• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.

Health Care Debate Fact versus Fantasy

New posts

beachFool

Beach Fanatic
From the week's Walton Sun

www.waltonsun.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From total truth to pants on fire, let’s bust some health care myths

Last weekend was great. After the coldest winter since the Ice Age, Saturday was a blue-sky, Chamber of Commerce day. At The Seaside Rep’s Pookie’s Patsy Party in Midtown Seagrove, Dread Clampitt closed their set with “Black Rose,” I had never heard a band cover it but I remembered the lyrics.

On Sunday, health care reform legislation passed and Monday morning the sky had not fallen. Then the stock market closed Monday afternoon higher — hardly a harbinger of socialism running amok.

There is a lot of disinformation from both sides regarding health care. The Pulitzer prize-winning PolitiFacts.com   and The Walton Sun combine to bust a few myths.

Here’s a little secret that no politician — liberal, conservative, Democratic or Republican — wants you to know. Even with the legislation that passed the House of Representatives, the fiscal challenge of rising health care costs is still being avoided. Neither Democratic nor Republican politicians seem willing to face head-on the hard and difficult choices our country must make.

Every problem can’t be solved with a tax cut, and costs of government programs can’t be ignored.

Here’s another little secret for you. If you are currently receiving government-subsidized insurance — a.k.a. Medicare — there is no way that gravy train can continue to run at its current speed unless someone pays higher taxes. With or without health care reform, unless benefits are reduced, taxes will be going up. Shoot me if you like, but I’m just the messenger. It’s math.

Bottom line: Americans can’t handle the truth.

According to Minority Leader John Boehner, the legislation would “force Americans off their current health coverage and on to a government-run plan.” The truth is most Americans will see no change at all in their current insurance plans. Mr. Boehner is simply wrong and a greater threat to him is the danger tanning beds pose. President Obama, meanwhile, claims that preventative care provisions in health care reform will save money. The truth is individuals will save money by early treatment but extra screening procedures drive up overall costs.

PolitFact.com   heaps special scorn on lies that go beyond the pale.

Nancy Pfotenhauer gets the “Pants on Fire” award for her insistence that millions of Americans will lose their health insurance coverage under health care reform. The opposite is true. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, 94 percent of Americans will have health insurance. Another “Pants on Fire” prize goes to a chain e-mail that erroneously purports a “Health Choices Commissioner will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None." There will be boards that will make recommendations on a general basis but they will not evaluate individual cases or deny anyone coverage.

Health insurance costs are a constant complaint. Proponents often tout that reform will lower insurance costs. President Obama said, “The costs for families (in the individual market) for the same type of coverage that they’re currently receiving would go down 14 percent to 20 percent.” PolitFacts rated that a half truth. While costs may decrease for some plans, people (like my family) who buy highdeductible, lower-cost plans will see their premiums increase because they will have to buy insurance plans that cover more.

Any reform is akin to rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic unless insurance costs are contained.

If our insurance premiums continue their current trajectory, my wife and I will be paying over $46,000 annually by the time I am Medicare-eligible. The Republican plan touted by Rep. Paul Ryan would replace Medicare for people under 55 with government vouchers for private insurance. Mr. Ryan needs to put down whatever he is smoking if this is the alternative.

If our daughter lived in any other industrialized nation her pre-existing condition (Crohn’s Disease) would be treated so that she could enjoy a normal life. However in this nation, which I still believe is the greatest ever, she does not qualify for individual health insurance. Our alternatives are A). we bankrupt ourselves; B). let her go untreated, or C). hope she qualifies for group coverage.

The debate should be what kind of a nation we want to be.

Buz Livingston is a certified financial planner. He operates Livingston Financial Planning Inc. focusing on hourly financial planning and investment management. Contact him directly at 850-267-1068 or at buz@ LivingstonFinancial.net  .
GetContent.asp

BUZ LIVINGSTON
Just Plain Talk
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Health insurance costs are a constant complaint. Proponents often tout that reform will lower insurance costs. President Obama said, “The costs for families (in the individual market) for the same type of coverage that they’re currently receiving would go down 14 percent to 20 percent.” PolitFacts rated that a half truth. While costs may decrease for some plans, people (like my family) who buy highdeductible, lower-cost plans will see their premiums increase because they will have to buy insurance plans that cover more.


Healthy individuals who currently enjoy high deductible plans will see their costs rise substantially. If you're 30-40, have an HDHC, and rarely visit the doctor, your probably paying around $1500.00 a year. Once this law kicks in the same person would have to pay around $5000.00 a year.

You won't see Obama trumpeting this achievement in his weekly radio address, I can assure you of that.
 
Similarily, families will see their premiums rise to around 13K a year assuming they are paying less today.
 
Last edited:
30Ashopper, where are you finding these numbers? I would rather take that extra premium I'd be paying and pay for a couple of families.
 
30Ashopper, where are you finding these numbers? I would rather take that extra premium I'd be paying and pay for a couple of families.

eInsurance estimates for currently available high deductible plans, and CBO estimates for the cost of an approved "bronze plan" once the mandate kicks in.

I had an HDHC when I was 41, and I paid around $1500.00 a year. When the mandate kicks in, my plan would not be legal, and I would have to purchase a plan that fits within the guidelines Obamacare sets out for "bronze" coverage. The CBO estimates the cost of a plan like that in 2016 will be around $5000.00 per year.

I am Obamacare's *****!
 
Last edited:
Then, pay the fine for not buying, right? My plan was $208/mo. with, I think, a $1,000 deductible and higher copays, maybe $40/visit. RX Brand was $30 and Generic was $15.

I don't understand how this law can make a plan illegal?
 
Then, pay the fine for not buying, right? My plan was $208/mo. with, I think, a $1,000 deductible and higher copays, maybe $40/visit. RX Brand was $30 and Generic was $15.

I don't understand how this law can make a plan illegal?

One of the ironies of Obamacare - someone who purchases a healthcare plan specifically designed to lower healthcare expenditures gets punished through a 2% taxable income fine... revenue that's used pay for somebody elses non-cost controlling healthcare coverage.
 
You can't use common sense with Progressives. They just see you as a speedbump.

Progressives are going to lose so bad they will be afraid to use the Progressive label. They will go back to calling themselves democrats and liberals so they can get elected again.
 
I would like to be the kind of country that takes care of it's older people and it's poor people, but allows the working people, people whose families make less than $88,000 per year, to suck it up and lose everything if they get sick. And for those who are already sick and can't get coverage -- sucks to be you. Get a job (but only with a large corporation with more than 200 employees, so you don't lose your job after being put through medical underwriting).

Wait, no...I would prefer the other kind of country, actually. The kind that cares about personal responsibility. If you live in this country and you get very ill, you do not go without treatment. If that was the case, people might be really reluctant to go without insurance. But those who choose to (or let's face it, have to) go without insurance are not contributing to the healthcare system, a system that shifts costs to the paying patients and where trying to figure out the real price of anything is so impossible as to make any kind of market based controls a fantasy. We are already paying for the healthcare of these people, only it's being delivered as inefficiently and expensively as possible -- late and in the ER. The uninsured are contributing little or nothing. No one turns them away from the emergency room when they are truly sick or in danger of losing life or limb.

An open market for insurance policies and a requirement for personal responsibility...what is socialist about that?
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter












                               
Back
Top