Something I've always wondered

HtownRose said:
...Example 2 - wife is a retired Texas teacher & he prefers to be on her plan - refuses to even consider Medicare.
Click to expand...

that was me, too. i was on my employers plan for 10-yrs post-retirement until 1201 am on the morning i turned 65. i was happy on that plan and wanted to stay but, alas, i had no choice.
 
I have not had any issues with SS or Medicare. Medicare has worked great, I went with traditional Medicare with a supplement. No networks, have never had anybody refuse to take it. I have never had an issue with payment to providers. My husband racked up a million dollars in hospital bills in back to back emergencies. He had private insurance that covered everything, including the $25,000 life flight helicopter ride. If he didn't have insurance, I would have had a tough time paying the bills with cash. As far as SS goes, it was simple to sign up for. I paid a lot of money into it and expect at least part of it back. I don't need it to live on it, but I paid into it and I'm going to use it.
 
Forgoing Medicare may be the worst idea I've ever read here and I hope it retains that distinction forever.
 
harllee said:
One major health problem can bankrupt even the richest person
Click to expand...
True. One might not but two could. This is the strongest argument for insurance. I wonder, though, if it can't be less expensive by fiddling with deductibles and coverage exclusions.


Well, I guess my question was answered. It was interesting! Thanks all.
 
johnhkc said:
... Seriously - why not just ditch that crap and use your savings? It's soooo much easier.
Click to expand...

Because Americans generally are horrible savers.... that is why we have SS... because Americans are horrible savers there was too much elderly poverty.... SS retirement benefits is effectively a forced retirement savings program (with a little wealth transfer on top).
 
Offgrid Organic Farmer said:
That same person, who has budgeted and saved all these years, has also been paying 7.5% of his/her income into SS/medicare [15% if self-employed].

That SS policy is just as much of their savings, as a 401k would be. ...
Click to expand...

Generally agree, but keep in mind that a portion of the 6.2%/12.4% for OASDI is for life insurance (pays survivors benefits if you die) and disability insurance (pays benefits if you are disabled).... IIRC only ~72% relates to retirement benefits.
 
johnhkc said:
True. One might not but two could. This is the strongest argument for insurance. I wonder, though, if it can't be less expensive by fiddling with deductibles and coverage exclusions.

Well, I guess my question was answered. It was interesting! Thanks all.
Click to expand...


I tried to do that with my house and car insurance some years back. Wanted to try and get it down to dirt cheap premiums and play the same odds the insurance company was playing. After a certain level of deductible it didn't affect the premium price more than literally a few dollars per year. For me to carry the additional risk beyond their max "canned" deductible didn't pay.


I know medical insurance might math out a bit different but I'm sure the same general rule would apply. Especially as you get older, because the probs of having "A big one" are greater.
 
At age 70 I get about $45k a year from SS. A COLA annuity for that amount would cost me in excess of a million I'm guessing.

You can turn down your million of you want.
 
At present age, 64, a bronze plan costs me 1250/mo. That's a crappy plan with a 6k deductable. Just extrapolation makes me think that at 65 a Medicare equivalent plan might cost me between 1500 and 2000/mo. Of course that would increase every year for age and inflation. Just a guess if I wanted to buy an annuity to pay that bill till I die it would be in the order of a million too.

Again, you can turn down your million.
 
johnhkc said:
Network price is cash price. The astronomical charges exist to pay for the EMTALA non-payers and the other govt plans that don't pay the full price. You can buy into a pre-packaged network if negotiated prices are all you want.
I asked the question to see if anyone else is thinking the way I am - not so far! :LOL:
Click to expand...


BS.

Have you ever gotten an medical bill that wasn't covered by insurance?
Have you ever wasted MONTHS of time (and danced with bill collectors in the interim) negotiating with a hospital billing dept to get "the cash price"?
Have you ever tried to even get a non-emergency medical service without being insured?
Hosptials might, eventually, get your bill down to the network rate, but it sure as hell is not their starting point in the billing process.

I'm convinced you're just a toll. Welcome to the board's ingore function.
 
Spock said:
BS.

Have you ever wasted MONTHS of time (and danced with bill collectors in the interim) negotiating with a hospital billing dept to get "the cash price"?

I'm convinced you're just a toll. Welcome to the board's ingore function.
Click to expand...

I have posted before about trying to pay cash for a procedure done out of state and not covered by my insurance. I'm convinced the billing department wanted to tell me "only the computer knows". I never did get a price, they had me apply for financial aid and wrote the bill off.
 
dixonge said:
I've noticed another contradiction (on a related note):

Lots of people: "You should delay S.S. because you never know how long you might live"

Same people: "You should retire early, because you never know when you might die"

Just a thought lol
Click to expand...

SS and retirement don't have to go hand-in-hand. Many of us did or will do both - FIRE and SS at 70.
 
pb4uski said:
Because Americans generally are horrible savers.... that is why we have SS... because Americans are horrible savers there was too much elderly poverty.... SS retirement benefits is effectively a forced retirement savings program (with a little wealth transfer on top).
Click to expand...


+1

One of the big pluses of SS is that it requires most of us to contribute to our retirement fund. Otherwise, many people (perhaps a majority?) would reach their 60's with no money and simply get some combination of welfare benefits. At least with SS most people had to put something in to get something out.
 
walkinwood said:
I don't see the contradiction. They are both true if you reword them. I think "might die" is overly optimistic :)

Lots of people: "You should delay S.S. because you never know when you will die"

Same people: "You should retire early, because you never know when you will die"
Click to expand...

OK so you make a good point and I should probably think longer before I type crap LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Is the IRS intentionally this obtuse???
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
indiajust
I
jollystomper
Built a NAS server after NAS-ty installation experiences
2
Replies
28
Views
878
The Cosmic Avenger
The Cosmic Avenger
Trooper
New Weight Loss/Obesity Drugs Could Transform Economy
9 10 11
Replies
255
Views
15K
audreyh1
audreyh1
D
Retired in 2017@42
Replies
10
Views
1K
Koolau
Koolau
J
Need Advice for Stepbrother
2
Replies
43
Views
3K
ncbill
N

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom