts: 57
Joined: Sep 2008

I have to add that I love Jerzey Grrls comments-so right on and so well humored.

stub1969's picture
stub1969
Posts: 868
Joined: Jul 2016

Well said, Jerzy.  I appreciate your comments.

Stub

adman's picture
adman
Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2012

well, it's finally done. 

It is interesting that this 'terrible' law must have had a few good things about it, given that Congress felt certain aspects needed to be kept for just themselves! 

Shame on them! 

 

 

Jojo61's picture
Jojo61
Posts: 1310
Joined: Oct 2013

I live in Canada and we have good coverage....a lot of us have supplemental insurance usually through our employment - that usually covers prescriptions, physiotherapy, chiropractor, etc. However the main stuff is covered. Of course it isn't perfect....long waits to see a specialist, no hospital beds, etc. Chemo treatments are covered - ironically kidney cancer therapy (sutent, cabo, etc.) is NOT covered in Ontario (it is in about half the country) because it is an oral medication. So if you have supplemental insurance, it may be covered. However, I do know that we are truly blessed to have this type of healthcare. I am hoping that the best possible healthcare is developed for you all - the last thing you want to do is spend your energy fighting for health care/coverage when you are fighting for your life!

Hugs

Jojo

dhs1963's picture
dhs1963
Posts: 513
Joined: May 2012

The items that really scare me is that the states can decide what is required and is not required.  So, it is possible that they will put on maximum lifetime benefits and eliminate the maximum out of pocket expense for a year.

The former might mean that I would have to change jobs...the latter would mean I can no longer predict my annual costs when budgeting.  I know I will spend 6K a year (max out of pocket for the family), usually by May.

 

medic1971's picture
medic1971
Posts: 200
Joined: Sep 2015

This bill has to go through the Senate and with the way it's written now, it's not going to pass. 

adman's picture
adman
Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2012

According to the CBO - 23 Million insured will lose their coverage.

MEDICARE is also in jeopardy for huge cuts. 

PLEASE write your Senators and Congressman; tell them that WE ALL need much smarter thinking around the 'Healthcare' issue. 

LeslieVail
Posts: 4
Joined: Apr 2012

Hi,

i've met many people that are happy about ACA, it has given them healthcare insurance that was not possible before. However, I've never met anyone that is happy with it who does not get premium assistance from the government. My insurance is 986 per month with a 7150 deductible. I was trying different income levels to see when the subsidies cut off. Surprisingly, that number was about 47000. So according to the rules we have now, someone making 47000 can afford 12000 in premiums and a 7150 deductible. That's 20000 against their 47,000 income. Granted that's a PPO instead of an HMO, but not one of my doctors were included in any of the  HMOs. There weren't any PPOs availalable on healthcare.com.

I haven't the slightest idea on how to solve the problem, I guess all I can do is watch and wait.

dhs1963's picture
dhs1963
Posts: 513
Joined: May 2012

The goal was good, but the implementation was bad.  The problem is, people making 50K, for example, are just screwed.  In my company, I pay 4500/year premium (not bad), for a family plan with a 6000 max out of pocket.  That effective reduces the person making 50K's salary to 40K if they have serious medical issues, or a 20% drop.  In my case, my expenses are nearly the same as that person, amounting to about 6% of my income.  And someone who earns 2x me -- is going to pay the same 10K, or about 3%.

If medical care was a tax, it would be extremely regressive.

We could make it work (I think), if everybody paid 10% of the income to medical care.

adman's picture
adman
Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2012

the '10%' idea makes sense. Maybe the #'s are off, here & there. Maybe it's 12%, or 8%, who knows. 

Whatever it is, if we don't figure out how to manage costs the 'number' will always be going up. 

The bottom line, a 'tax' that we all pay before 'Medicare age' makes sense.

We're all paying one way or the other. When you look at the amount of money 'after taxes' that families are having to come up with each month, and then pay in deductibles if they need to use the insurance, how does this 'not' make sense? 

** IF I'm making $50K and paying $3-$5K a year in premium, and then another $6K to use it, how could anyone not think 10% of $50K doesn't make sense. Even 15% makes sense. When you figure in all of the hassles of managing a plan, finding the right one, and finding doctors that take our insurance, ALL of that time & energy could be used for many more productive pursuits. 

This is an idea that's 'time that has come'. It's time to end the madness of how we deal with healthcare in our country. 

** now reality; this will never pass with the political climate we're in. The word 'Higher Tax' is a non-starter, no matter if it is the smart thing to do! 

adman's picture
adman
Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2012

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/06/14/how-the-senate-health-care-bill-will-drop-people-with-preexisting-conditions/?utm_term=.dda580a06f12

Subscribe to Comments for "ACA repeal - latest attempt....."