<p>This family of seven has a family income of less than $35,610/year. And you’re telling me that they used to be able to buy insurance for their family. No they couldn’t. They could buy “insurance,” but they couldn’t buy insurance that insured. Why are we trotting out this nonsense yet again?</p>
<p>And why don’t you just look it up rather than saying everyone must be lying? The fact that they thought they had some sort of insurance before and now the exchange would slide them to Medicaid-- it’s coverage at the essential benefits standard. These “reports” are a problem when anyone takes them at face value. We can;t be informed when we settle for headlines or 60 second bits. yeah, we can fuss and fret- but that’s still lite.</p>
<p>CF - They can’t see their doctors with Medicaid. They don’t want Medicaid. And, there was some complicating factor about where they lived bordering two state lines where the physician in one state said he couldn’t even see a Medicaid patient from another state if they paid a cash fee for the visit. </p>
<p>Apparently, they bought what they could afford to cover what they wanted to cover and they liked it. Now, not so much. The question is how many people are in this kind of mess vs. how many benefit and I obviously have no clue. </p>
<p>I’m not saying they are lying: I’m sure they are saying what they believe is true. What I’m saying is that the “insurance” they previously had was junk.</p>
<p>You say they were happy with the junk. I say, they wouldn’t have been happy with the junk if they got sick. I say, insurers were acting fraudulently and in bad faith by representing junk as insurance, and it’s a good thing that insurers are now prohibited from committing this fraud.</p>
<p>Should companies be allowed to sell “fire extinguishers” that don’t put out fires? People who bought the fire extinguishers but didn’t have any fires would be happy with the low price. But I still say companies should be prohibited from representing fire extinguishers that don’t extinguish as fire extinguishers. And I say companies should be prohibited from representing health insurance that doesn’t insure as health insurance. It’s fraud. </p>
<p>Here’s how we know it’s fraud: we ask the people who have purchased this junk insurance whether it covers cancer, hospitalization and other expensive conditions. And they tell us it does. But it doesn’t. The people who bought it were deceived into thinking they were buying insurance, when they weren’t.</p>
<p>Deleted. I misinterpreted what someone said.</p>
<p>actingmt, if they don’t like Medicaid, there’s nothing to prevent them from going directly to an insurer and paying full freight. Nothing at all.</p>
<p>The so-called “insurance” they had before ACA is not available any more because it is junk. We talked about this a couple of weeks ago. Those junk insurance plans had features like coverage capped at $1000/year, or did not pay for hospitalization, etc. The reason they liked it is because they never found out from experience what the limits were. There are plenty of cases of people who liked their low-cost junk until they got sick. Also, lots of bankruptcy stories.</p>
<p>Yes, the people are too stupid to know what was good for them, so the government has to decide for them. 8-| </p>
<p>LF- Where did I say look it up? There are plenty of stories and there’ll be plenty more. I’m not going to pick them all apart on an internet forum all day. That is pointless. I do think telling a working family that all of a sudden they are so poor that they need to go on Medicaid is going to be a tough sell. But, we’ll see. </p>
<p>The argument that people like their plan so they should be able to keep it is stupid.</p>
<p>Huh? Only if your opinion of your fellow man is so low…</p>
<p>AM- I said look it up, rather than fling out "they must be lying ". Fang showed what that family size must have been earning. If you or someone else had considered a family of 7-9 on 35k, it’s clear they have little left for adequate coverage at list prices. </p>
<p>Of course there will be more “stories” on this thread. That doesn’t mean linkers are always vetting. It would be good if they did. </p>
<p>You think they are stupid, Tatin? As noted by others, they can still go direct. On 35k before taxes, that would involve other sacrifices I wouldn’t want, with that size family. </p>
<p>You missed the sarcastic eyerolling smiley face. On the contrary, I think people should be allowed to make their own choices, not have those choices made for them by government. I’m not talking about that family particularly but for all those who liked their prior plans. </p>
<p>LF - Oh, my lying reference was to what we are hearing about these stories of late from our government but that wouldn’t have made it onto this thread. Sorry for the confusion. </p>
<p>The idea that people should be able to keep their insurance because they like their insurance is stupid.</p>
<p>Some of the insurance was junk. </p>
<p>I can’t even find a link to a family of 7 and this issue.
It really is the fire extinguisher analogy- or fire sensors in our homes: “Oh, yeah I have them and I like what I have and they cost next to nothing each at the dollar store. Why is the city telling e they aren’t adequate? How can they impose certification standards? Do they think I am stupid? Where are my individual rights?”</p>
<p>Or maybe the family has buckets of water placed around the house.</p>
<p>Now that I think about it, the Medicaid income for a family of seven is 135% of poverty, not 100% of poverty, in expansion states. So the family could earn as much as 135% of $35600, which is $48000, and still be eligible for Medicaid. Still not a ton of money for a family of seven.</p>
<p>"…where the physician in one state said he couldn’t even see a Medicaid patient from another state if they paid a cash fee for the visit."</p>
<p>^ This makes absolutely no sense. </p>
<p>Some quick Googling has led me to believe that it may be illegal for a Medicaid patient to cash pay a physician. But, I don’t know. I do know that’s what she said was the glitch in trying to see her previous doctor. Well, along with being offended by the whole Medicaid thing. Not everyone says Yippee! at the idea of their family being put into a poverty program. </p>
<p>x </p>
<p>I have a friend that earned a degree in chemical engineering from UC Berkeley. (That was supposedly the hardest major at Berkeley at the time). </p>
<p>He is very pro business, but he ended up working for the govt. My next door neighbor, who happens to be my wife’s best friend, has a graduate degree. She works for the govt. I could go on…They are pretty bright. These two people work for us so we can breathe fresh air and drink clean water. </p>
<p>My friend said in over 30 years, maybe there were one or two companies, that cared about pollution. Maybe one or two. </p>
<p>He has lots of stories. They are pretty bad stories. Companies will kill us if given the chance. Maybe not on purpose. We are collateral damage. We would die just the same though.</p>
<p>Health insurance companies dont have a great track record. Look at that Forbes opinion piece GP posted. ;). </p>
<p>A little regulation is needed.</p>