Health insurance for youngsters

on that note......closed

Dance Chick wrote:
I know many who are driving their high-end vehicles and shopping at nice stores, eating out a lot,etc. who say they can't afford health insurance so go without.

As a student of human nature for most of my life, I've concluded people 'afford' what they darn well feel like affording.

At the risk of disobeying forum rules, I must say I know many who are driving their high-end vehicles and shopping at nice stores, eating out a lot,etc. who say they can't afford health insurance so go without. THAT is what we object to, and yes, I know we're subsidizing the deadbeats with our higher premiums and higher costs. The jury is out as to how this whole thing will play out.

To the OP, I just called BCBS to see if we can do something about our recent increase and lower the premium with another plan. The answer is no. We could save $50.00 per month, but our ded. would go to $10k per person instead of family and our max out of pocket would go up $10k a year to $20k. So, we'd only save $600.00 a year. Not worth the risk, IMO.

I feel your pain....

paulcardoza wrote:
to the OP:

This is a issue you should have resolved long before making the FT decision. If you have no current healthcare plan that you can continue on until Medicare kicks in, you have to be ready to pay big money.

To those waiting for Obamacare to "take care of them", I sure hope that never happens. The money has to come from somewhere, and I frankly don't want to be subsidizing anyone's early retirement desires. If you want to retire early, more power to you, but pay your own way.

So true. If I have to subsidize someone else's healthcare and early retirement, that delays my own. Even one of the main proponents and architects of the Affordable Healthcare Act, Montana Senator Max Baucus democrat and head of the Senate Finance Committee, called it's current implimentation a "Train Wreck". Like others, my premiums for my high deductible plan has skyrocketed. Nothing "Affordable" has happened to health insurance that I can see. Planning on Obamacare as your salvation from high insurance costs is hanging your future on a very tenuous thread.

Dance Chick wrote:

paulcardoza wrote:
to the OP:



To those waiting for Obamacare to "take care of them", I sure hope that never happens. The money has to come from somewhere, and I frankly don't want to be subsidizing anyone's early retirement desires. If you want to retire early, more power to you, but pay your own way.

Agreed 100%.

The people that are insured are already subsidizing those that do not.When the uninsured get sick or injured,they are taken care of
one way or another,usually in the emergency room.Those places do not provide their service for free.It is paid for by the high fees charged those who are insured.So who is actually paying?

To Paulcardoza, As the OP, it's not like we haven't been looking, already have a couple of plans we have been looking at. Was just curious if there was a company out there that we were not aware of. We are not stupid, making the decision to full time is a big one, and needs to be thought out and planned for.

Just because I asked this question, doesn't mean we are expecting for the government to take care if us. This was not posted to be a political debate about "Obamacare".

I know a lot of people are concerned about subsidizing other people's healthcare, but you should know that you are already doing just that.

When someone shows up to the hospital without insurance they are treated and sent a bill. This bill needs to get paid. If they don't/can't pay the hospital eats it and raises prices for those that can pay or have insurance. Obamacare means we will have less uninsured people and the hospital will get paid more often.

Some people without insurance go to the emergency room for things that should have been done at a doctors office. The emergency room is a very expensive place. Obamacare means more people will be able to get treated in lower cost doctors offices and thus reducing medical bills and wait times at emergency rooms.

This stuff is complex. Paying more here and less there. Who knows what is best.

paulcardoza wrote:
to the OP:



To those waiting for Obamacare to "take care of them", I sure hope that never happens. The money has to come from somewhere, and I frankly don't want to be subsidizing anyone's early retirement desires. If you want to retire early, more power to you, but pay your own way.

Agreed 100%.

to the OP:

This is a issue you should have resolved long before making the FT decision. If you have no current healthcare plan that you can continue on until Medicare kicks in, you have to be ready to pay big money.

To those waiting for Obamacare to "take care of them", I sure hope that never happens. The money has to come from somewhere, and I frankly don't want to be subsidizing anyone's early retirement desires. If you want to retire early, more power to you, but pay your own way.

dahkota wrote:


Maintaining our current insurance through COBRA is much more expensive then going to the marketplace for the exact same plan. People who think the cost of insurance is going to skyrocket don't realize how much their employer is currently paying for their insurance (which shouldn't change under ACA).

Our COBRA payment is $873 a month for both of us. Since we can't get insurance on the "open" market we would have to get a state plan which would be roughly $1,200 each. So in some cases it is the lowest cost, only option available. However, I totally agree that most people would be shocked if they knew how much their companies are paying on their behalf.

I don't believe for a minute that group or employer based insurance plans won't see their costs go up due to the ACA. Employer plans will have to meet new minimum coverage requirements which will drive costs up.

We have been converting as many of our prescriptions to $4 generics.