More than 1/4 of uninsured rather pay Obamacare fine than get insurance, Gallup finds

[Redfairen]

Source: AL.com

Next year all uninsured Americans will need to get medical coverage or a pay fine. But more than a quarter still say they'd rather pay the fine.

According to the latest Gallup poll, 28 percent of uninsured Americans say they plan to pay the fine under the Affordable Care Act rather than seek health insurance. The rate is higher when asked among uninsured Republicans.

Gallup finds 45 percent of uninsured Republicans plan to pay the tax penalty, compared to just 15 percent of uninsured Democrats.

.......

Gallup also found among the uninsured that 84 percent of black respondents said they would get insurance, while just 49 percent of white respondents said they would get coverage. 



Read more: http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/12/nearly_half_uninsured_republic.html#incart_river_default

[bpositive]

1. Wonder how many of them

Have children? Will they go to the emergency room and potentially get free coverage?

[Mr.Bill]

12. Emergency rooms are not free.

They will bill you for their services. They can take you to court, garnish your wages and put liens on your property to collect.

[Tarheel_Dem]

30. And if you have no property to lien? What then? Prison?

[madrchsod]

37. jail for sure...maybe not if you have a nice judge

[Mr.Bill]

38. Like I said,

garnished wages, liens on any property you ever own, destroyed credit rating, etc.

It's not free.

[Hosnon]

47. "Judgment proof" is a thing. And there's always bankruptcy. nt.

[Mr.Bill]

49. Even filing for BK isn't free.

And would you like to pay 28% interest on your next car loan?

Unpaid debt is no picnic, and it's not free. People filing bankruptcy over medical bills is one of the things the ACA was designed to prevent. But one must use the system, not deny it.

[Hosnon]

53. Didn't say it was. But it's MUCH cheaper than an emergency room visit.

And bankruptcy isn't a credit death sentence.

[Mr.Bill]

58. You make valid points,

I'm just saying a little common sense can avoid it. There are actually people who the ACA would cover at little or no cost, and they are stubbornly refusing it. That's who I am speaking about. I am also speaking about the people who think the ER is free health care. Fucking Romney pretty much told them that during his campaign, and it's wrong.

[Hosnon]

59. Yeah, you're right. Hopefully they will see it's a no-brainer.

Even if it costs as much as the fine, YOU HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE!

[Sgent]

43. They can sue you,

win, and then require any money that you are paid, gifted, receive, or othwise control to be turned over to them. If you don't turn over the money (example you hide it) you can be subject to sanctions for contempt of court (which could result in prison eventually).

If you are honest with them you cannot go to prison; however, they can garnish your wages, assets, gifts, etc. for the rest of your life and go after your estate until the debt is paid or you declare bankruptcy.

If the care was for a kid or other minor they can also go after that person for the rest of their life.

All that being said, the above is the worst case and I've never heard of a judgement being renewed unless there are special circumstances (aka assets) which justify it.

[wercal]

31. I know a man who was put in jail over it

After years of missed hearings and dodging summon, he was arrested and spent a night in jail before finally going in front of a judge.

[Hosnon]

48. He wasn't jailed for being a debtor. He was likely jailed for contempt of court. nt.

[happyslug]

78. No, arrest for debt is a Common Law grounds for an arrest

Unless your state abolished it (Pennsylvania did in 1820) arrest for having an outstanding unpaid judgment is still permitted. Most states that still permit arrest for debt have some restrictions, but those are easily avoided.

Now, if a Court Order is issued and the Debtor does NOT follow that Order, he can be jailed for violation of that order, but then only after a hearing, where the defense of no money is a real defense (you can NOT be found to violate a Court Order, if it was impossible for you to follow the order).

Thus even in a State that has Abolished arrest for debt, you can still to jail for an unpaid judgment, but only after a hearing (i.e. someone has to find that you are in violation of a Court Order before you can be arrested for Violating a Court Order).

[Hosnon]

114. Imprisonment for state fines has been unconstitutional since the '80s. And it has been banned by

federal law for federal debts since the 1800s. If a state allows it for a private debt, the individual can just file bankruptcy.

There is a problem with courts using their power to imprison people because they missed a court hearing in debt-collection litigation, and that should be stopped.

[Maeve]

34. True and one fall can eat up a LOT of money

Took a fall a few years back and landed wrong--broke my wrist. Without insurance, the cost would have been hundreds just for the emergency room, never mind the surgery I opted for rather than months in a cast that would have meant no driving (I tried--no way!).
Been without insurance--signed up Monday on HealthCare.gov!

[SummerSnow]

56. Guess thats what they want...

then they will cry " Obama is taking my house!!!"

[Mr.Bill]

61. Everytime someone dies after Jan. 1st, they are going to say "Obama has blood on his hands."

Like no one ever died before.

