Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-05-2014, 01:39 PM   #21
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,705
My guess is that most of the folks here were retired before ACA and the "opportunities" it now affords are considered 'gravy' by most of us.

Not to be blunt, but if one's retirement plan hinges on whether ACA remains/changes/goes away might be an indicator that you're shaving things a bit too close.
__________________

__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is online now  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 11-05-2014, 01:59 PM   #22
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,318
In MA where I live we had "Romney care" which was fully implemented and effective with a 97% of residents with health insurance before we had to switch to the ACA. So if the law is repealed the state will go back to the old system with the only difference being subsidies started @300% of poverty level as opposed to 400% under the ACA.
__________________

__________________
Corporateburnout is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 02:47 PM   #23
Moderator
rodi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 8,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
My guess is that most of the folks here were retired before ACA and the "opportunities" it now affords are considered 'gravy' by most of us.

Not to be blunt, but if one's retirement plan hinges on whether ACA remains/changes/goes away might be an indicator that you're shaving things a bit too close.
Yes and no. I agree to an extent - but not all states had risk pooled policies for those with pre-existing conditions. So if you were a cancer survivor, diabetic, on dialisys, had been treated for depression 20 years ago.... whatever... you were uninsurable unless your state had a high risk pool.

That's the BIGGEST change of the ACA, IMO, as far as ER - the ability to get insurance, outside an employer, prior to medicare age.
__________________
Retired June 2014. No longer an enginerd - now I'm just a nerd.
micro pensions 7%, rental income 18%
rodi is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 03:24 PM   #24
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
I see no way that ALL of the ACA is repealed. Too many of the provisions of the law are very popular, even as some of them are rather unpopular in many circles.
That's very true. Even though Kentucky never actually adopted Obamacare, McConnellcare is very popular.

Mitch McConnell’s puzzling claims on insurance in Kentucky, post-Obamacare - The Washington Post
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is online now  
Old 11-05-2014, 04:18 PM   #25
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,360
I wouldn't be surprised if they agreed to just scrap the employer mandate entirely.

They keep pushing it off anyway, and at the end of the day it isn't critical to the ACA.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckanut View Post
Most likely would be a fix to the 30 hour a week problem that keeps many people stuck in part-time jobs earning less than they should. Or having to cobble together two part time jobs to earn a full time income.

As long as they don't do something stupid, like returning to the days of pre-existing condition exclusions, I think improvements will be welcome.
__________________
Hamlet is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 04:18 PM   #26
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodi View Post
Yes and no. I agree to an extent - but not all states had risk pooled policies for those with pre-existing conditions. So if you were a cancer survivor, diabetic, on dialisys, had been treated for depression 20 years ago.... whatever... you were uninsurable unless your state had a high risk pool.

That's the BIGGEST change of the ACA, IMO, as far as ER - the ability to get insurance, outside an employer, prior to medicare age.
Yes I was told by a broker I couldn't insure my c-spine or anything it was attached to. That's after 6 months of no insurance. No thanks.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Early Retirement Forum mobile app
__________________
MRG is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 04:54 PM   #27
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Live And Learn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Tampa Bay Area
Posts: 1,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
My guess is that most of the folks here were retired before ACA and the "opportunities" it now affords are considered 'gravy' by most of us.

Not to be blunt, but if one's retirement plan hinges on whether ACA remains/changes/goes away might be an indicator that you're shaving things a bit too close.
ACA did two things for me (a) made sure that I could get insurance as I am otherwise uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions and (b) added a bit of "comfort" to help me get over OMY syndrome and not work longer than I need to. My 3% WR includes 28k / year for HC for 2 people. I would not retire if my costs were going to be more than that - which could very well happen if ACA changes dramatically.

Perhaps that is cutting it too close - but when do you draw the line in the sand and say "enough" ?
__________________
"For the time being no discipline brings joy, but seems grievous and painful; but afterwards it yields a peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it." ~
Hebrews 12:11

ER'd in June 2015 at age 52. Initial WR 3%. 50/40/10 (Equity/Bond/Short Term) AA.
Live And Learn is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 05:01 PM   #28
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 16,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
My guess is that most of the folks here were retired before ACA and the "opportunities" it now affords are considered 'gravy' by most of us.

Not to be blunt, but if one's retirement plan hinges on whether ACA remains/changes/goes away might be an indicator that you're shaving things a bit too close.
As other mention - it's the re-existing conditions waiver that makes all the difference for many folks over 50 trying to retire.
__________________
Well, I thought I was retired. But it seems that now I'm working as a travel agent instead!
audreyh1 is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 05:02 PM   #29
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
heeyy_joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Madeira Beach Fl
Posts: 1,403
This country is going to pot. Right Oregon?
__________________
_______________________________________________
"A man is a success if he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night and in between does what he wants to do" --Bob Dylan.
heeyy_joe is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 05:33 PM   #30
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
My guess is that most of the folks here were retired before ACA and the "opportunities" it now affords are considered 'gravy' by most of us.

Not to be blunt, but if one's retirement plan hinges on whether ACA remains/changes/goes away might be an indicator that you're shaving things a bit too close.
Here in New York, the individual market is very hostile. I did not count on my my low-end HI plan's premiums to rise nearly 50% in my first 2 years (2010-2011) of ER. At that super-high pace, I'd be paying $1,600 a month in 4 years from now, and that would start busting my budget. I would have to pay it or buy a policy which would leave me very much underinsured. (I had that underinsured policy from 2011-2013 until the ACA's exchanges went into effect.)

