Venting about ACA and requesting suggestions

[brucethebroker]

Could you posters use the proper term which is ACA instead of the constant references to Obamacare?

Personally, I have tried using it in conversation about health care. Most people either just look confused, or say "do you mean Obamacare?"

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

This alone sounds like a prime reason to overwhelmingly support Medicare for all. At least for those over 50 - 55 perhaps. A Partial Medicare for some maybe?

Medicare just for those who deserve it.

 

[ivinsfan]

Personally, I have tried using it in conversation about health care. Most people either just look confused, or say "do you mean Obamacare?"

Babysteps The idea that healthcare shouldn't be tied to your job and that preexisting conditions can stop you from buying insurance are getting into the mainstream...that's a good thing.

 

[sheehs1]

Roth IRA conversions ADD to income, they do not lower it. Some here LIMIT their Roth IRA conversions, taking less than they might (or might not) take otherwise to stay away from the cliff.

Donations are deductions, and deductions do not help control MAGI income.

Cap gains losses and HSA contributions reduce MAGI. So does anything else on lines 2335 of the old 1040. Not sure where all those are on the new forms.

Not sure what I was thinking when I wrote that about Roths. I guess I just kept reading how many were converting on the ACA threads. I have never been able to contribute to a Roth. When I looked at the conversion, it just meant more income and then taxes for me.

 

[joeea]

I also suspect that there has probably been an increase of middle class people dying as a result of Obama care because they are forced to have such a high deductible on their insurance that they don't go to the doctor when they should (minor chest pain, etc).

Sorry, but that's utter nonsense.

More people have insurance as a result of Obamacare. If anyone were to die because of doctor cost, it would he uninsured folks.

 

[ShokWaveRider]

ACA!!!!

 

[Gumby]

Technically, it was the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148) ("PPACA").

 

[samclem]

I don't think there's a force strong enough to make increasingly cynical Americans use the Orwellian labels affixed to legislation (by both sides). "Obamacare" was certainly pejorative at first, and I avoid the term in polite company for that reason. But, since President Obama said he welcomed that label, I think the stink is now off the term. It is even commonly used on NPR now.

 

[ncbill]

Don't forget the sickest people are in the ACA exchanges...or on Medicaid.

OP probably needs to sell the rental to reduce income under 400% of FPL to get ACA subsidies.

Alternatively, take an extended vacation to Mexico & buy group insurance for down there...last time I checked for a 60 year old ~$250/month bought $5 million in lifetime coverage w/ $2500 deductible (1/2 waived for treatment outside of the U.S.)

 

[Spock]

check out a graph of health insurance premiums.
Its not like they were flat prior to ACA.
While you were paying less prior, rates were still doubling about every 6 years before [MOD EDIT] Obama even took office... the slope of the curve is about the same before and after ACA despite picking up coverage for pre-existing conditions, etc.

 

[ShokWaveRider]

Don't forget the sickest people are in the ACA exchanges...or on Medicaid.

This is not strictly true, DW has been in an ACA policy for 4 years and has no pre-existing Conditions or takes any medications.

I have been on for 4 years also and go to the docs approximately 2 times per year.

Our reasoning is purely policy costs. We are NOT on Medicaid.

In general Insurance companies will refuse coverage to anyone who is not on an ACA policy, for any condition no matter how minor; taking BP meds, statins etc. (a lot of folks do that and are perfectly healthy), The insurance companies simply MUST be reigned in, the ACA basically does that, but it does need tweaking.

 

[street]

It's trying to take some of the political stuff out of the picture....for better or worse it's here for the indefinite future...

Exactly!

 

[pb4uski]

Could you posters use the proper term which is ACA instead of the constant references to Obamacare?

https://youtu.be/V25HvZ_CJ9o?t=23

Once he stops we will.

While it was once a politically charged reference to ACA, I don't think it is anywhere near that today.... if you think so, then please get over it.

 

[NW-Bound]

... I live in Oregon and just shopped for my health care for 2019. (61 year old male, single, healthy, no drug use of any kind, no alcohol or tobacco, healthy weight, 2 hours of exercise a day) Income: Pension + rental income + dividends = about 60,000 a year. The bronze plan is going to be about 880.00 a month, with about 7000 deductible...

That's $10,500/year for a single person, out of an income of $60K.

Back in 2017, I made the following post:

Y'all think it is absurd? You have not seen anything yet. As I said, the number varies from place to place. If a cliff of $19,536 is bad, look at what I found in Anchorage. The following is for a couple of the age of 60.

Joint MAGI = $80,079, annual premium for Silver plan = $6,558 + $6,000 deductible
Joint MAGI = $80,080, annual premium for the same = $44,808 + $6,000 deductible

One dollar more in income, and you pay an additional $38,250 for insurance!

That's the law on the book, my friends. Go to healthcare.gov, and try Zip code 99501 to see for yourself. You do not see this in the media, because ignorant reporters have employer insurance and do not know about all this stuff.

To tie back to this thread topic, yes, a lot of people will die rich, because they do not dare spend it. Spend $1 more, and it sets you back close to $40K a year, or 1/2 of your gross income.

 

[ivinsfan]

https://youtu.be/V25HvZ_CJ9o?t=23

Once he stops we will.

While it was once a politically charged reference to ACA, I don't think it is anywhere near that today.... if you think so, then please get over it.

LOL you did say please, but I still hold the thought that ACA is a more neutral term no matter what side you're on. So no I don't think I will "get over it"..

It's not like people call SS Rooseveltsecurity...

 

[Golden sunsets]

I don't have a dog in this hunt and DH and I have not had to rely on the ACA for health insurance coverage, but it seems to me, looking from the outside in, that obtaining ACA insurance is terrific if you also get a subsidy and ridiculously (disproportionately?) expensive, if you have no subsidy.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[flintnational]

@ivansfan - There is nothing neutral about the names congress gives bills. The name routinely pushes one party's, or the other's, agenda.

 

[garyt]

Personally, I have tried using it in conversation about health care. Most people either just look confused, or say "do you mean Obamacare?"

+1

 

[Dtail]

I don't have a dog in this hunt and DH and I have not had to rely on the ACA for health insurance coverage, but it seems to me, looking from the outside in, that obtaining ACA insurance is terrific if you also get a subsidy and ridiculously (disproportionately?) expensive, if you have no subsidy.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

That is correct, plus it depends where one resides.

 

[OHjosh]

I completely understand your frustration with ACA. But for me, the true vent should be the way health care insurance is "set up" in the first place. Why should someone "traditionally" employed for a company be able to get good or excellent coverage, for no or relatively modest contribution, vis a vis those of us in early retirement, private practice, or owning our own business?

I have been self-insured 6 of the past 8 years. When I was employed, I paid $100 a month max for a very comprehensive plan. In my consulting years pre-ACA, I had to take take plans that covered nothing until I reached as much as $8,000 OOP. I am in good health but one year I reached the limit; a bout of whooping cough (my immunity ran out) led to double hernia surgery.

You seem to be losing under ACA. In retirement I gained. My 2019 subsidy allows me to get a silver plan at a slightly lower cost than last year, when I was employed. (Guess I should thank people like you). If anything, this again proves how stupid the current insurance system is.

It may be true that you (and I) are financing somebody less healthy to some extent. But for what it is worth, the services ACA plans must cover (but in your case probably will just count top the OOP) is more comprehensive.

 

[joeea]

But, since President Obama said he welcomed that label, I think the stink is now off the term.

President Trump said about Obamacare "we have gotten rid of it".

 

[marko]

"Obamacare" was certainly pejorative at first, and I avoid the term in polite company for that reason. But, since President Obama said he welcomed that label, I think the stink is now off the term. It is even commonly used on NPR now.

My sense is that ACA hasn't lived up to the (perhaps unrealistically) high expectations of many people.
I'd guess that if it had, it would still universally be "Obamacare".

IMO, (wearing my old marketing hat) the long threads over the past few years here here trying to clear up tons confusion show that it was a great idea that was poorly marketed, poorly explained and poorly executed.

Frankly, I would have been deservedly fired if I had had a product roll-out that created so much confusion on day one. Kind of a shame.

 

[gwraigty]

I completely understand your frustration with ACA. But for me, the true vent should be the way health care insurance is "set up" in the first place. Why should someone "traditionally" employed for a company be able to get good or excellent coverage, for no or relatively modest contribution, vis a vis those of us in early retirement, private practice, or owning our own business?

I have been self-insured 6 of the past 8 years. When I was employed, I paid $100 a month max for a very comprehensive plan. In my consulting years pre-ACA, I had to take take plans that covered nothing until I reached as much as $8,000 OOP. I am in good health but one year I reached the limit; a bout of whooping cough (my immunity ran out) led to double hernia surgery.

You seem to be losing under ACA. In retirement I gained. My 2019 subsidy allows me to get a silver plan at a slightly lower cost than last year, when I was employed. (Guess I should thank people like you). If anything, this again proves how stupid the current insurance system is.

It may be true that you (and I) are financing somebody less healthy to some extent. But for what it is worth, the services ACA plans must cover (but in your case probably will just count top the OOP) is more comprehensive.

That isn't true for everyone who is employed. It can vary widely. My husband pays over $152.10 every 2 weeks for HDHP family coverage with a $4,000 deductible. Next year it will be over $163.54 every 2 weeks. That's the discount with the employee & spouse health screening, otherwise it would be $230.05 every 2 weeks. His employer self-insures. They offered HDHP along with traditional health insurance for a few years, but now it's just HDHP. They contribute $1,800 to the employee's HSA for family coverage, lesser amounts for other coverage levels.

And I still consider it a bargain when I read of what others are paying under ACA.

 

[ShokWaveRider]

The ACA REALLY does need updating (Simply removing or stifling it will not work, except to make things worse, as it has.) No argument there. Fortunately it does work for some who can control their MAGI, which is a lot better than before. at least they can get HI if they have diabetes or High BP, High Chol. etc. Not like the "No HI for You" we had before.

 

[Fleur58]

I paid $640 for a Bronze ACA plan this year until I qualified for a subsidy in July. By the way, even Obama calls the ACA "Obamacare". After the initial doctor visit and mammogram in January, if was out of pocket for all doctor visits, labwork, xrays, and medicine. It stopped me from going to the doctor by mid year. One visit cost me $753 in doctors fees as my Primary sent me to see 2 "Specialists" during the visit. I am with Kaiser Permanente. Medicine costs at their pharmacy weren't too bad, but all other services are expensive. I like them, however, because all services and doctors are in the same building--its like a mini hospital and the staff is polite and friendly. In my state the cliff for a single is $16-46K. Under 16K you must get a Medicaid plan. I had to do a 10K Roth conversion to get me in range for a subsidy this year. I get no earned income or SS or Pension. Now I hope I don't get socked by surprise large cap gains at the end of the year.
The ACA costs are ridiculous for a Bronze Plan. Now that I get a subsidy, I have elected to pay for a Gold plan for 2019. Just a $20 copay to see my doctor. 0 deductable. I want the peace of mind of having good coverage.