[SummerSnow]

63. So true.

If you tell them Bush has blood on his hands they get amnesia

[elias7]

100. You are thoroughly misinformed

I have worked at a half dozen hospitals in my career and never has anyone been taken to court, had wages garnished or had liens placed on their property by a hospital for failure to pay a bill. Hospitals are notorious for being unaggressive in this setting and for eating costs.

Medical professional bashing is common enough on this site without having to resort to misinformation, especially since many on DU are in the field. We often just don't always feel compelled to respond to ignorance.

[Mr.Bill]

107. My wife is a retired RN and spent five years as a case manager.

I'm getting my information from her and I stand by what I said. They don't always aggressively collect, and they do write off a lot. But they can and do go after people for unpaid bills, turn them over to collection agencies and destroy their credit ratings. My wife herself had to file bankruptcy before I met her because of medical bills incurred when she was between jobs and briefly without health insurance.

I don't know what you did at the hospitals you worked at, but you obviously didn't work in the department that collects bills. My wife did.

[elias7]

109. Bankruptcy is mainly due to medical debts, I'll agree

My beef is with methods you described. I've never heard of anyone being taken to court, had wages garnished or had liens placed on their property, but your wife may know better than I.

I think it is the honorable people who believe in paying their debts that flail in this setting. For those who dont care about credit ratings or unpaid bills, I think hospitals give up after a while...

[Mr.Bill]

110. They mainly sell the debt to collection agencies.

I'm sure some hospital corporations are more aggressive than others. My wife's hospital mainly chased the people they knew had the money. They do have a community fund to help genuine hardship cases, such as people who could not obtain insurance because of a pre-existing condition, or those who had maxed out their insurance. But with the ACA those situations should no longer exist after this year.

[slipslidingaway]

134. You are kidding right? The ER treats problems and then refers them to a private doc/hosp ...

for follow up care.

Where does one go from there? The whole idea that one goes to to the ER and problems are resolved is ridiculous! My husband went to the ER with a hemoglobin of 6 and needed a bone marrow transplant, do you think that would be done in a local ER?

[arcane1]

2. In other news, nearly 3/4 of uninsured will choose to get insurance.

I like that headline better

[BlueStreak]

127. Thank you. 2014 is about the 75% non-morons

We have plenty of work to do getting the 75% thinking people into insurance in one year. This is a huge task. We can't waste too much time on the morons. The individual mandate goes up sharply in 2015 and again in 2016. It will not be long before they are far ahead of the game buying insurance than choosing to be deadbeats.

We need to put our attention on all the decent folks who, despite all the good intentions in this law, still can't get affordable health care in 2014. There will still be something like 5 million people who have no viable way to get health coverage. Let's not waste our time on the morons.

[boobooday]

3. So 25% of the uninsured

are healthy, but stupid. Sounds about right.

[valerief]

51. And after a year, that number will be below 15%, I'll bet. They'll get on the bangwagon. nt

[SummerSnow]

57. Healthy for how long?

[JoePhilly]

4. 45% of Republicans would rather die than

get insurance thru ObamaCare.

I'm ok with that.

[LionsTigersRedWings]

10. 15% of democrats would rather die as well....

I wonder why they feel this way?

[JoePhilly]

18. They are stupid?

[LionsTigersRedWings]

39. I have a feeling you're right

[thefool_wa]

19. Idealogical Stand

I can totally someone who is single and uninsured and a Democrat who feels so strongly that the government doesn't have the right to compel the services of a private industry that they elect to pay the fee. If I was single, I might even be one of them.

Also, really, its way cheaper to just pay it and if you have to pay it somewhere, that's where they will pay it.

I doubt any of those on either side who responded that they would pay the fine have dependent children, if they do, then that makes them pretty terrible.

[LionsTigersRedWings]

40. Good point

[Locrian]

106. my neighbor

Has kids in catholic $chool - BMW SUV, 2 kids in sports - no insurance.

[tom_kelly]

41. Their spouse is republican n/t

[LionsTigersRedWings]

42. The one thing making them talk about politics.

[hedgehog]

116. Libertarians?

[LionsTigersRedWings]

117. that could be. I could see that.

[valerief]

52. Ha! Me, too! nt

[840high]

76. Reid exempt his staff

from ObamaCare.

[chillfactor]

81. yet the President enrolled..

and by the way..Boehner exempted the House...

[silverweb]

5. The 25%.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]This is roughly the same percentage of the population that remain illogically diehard RW/TeaTHUGs, and continue to vote against their own interests and all reason no matter what the reality is around them.

That's okay. They'll be carried into a better future, kicking and screaming, by the more rational majority.

[Old and In the Way]

27. These are the alternate universe core baggers.

Where war is peace, hate is love, and deficits don't matter (unless it's a Democratic administration).

[silverweb]

35. Exactly.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]n/t

[Igel]

45. Really?

So 25% are "core baggers," but of those 25% 1/4 are Democrats.

So a quarter of "core baggers" are Democrats?

Yes, that's what you implied.

The other option is that they know more about their situation than you do, as hard as that may be to believe.