But thanks to the exchange, I was able to buy a reasonable HI plan which was affordable (as in Affordable Care Act) and cost less than the 2009 premium I was paying when I first ERed.
__________________
Retired in late 2008 at age 45. Cashed in company stock, bought a lot of shares in a big bond fund and am living nicely off its dividends. IRA, SS, and a pension await me at age 60 and later. No kids, no debts.

"I want my money working for me instead of me working for my money!"
scrabbler1 is online now  
Old 11-05-2014, 05:35 PM   #31
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by easysurfer View Post
Article is rather limited in scope. It does not even consider the impact of the new Congress reducing ACA funding, which a very real possibility. Only half of ACA spending is mandatory, and half is "authorized" but still "discretionary" and subject to the annual Congressional appropriations process.

http://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files....13/01/8301.pdf
__________________
ERhoosier is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 06:40 PM   #32
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Shelton, Washington
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by David1961 View Post
This is sort of a tangent, but I remember reading in Money Magazine years and years ago where they did a study of how the stock market did depending on which party held the White House and which party controlled Congress, or if Congress was divided. I seem to remember that the best scenario by far for stocks was with a divided government - one party had WH and the other had Congress. Wonder if anyone here can elaborate on this and bring it up to date, as it must have been 20 years ago since I read this.
Not surprising, stock market likes certainty, gridlock has pretty certain outcomes (lack of rule changing).

Yes, I'm bumping my equity allocation up slightly, as a result.
__________________
Jaded salami is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 07:29 PM   #33
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
brewer12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,391
V is for veto.
__________________
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."



- Will Rogers
brewer12345 is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 08:18 PM   #34
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewer12345 View Post
V is for veto.
+1. Plenty of those in the next 2 years. Maybe we start a pool (or poll?) as to the date of the first one?
__________________
Retired in late 2008 at age 45. Cashed in company stock, bought a lot of shares in a big bond fund and am living nicely off its dividends. IRA, SS, and a pension await me at age 60 and later. No kids, no debts.

"I want my money working for me instead of me working for my money!"
scrabbler1 is online now  
Old 11-05-2014, 08:51 PM   #35
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by brewer12345 View Post
V is for veto.
R is for Reconciliation
N is for Nuclear Option

The tactics introduced in the Senate during the last 5 years have significantly reduced the comity of that body and also reduced the protections afforded to minority positions. Expect that what has been good for the goose will now be found suitable for the gander.

The reconciliation procedure (used to pass the ACA, among other legislation which did not enjoy fillibuster-proof support in the Senate) is likely to provide many opportunities to deny funding for programs and initiatives not favored by the legislative branch. This might include some portions of the ACA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort View Post
The CBO estimates that repealing the ACA would increase the federal deficit by $109 billion:
Letter to the Honorable John Boehner providing an estimate for H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act | Congressional Budget Office
I don't think you'll find many who take this CBO report seriously. The true budget impact is undersated considereably, especially due to the very limited timeframe considered (10 years, with a very vague estimate beyond that).

For an assessment that includes a broader view of the impacts for the first 10 years, plus a look beyond that, see analysis & commentary Health Care Reform Is Likely To Widen Federal Budget Deficits, Not Reduce Them: In part:
Quote:
We examine the underpinnings of the CBO’s projection and conclude that it is built on a shaky foundation of omitted costs, premiums shifted from other entitlements, and politically dubious spending cuts and revenue increases. A more comprehensive and realistic projection suggests that the new reform law will raise the deficit by more than $500 billion during the first ten years and by nearly $1.5 trillion in the following decade.
For example the CBO estimate assumes that the Medicare "doc fix" will not be continued, despite the fact that Congress has passed this "temporary" fix every year for more than a decade.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 09:07 PM   #36
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
brewer12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,391
My best guess is that precious little other than the bare minimum gets done in the next 2 years. In the meantime there will be ugly, in the trenches, no holes barred political nastiness on a grand scale. What else is new?
__________________
"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."



- Will Rogers
brewer12345 is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 09:30 PM   #37
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
I don't think you'll find many who take this CBO report seriously.
Their reply was in response to John Boehner asking them to analyze what would happen if the ACA were to be repealed. I am not sure why he would ask if he would not take their reply seriously. They are the Congressional Budget Office, working directly for Congress, not a partisan think tank:

Congressional Budget Office - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
daylatedollarshort is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 09:38 PM   #38
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort View Post
Their reply was in response to John Boehner asking them to analyze what would happen if the ACA were to be repealed. I am not sure why he would ask if he would not take their reply seriously. They are the Congressional Budget Office, working directly for Congress, not a partisan think tank:

Congressional Budget Office - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I know who the CBO is, thank you. Do you know the limits they must work within? Google "CBO", "static scoring", "dynamic scoring" for a glimpse. Do you know why Speaker Boehner asked them for this estimate?

Here's a short clip on the "special sauce" that was included in the original CBO PPACA estimate--not their fault, it is just the way the legislation was written (to take advantage of the way CBO is forced to do their calculations). This is not a partisan issue--both sides play this game to optimize CBO estimates.

CBO estimate of PPACA costs explained
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is offline  
Old 11-05-2014, 10:00 PM   #39
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,146
A great post to bring our discussion to a close. Thanks to all for participating.

__________________

__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stuff we've all heard before but still good mickj Young Dreamers 1 02-17-2011 04:52 PM
Good ol' fashioned things you still do... freebird5825 Other topics 60 11-28-2009 07:33 PM
Weak dollar good/bad for ER plans trib1 FIRE and Money 7 05-14-2009 10:38 AM
for those still wo*king, are you still putting $ in your 401K? ER_Hopeful Young Dreamers 58 01-14-2009 01:12 PM
Work Less Live More: Is his balanced portfolio still good? Shabber2 FIRE and Money 28 02-03-2008 10:27 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:08 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.