Or that they don't like somebody telling them what to do under legal threat. "It's for your own good, and if you don't like, just what until you see what good we have in store for you--confiscation of property, confinement in prison, and, if you resist, actual violence against your person. Because we're gentle and caring."

Or they just don't like Obamacare--maybe because they're anarchists, maybe because they're anti-corporatists, maybe because they don't like government control over more of society, maybe because they just don't like how it was decided on a straight-party-line vote and billed not as a tax but as a penalty (because even afterwards the claim was that there had been no middle-class tax increases ... except, of course, that "none" overlooked one).

Or perhaps even they don't like the extreme judgmentalism. If you disagree with us, you're stupid. Criminal. Terrible people. Uncaring. Negligent. Snap judgments based on one single criterion without any context.

(Full disclosure: Where I worked when I was much younger I had the option of joining a very small pool. My addition would have greatly reduced rates for coworkers, making it affordable. I looked at the options and said, "Sorry, no." The most irate coworker was one who had health problems and really needed insurance. I offered to help him out by just giving him money to help cover the bills, but he considered that condescending and humiliating. He eventually got over it.)

[solarhydrocan]

92. Or they agreed with Keith Olbermann

The funniest (?) thing about this whole Heritage Foundation mandate is that if this exact same law was passed by Republicans no one here would support it.

There would be calls for non compliance, marches on the capitol, and calls for impeachment.

[valerief]

54. Their guardian angels will protect them.

[JoePhilly]

32. The GOP is actively working to kill off its own base.

[silverweb]

36. Pure insanity.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]But we're kind of used to seeing that from the TeaTHUGs.

[Justitia]

99. I call them "The Brain-dead 20%"

In this case it's 25%, but no matter, they are ALWAYS with us, no matter what issue.

They are the lost causes that are not worth your time or effort. Others legitimately want info & help.

[Lex]

6. About 25% of the people believe climate change is a hoax &

magic is real. These people have to be dragged along kicking and screaming into anything that makes sense.

[Dopers_Greed]

7. "The rate is higher when asked among uninsured Republicans."

Damn those Republican freeloaders. Use part of the tax penalty to buy bootstraps for them.

[Hoyt]

8. Stupid White Wing. I wish their were some way to deny care to those who could afford

insurance, but refuse to participate. But they know that the rest of us will pay if they get sick. I suppose some are just inbred fools.

[Stargazer99]

11. the way to fix that

if they ever require free medical care take out all the premiums they did not pay from the beginning from their tax credits and refunds. The more monied usually get several tax credits (non refundable)...reduce those by the unpaid premiums

[nobodyspecial]

13. This says it all

"Gallup finds 45 percent of uninsured Republicans plan to pay the tax penalty"

The GOP rank and file will continue to neglect its own best interests to do the bidding of their corporate masters.

Or, they are lying and will secretly get insurance because they are not complete idiots. A girl can dream, right?

[justhanginon]

29. I agree. Talk is cheap but

when push comes to shove a lot will change their tune. They cannot really be that damn stupid. On the other hand .........
banghead:

[jamzrockz]

121. why?

Think about it, right now the penalty is very low and for a healthy person that doesn't care about the success of Obamacare, not buying insurance saves him money. Remember, he/she can wait till they get sick and buy an insurance policy(no more rejection or price hike for pre existing condition) and even if they need some minor healthcare, the out of pocket paid will still be lower than the average deductible on the average policy.

The number will change once the penalty is increased to max lvl. For now, its a money saver

[Dawgs]

15. Great. Usually it's 35%. n/t

[onehandle]

16. Most people don't know what is what still. Try this poll again next April. nt

[leftynyc]

17. Didn't we already know

at least 25% of this country was made of morons?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

20. Yes:

[leftynyc]

21. I LOVE that movie

One of the best comedies of all time that wouldn't have a prayer of getting made today.

[Ms. Toad]

22. I wonder how may of that 1/4 bothered to check prices. . . n/t

[OneCrazyDiamond]

23. Thirty million

divided by four equals seven million five hundred thousand.
Seven million five hundred thousand times one hundred dollars equals
seven hundred and fifty million dollars to help shore up the system's finances next April.

I bet next year they by insurance.

[cyberswede]

24. Nearly 3/4 of uninsured would rather get insurance than pay Obamacare fine, Gallup finds

Hate the spin.

[Jack Rabbit]

25. Well, there's your rank-and-file tea party

They're brainwashed by Randians.

[Laelth]

26. Very interesting results. n/t

-Laelth

[JDPriestly]

28. Don't worry. That will change.

[spin]

33. True. The fine will increase over time. ...

Beginning in 2014, absent a qualified exemption, you will be required to obtain health insurance. If you fail to comply, you will be subject to a penalty of 1.0% of your annual income or $95.00, whichever is greater. In 2015, the penalty increases to the greater of 2.0% of annual income or $325 per person. The following year it becomes the greater of 2.5% of income or $695 per person. After 2016, it will be indexed to the cost of living. It should also be noted that the maximum penalty is capped at three times the per person penalty. For example, if you earn $28,500 in 2014, 1.0% of your income would equal $285. Therefore, if you earn more than this, your maximum penalty would remain the same. All penalties will be due and payable with your annual federal income tax return. Hence, the penalty for 2014 would be due by April 15, 2015 and the IRS will be the collection agency used.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2013/10/28/obamacare-penalties-and-exemptions/

[Thor_MN]

44. Tell them that as an alternative, they can sign up for the ACA....

That ought to reduce down to the truly stupid. The merely bigoted will sign up.

[BlueToTheBone]

46. The 28% of crazy teahadists who

are well known for doing the stupidest things.

[Wolf Frankula]

50. Some Fall into a gap

A married couple with no children, Both in their fifties. Dual income about 43000 a year. One has health insurance through the job. Income for one about 24000 a year (the one with the insurance through the job) Other is a temp with no insurance, income about 19000 a year. To add spouse costs more than they can afford around 400 more a month. Least expensive plan, with subsidy, costs 650 dollars a month, more than they can afford. If lower income partner's income could be considered separately, cost would be 6 dollars a month.

This is the gap millions fall into.

Wolf

[JoePhilly]

62. So 15% of Dems and 45% of Republicans ...

... Fall into that gap?

Weird.

[Wolf Frankula]

65. Didn't Say All, I said Some

Right now I'm one of them. After January 1 my temp service, (I'm a temp) will offer a medical plan which I have signed up for.

Wolf

[JoePhilly]

69. So did the ACA make you situation better, worse,

... or no change?

[Wolf Frankula]

119. No Change.

I didn't have a health plan before it came into effect. I couldn't afford one after it came into effect. I just wish Barry hadn't caved on the employer mandate.


And it's not that I would rather pay the fine. It's that the fine is less than an ACA plan would cost.
I would rather have health insurance. Due to the fact that we fall into the gap, I still can't afford one.

Wolf

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

55. It's my opinion

Threads Ike these are a waste of time. Except for the time I spent posting it. I'm series, who cares about these polls? People are signing up and this is just a bunch of noise....

[Turbineguy]

60. The GOP apparently doesn't know

that when these people die, they stop voting.

[JimboBillyBubbaBob]

64. More support for the idea...

...that you can't fix stupid.

[oldbitty]

66. Unaffordabel premiums

My daughter is one who won't be buying a policy. The premium rates are too high. She can't afford the $200/month premium for the crappiest insurance policy available. She can barely afford bills. Why is it nobody is really admitting how pricey they plans really are and how little they cover? They suck. Period.

[penultimate]

67. Compared to individual private plans before the ACA

they actually compare better in many cases. They might be a bit more, but they do offer better protection and lower maximum out of pocket expenses. At least based on my experiences with getting health insurance on my own in the past. How old is your daughter and where does she live that makes it so her premium for the cheapest plan is over $200/mo? Does she make too much for subsidies?

[oldbitty]

75. Unaffordable

Her premiums with subsidies are higher than she can afford. Not only that, they carry high deductibles and high copays. She's 26 and lives in Illinois, a place where conspicuously, there are NO platinum plans available.

As far as I can see, Obamacare isn't going to prevent any medical bankruptcies, and may actually increase them.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

83. What difference does it make about the lack of platinum plans?

Based on your information she couldn't afford those anyway. If her premiums with subsidies are higher than she can afford then she must be very low income and therefore could qualify under Medicaid..... couldn't she?

[oldbitty]

88. Chronic health issues

Anyone with a chronic health issue is going to need a platinum plan. They aren't offered here in this state for some odd reason. She's not very low income. It's just this area has very high living expenses. The prices they're charging for these plans aren't realistic for the majority of people here. They aren't even close to realistic. She makes too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to use insurance.

This mandate is the worst thing they could have done without a public option to compete with the private insurance companies. Without a public option, there is no competition and they can set their premium prices as high as they want. I'm still furious about the fact the dems didn't fight for one. It's ridiculous how everyone is claiming these premium prices are low.

Who cares what the premium rates are when it's the back end expenses that kill you anyway? The copays and deductibles, plus the prescription drugs that aren't even included as part of the deductible of out-of-pocket max. What's up with that? It's part of your medical care and well-being?

Single payer is what we need. I supported this mess from the beginning and it turns out our family is one of the hardest impacted by the ridiculous rates they're charging. Thank God we still have employer based insurance, even if it's gotten ridiculously expensive as a result of this mess.

[llmart]

98. No plantinum plans???

Your arguments don't make any sense. Why would she even be looking at platinum plans since those are the most expensive plans? Most people are going to end up in some sort of silver plan - that was stated from the start. It's a choice, OK?

Basically what you want is for your daughter to be able to have everything she needs paid for 100%. Well, wouldn't we all. Even on Medicare you have to pay some of your bills.

From your last sentence and low post count I'm thinking you just came on here to bash the ACA.

[oldbitty]

101. I am bashing the ACA

Because it needs bashing. And I feel passionately about that fact. This was a golden give away to the insurance companies, not the public.

The platinum plans were an added concern, if in fact she did end up with some health problem, or likewise, if we ourselves ever found ourselves looking at a marketplace plan. Look, our kids are going to be living at home into their 30s or living in bunkers like Chinese manufacturing slaves if we're going to expect them to afford this. They simply don't make enough money to stay healthy.

I'm really fed up with everyone promoting this like it's a fantastic deal. It's a horrible deal. It's an awful lot of money to pay for one physical and gyn exam every year. We can get that for far lower paying cash than what this requires. Beyond that, the coverage is abysmal.

[burnsei sensei]

125. Single Payer NOW!

No more words are necessary.

[oldbitty]

130. Agreed

It's the only real solution to this problem. Unfortunately, with as many "liberals" as there are supporting this without really looking at the details, and ignoring or bashing those who admit they're going to suffer economically from it, they pull out the old bootstraps argument like a right winger and do everything in their power to discredit the person.

As long as a person stays healthy, this might be a fine plan. But the moment a person needs medical attention, the bills are going to drown them. Forget it if you already have a chronic health problem. You're just plain out of luck and on your own. Most people with chronic health issues are already broke to begin with. How's that for rubbing salt in the wound? "Here you go. Have some insurance, if you can afford it. If you can't, just get a better job, board out a room in your house, or move back in with family!"

Whatever happened to smart and caring liberals? Have the wingers taken over DU or something?

[llmart]

68. What happens if she gets sick and needs medical care?

How will she feel about paying the tremendous bills an illness or accident entails?

So many of these people who think "I'll just pay the penalty" have some sort of naivete thinking they won't need any medical care. Anything can happen to anyone at any time. Just listen to people's stories sometimes. Young people have unexpected illnesses too. They are not invincible.

I'll bet these people don't blink an eye at paying over $100 each month for a smartphone and cable TV.

[oldbitty]

86. No cable, no internet, yes cell phone

Then she'll have to apply for charity care like every other underinsured person has done all along.

These plans are nothing more than overpriced catastrophic coverage.

Why is it someone who works a full-time job should be expected to not have any benefits of that labor other than food, shelter and clothing? No perks? No frills? My kid works her tush off at her job and she's good at it. She's willing to pick up shifts for others and rarely asks off. She's worked her way up from the bottom and still can barely afford to survive. No car payment, driving a junker and no extra to put toward a new vehicle. Her only luxury is a cell phone. She lives in a gang infested area and has a couple of dogs for protection from intruders. Even on our insurance plan, she can barely afford to pay copays and prescription drug costs.

People who determine these numbers are so far out of touch with the reality of working people they may as well be living on another planet. Truly, economically, they are on another planet.

[hugo_from_TN]

87. If she gets sick she can sign up at that time.

Why pay the high premiums now if she can't afford it? Emergency rooms still take emergency care cases and the insurance companies can't deny you for pre-existing issues. So if you get really sick, go to the emergency room and then if long term issues are involved get the insurance then.

Don't waste your money paying premiums when aren't sick to subsidize a bunch of boomers!

[llmart]

97. Wow...

"subsidize a bunch of boomers"???? You really see it as some sort of us vs. them scenario don't you?

For your information, I'm a boomer and my two children have long been out of public schools and yet I have no problem with paying my taxes so that others' children can have good public schools, libraries, etc.

Health insurance has always been about the healthy "subsidizing" (spreading the risk) among those who may need it or not.

I'm a boomer and I'll be on Medicare in less than 6 months. I live very frugally, bought a bare bones policy a couple of years ago to tide me over until Medicare and I've never had to use my health insurance once since I bought it. I'm extremely healthy. So I guess it's possible that I "subsidized" that millenial I know who rode his bike into a car and broke an arm and his pelvis, because he didn't have any insurance.

Your selfish attitude is no better than a freeper.

[KatyMan]

71. not so for everyone

My daughter's premium is 21.00 per month no deductible bc/b.s. silver advantage 004. But my wife and I pay 400.00 per month through her company. We have no problem with the ACA

[penultimate]

70. My conservative father said I should just pay the fine myself

I asked how that is a good idea for me to do that. I need insurance, so I'd have to pay for some sort of insurance.... He didn't really have an answer. It's funny because in the past he would always give me shit for not having insurance and how irresponsible I was being for not getting it. Which I learned the hard way of the importance of having health insurance :/ Funny how easily their opinions of things change based on politics.

[quadrature]

72. rumor: free Dilaudid on Jan1 at the ER if you enroll in ACA

Obamacare.
what's for young people not to like?

[Pterodactyl]

73. That's cool by me. The increased taxes will increase revenues.

[Le Taz Hot]

74. I know this goes against the Party Faithful

zeitgeist but some people are neither stupid nor Republicans, they simply can't afford the premiums. Ready, aim, fire!

[840high]

77. No fire from me.

[oldbitty]

79. For upper middle class older folks, Obamacare will result in bankruptcy

Last edited Thu Dec 5, 2013, 12:43 AM - Edit history (1)

There are going to be a lot of people falling through the cracks with this, despite all of the positive press trying to pump it up as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Our own employer sponsored premiums have doubled in price since this law was enacted. They went from $300/month to $600/month.

One year, they estimated our insurance plan price to be $12K/year as a benefit. Then dropped the employer's share of the premium from 60% to 51%. Now, all of a sudden our plan is valued at $18K/yr. If they're paying $600/month and we're paying $600/month, there is no way the plan is worth $18K/yr. Fuzzy math.

Not just that, our grandfathered plan was cancelled, forcing us into a higher priced plan with less coverage.

If our employer ever dropped the coverage, we'd be falling into that group that wouldn't be able to afford premiums. We're older, one smoker (who will probably be smoking the day he dies unable to breathe, yes, I see this coming as a real possibility), and income high enough that it barely qualifies for a subsidy. Premiums would run (with the little subsidy) $1300/month or $15K/year. Out of pocket maximums would be $12K/yr (and we would meet them, with three household members having chronic health issues). And then there are the prescription drug costs, which run us $2K to $3K/year now just in copays. They'd be far higher with these plans being offered on the exchange, and we'd have to forgo some of them to put food on the table. Let's just double what they cost us now as I'm sure the real cost on an exchange plan would easily triple. So add another $5000/year, that doesn't go toward a deductible or out-of-pocket max. Our total would be $32,000/year, or nearly HALF of our family income of $72,000/year.

I'm not interested in comparing what was on the private market before Obamacare. I'm interested in survival going forward - eating real food vs. overpriced pet food, having the medications our doctor prescribes to keep us functional and WORKING.

So here you have a couple who have worked themselves into the upper middle class, one having stayed with the same employer for 35 years, stuck in a mortgage and no way to afford health insurance that's supposed to save us from going bankrupt from medical bills. With those premiums alone, there's no way we would be able to afford to use the insurance when needed. This is the same situation for a lot of these young, healthy people who are supposed to be the pillar supporting the entire structure. So you get the chance to buy health insurance. What good will it do you if it sucks every penny of your spendable income, preventing you from affording a prescription and doc visit from contracting pneumonia after working your 70 hour week of 2 jobs?

[LovingA2andMI]

96. Obamacare.....interesting word choice

The Law is named the Affordable Patient Protection and Healthcare Act. Obamacare does not exist. With 14 posts and counting, welcome to D.U.

Also, don't be fooled by my 400+ posts...as I'm a DU reader more so than commentator but since I'm also a talk show radio host....my ability to see past words is #AWESOME.

[oldbitty]

103. Suspicion

is understandable based on my low post count, but unwarranted. I've been a reader of DU for many years but most often just read. I'm posting on this topic, because people need to hear the negative impact this has on some people in certain income categories. It's not the great thing it's getting promoted as. I'm a progressive and a volunteer for a local progressive campaign. Obamacare is simply easier to remember than ACA. Even Obama supports the term.

But I love how everyone is trying to pull rank and accuse me of being a troll here. I can assure you, I'm speaking for myself, our situation, and my honest perceptions on this topic.

It's becoming apparent to me that most people promoting this are either a) are wealthy enough to have been able to afford private market insurance and are actually getting a bargain or b) are incredibly math challenged.

A person who dislikes how the ACA turned out doesn't necessarily have to be a Freeper.

[Enthusiast]

104. It might be unwarranted but you have aroused my suspicion.

You're on the radar now.

[oldbitty]

111. Disbelief

Why? Because I pointed out a gigantic flaw in the Obamacare law? The media needs to stop burying these stories. It can't be fixed without looking at the truth of the hardship it's going to cause for the middle class. That's who's getting hid the hardest with this. Wages and salaries of today don't support the costs of insurance. People are barely scraping by without being forced to buy an overpriced private industry product that delivers nothing more than a free physical and pap test every year.

How about we just get rid of the middleman altogether? I'd love to see the insurance companies eliminated.

[philosslayer]

108. I thought Obamacare was an acceptable way of referring to ACA

Even The President himself said he likes it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2012/10/03/obama-likes-obamacare/

Are we not to use that term here?

[oldbitty]

112. You and me both

The term is used everywhere to refer to the law. Why is it all of a sudden considered derogatory?

[LovingA2andMI]

122. The LAW IS....

The Affordable Patient Protection and Healthcare Act. Obamacare does NOT exist, regardless of what the President said, previously. If the name of the law is too much for ya to type, try ACA.

[oldbitty]

131. When posting my comments

I never expected someone to nitpick my choice of terms. Have anything to add to the discussion, besides a shallow correction on my use of the term Obamacare? It's what I call it, myself and probably 80% of the country. Maybe you should get used to it being referred to as that. Otherwise, you'll be running around correcting everyone around you like an anal school teacher correcting everybody's grammar.

[Lifelong Dem]

80. $95 per person or 1 percent of income whichever is greater

Every year the penalty goes up quite a bit. $695 per person or 2.5 percent of income whichever is greater by 2016.

https://www.healthcare.gov/what-if-someone-doesnt-have-health-coverage-in-2014/

[Warpy]

82. The bottom tier plans are terrible

because of those high deductibles. For low wage workers, it still makes more sense to forgo insurance and just hope they only get sick with things they can treat with OTC drugs.

Those insanely high deductibles have to be the first thing to go. They render the insurance useless for most people.

[Fumesucker]

84. I'm just about done with wasting my time on this issue

DU is solidly upper middle class and most here don't have a clue what it's like to actually have to choose whether to pay the electric bill, repairs on the car or the rent. And of the ones who do know a goodly percentage of them are so wrapped up in making sure this is a "win" for Obama and/or "The Democrats" they couldn't possibly care less about anyone stuck in that position.

[oldbitty]

90. Every plan below platinum is terrible

And platinum plans are too high priced. Is this forum full of people making $100K+ per year or something? Where are these people whose kids' premiums are $21/month? What state do you live in? LOL The lowest priced plan here has a $10K deductible. Can you imagine what would happen to one of these kids who gets sick and has to come up with $10K plus 40% of their medical costs after that? So they can't afford the premiums, but are forced to buy a policy anyway. Then they get sick and get hit with these bills on top of it. Negotiate a monthly payment and get sick again. Then what? Give up, go on welfare and Medicaid? File for bankruptcy? How discouraging for a young person to be saddled with something like that, but then to be buried in the costs regardless of whether they have "insurance" or not. This isn't sharing the costs of serious illness among the population. This is bankrupting people who need medical care and forcing them to go without while sucking their money away for "insurance" coverage that isn't.

The worst part of these plans is the prescription drug coverage. Most of them are charging a percentage copay. Many of the newer drugs have a 50% copay. What if you happen to need 4 of these - cholesterol, high blood pressure, migraines and insomnia meds? You're looking at $200/month or better just for prescription copays. Some of the newer, more effective drugs for serious and chronic health conditions aren't in their formularies, meds that cost upwards of $3000/month. How does someone get treated for their condition? Do they just die?

Does nobody think these things through or something? The price of the plans alone is going to steer sicker people away from receiving care they need and driving costs even higher. I don't see it saving lives, either.

This is bad, bad, bad. As much as I wanted this to be a good thing, I can't see anything good in it other than the kids who were allowed to stay on their parents' plans until they were 26 years old. That saved lives.

[Warpy]

91. Right. We knew it was going to take a lot of work to fix it

because it's the plan the Heritage Foundation came up with and they have never been anyone's friend but the ultra wealthy.

When enough states have joined Vermont with single payer systems, we might finally get that on the agenda. Dixie and the Moron Corridor will shriek about it, but they always have to be dragged kicking and screaming to make any progress, at all, in this country.

People who will do well out of this are the working poor in blue states, who will go right onto Medicaid, where they should have been all along. I can only hope the subsidies for the rest of relatively low paid workers will make the plan an affordable catastrophic insurance plan. It just doesn't do squat to get them care for any chronic condition.

[oldbitty]

94. Medicaid

In this state is a joke. You can barely find a doctor who accepts it. It's been this way for nearly 30 years. Medicaid in Illinois = emergency room care. It's the only place a poor person can be seen for an acute illness. No docs = no care.

[Warpy]

95. They're going to have to come up with a quota system for docs

that can be satisfied by a percentage of Medicare or Medicaid or a combination of the two.

I hear you about the Medicaid snobs. At least now poor folks will get those ER bills paid.

[oldbitty]

132. It might exist

But only for the educational facilities that receive state support. That's about the only place you can find someone who accepts it. I'm sure they have a nice long waiting list for those who use it.

Medicare gets this snobbery by private facilities, too. They have a quota on how many Medicare patients they will accept, a self-imposed one. True story - two people looking at the same facility for cancer treatment. One had Medicare, the other private insurance. The one with private insurance was able to be seen right away. The one with Medicare was told she had to wait 5 months for a first appointment. Needless to say, the Medicare patient couldn't wait five months without treatment, so had to go elsewhere.

The private pay person lived longer, despite having had far more advanced cancer at diagnosis. But the moment she went on Medicare, the facility started cutting back her treatment program and scheduling her with the physician's assistant instead of the real doctor.

[KatyMan]

123. i am the one with a daughter

Who is getting a silver plan bc/bs advantage 004 for 21.00. She h a s a low income and qualified for a subsidy. There is no deductible on her plan. We 're in Texas so no Medicaid expansion. Her copy for pop is 30. For a specialist it is 50. Prescription drugs are 30 to 50 per month

.

[oldbitty]

129. Thank you for responding

Does anyone realize that these copays are close to what the costs would normally be for a doc visit and prescription if insurance weren't part of the picture?

At least she has a reasonable premium price for her discount plan . . . er . . . insurance. The rest of us are getting ripped off, big time. They've devised another brilliant way to funnel the incomes of the middle class upward to corporate executives.

[KatyMan]

133. i do not think any doctor visit

Would be 30.00 even if insurance was never involved. Now my wife is an RN with 30 years experience who has been a case manager for Medicaid for 10 years so we do have strong views on healthcare at our house. For my daughter, who has a serious chronic disorder, the ACA has really been a relief

[oldbitty]

135. It all depends on the doctor

We had one start up a practice in our area a few years back advertising one-problem visits for $25 for anyone without insurance. There are groups of docs around the country starting up their own insurance-free health care systems and doing well. At least they were. The prices were incredibly reasonable.

[taught_me_patience]

85. Polls like these tend to be B.S.

most people talk big, but when the fine comes, they'll change real fast. Plus, the fine ratchets up. and they'll start buying insurance real quick.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

89. so what happens if they get really sick?

they go to the emergency room and run up a huge bill?

What would happen if hospitals refused to treat people without insurance? What then?

[Tien1985]

93. The same thing that happens now

You work until you physically cannot work anymore.

You get sent to an emergency room when it becomes apparent to the people around you that you are on death's door.

You and your family get saddled with enormous bills that you can't afford to pay.

Then you die, go bankrupt or both. If you survive, you and your family try to make some settlement for what to pay a month that is sadly, still less than insurance premiums in many cases.

This is just how it is for many people. We've made some progress, but this is far from a great system. It'll need a lot of tweaking if we want it to truly work and be fair.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

120. single payer system is the answer

[alc]

102. that's the problem with the pre-existing condition stuff

It's no longer "medical insurance" in the sense of a group of similar people sharing risk of costly health problems. It insures you against sudden emergency room visits but not against longer term medical needs. You can wait for the long term problems to come up then get an ACA medical payment policy for much less than the cost of your treatment so there's no reason to pre-pay in case you are one of the people who pooled their money to cover the cost.

There are a lot of people who are sure they won't have a sudden need (the young invincibles). And many others who can afford the sudden ER visit (it's cheaper if you pay rather than using insurance and hospitals/providers will work with you). I had catastrophic coverage for much of my life even with 2 kids and paid for many things out of pocket including ER visits and still saved $1000+ in the worst years.

Catastrophic coverage is still legal, you just have to pay the ACA fine. If regulators stop approving those policies, my guess is that someone will find a way to sell non-ACA insurance to cover the costs between an emergency and buying an ACA policy. It won't be a primary insurer since that would eat into their ACA profit. And regulators will balk at allowing these as health policies so it'll be more of an "emergency insurance" than medical insurance and will pay out in any emergency that you have a sudden need for money (house fire, theft, tornado, ER visit).

The ACA has too many holes. It needs to be single-payer "medical care", not this pretend "medical insurance" system the ACA is.

[oldbitty]

113. Thank you

This law didn't provide access to health care beyond annual preventive visits. It provided access to health insurance.

It is cheaper to pay out of pocket and they will work with you. May as well get the cheapest plan available and figure on paying cash for everything anyway. Like I was saying, they're nothing more than overpriced catastrophic plans.

[hollowdweller]

105. NONE OF THE PEOPLE I KNOW

That do not have health insurance have even tried to sign up.

The funny part is they are all extremely liberal and some even volunteered for the Obama campaign, argued with conservatives about the health care law.

But now the time has come to put out or get out they are not supporting the law.

It really upsets me because it's so hypocritical.

One of my friends, extremely liberal more than me even and I've been accused of being a communist before said if he paid all that money in premiums and wasn't sick that would be "wasted money" He's within 3 years of getting on medicare so he's going to pay the fine till then.

OK so then there's me whose been dumb and was paying for insurance even when I was 22? But I didn't want somebody else to pay more because I wasn't covered on the chance I got sick.

[HuckleB]

115. Do this same poll in a year, and then in two years.

We all know what the results will be...

[ForgoTheConsequence]

118. My mother is in this camp.

She is self employed and makes too much to qualify for a subsidy and not enough to afford the bottom tier plan which is nearly 400 a month. To get added on to my fathers plan would cost nearly 600 a month. I'm not sure what we're going to do yet.

[Mr.Bill]

124. I hear that if you don't sign up,

then the death panels can't kill you.

(I'll bet there's people that really believe this.)

[Puzzledtraveller]

126. lawl

[liberal N proud]

128. Stiffen the fine

They see the fine as a cheaper alternative thinking they will never get sick.

[jamzrockz]

136. or even better increase the subsidy

Cos it is truly cheaper to pay the fines than to get healthcare insurance. With the law, insurance companies cannot deny or oversharge you for coverage so for a very high percentage of the consumers, they will come out ahead if they paid the fine.

Wanna convince those people? raise the subsidy. Sugar attracts more flies than vinegar