Obamacare: Californians will pay 10th...

Obamacare: Californians will pay 10th highest rates in country under health exchange

There are 3805 comments on the The Daily Democrat story from Sep 26, 2013, titled Obamacare: Californians will pay 10th highest rates in country under health exchange. In it, The Daily Democrat reports that:

TOPSHOTS US President Barack Obama listens to President Michel Sleiman of Lebanon speaking to the media before a bilateral meeting on the sideline of the 68th United Nations General Assembly at the UN in New York on September 24, 2013.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Daily Democrat.

sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#85 Sep 30, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
All industrial countries in the western world have universal health care except one... and the exception isn't going to be there much longer.
There is something to be said for a country whose priorities is to spend something close to a $1.5 TRILLION dollars but not $600 to save the life of a child needing a tooth extraction.
That TRILLION with a T.
And you can be sure that shortsh!t Canadian in the Texas Senate wouldn't allow his kids to not have health insurance..
If the truly needy need health care they are getting it through Medicaid, clinics and childrens medical insurance. There are states that have children insurance for 30-75$ a month if they don't qualify for anything else. I don't have a problem giving the those in need care but what is the difference between "in need" and those that don't have health INSURANCE an optional voluntary form of payment for until Oct 2013.

The costs or money spent on health care is atrocious along with some of the results. But it's not a funding problem it's a greed and exploitation problem. It's not just the INSURANCE companies either, you have providers bilking the INSURANCE for billions along with patients abusing INSURANCE, a tool used for A catastrophic event being used for minor events and routine maintenance.

INSURANCE creates inflation because the providers bill on INSURANCE fee schedules, not what the patient can afford. The ACA is an INSURANCE bill, not a care bill or even an 'affordable' care bill. I'd rather see a 50$ dollar tax slapped on every taxpayer no exceptions for physical medical care for those in need. But don't try to disguise or open a backdoor to a government funded health care system in a free market society. There should be choices but not everyone will have the same choices.
see the light

El Paso, TX

#86 Sep 30, 2013
Who cares if all the illegals and poor have insurance. Its the citizens who pay for them and who have AlWAYS paid for them. Its gonna be the same, American Citizens foot the BilL.

Level 5

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#87 Sep 30, 2013
sheepleloveroyalty wrote:
<quoted text>
If the truly needy need health care they are getting
The only western industrial country that doesn't have health care.

People who were raised right should be ashamed of what this country did to the Japanese Americans in WWII, those who fought so hard to keep blacks from voting in the 60s, disco in the 70s, beating up on Grenada and pretending it was a great victory for that dope Reagan in the 80s...

And not having health insurance for 1 in four kids today.

People who were raised right.

Christ: even some third world countries have universal healthcare.

Level 5

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#88 Sep 30, 2013
see the light wrote:
Who cares if all the illegals and poor have insurance.
We have to pay for your methadon treatments, shug.

I'd rather pay for kids who deserve it.
spud

Weatherly, PA

#89 Oct 1, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
One state will pay the highest and another will pay the lowest.
I guess I should not be surprised you are confused.
I guess will have to wait a day but my money on the highest bills will be in the south where so many fat people who smoke can be found drinking while playing with firearms.
Louisiana good bet.
I know math isn't the lefts favorite subject but even you should be able to understand that two states can't both be paying the tenth highest cost. When you have a paper called the daily Democrat, reporting on the cost of a Democratic law that nobody understands, you'll get whatever conclusions they want to portray. Hidden costs, like increased taxes and fees, are the kind of things Democrats are known for omitting in their cost studies.
Brenda besson

United States

#90 Oct 1, 2013
spud wrote:
<quoted text>I know math isn't the lefts favorite subject but even you should be able to understand that two states can't both be paying the tenth highest cost. When you have a paper called the daily Democrat, reporting on the cost of a Democratic law that nobody understands, you'll get whatever conclusions they want to portray. Hidden costs, like increased taxes and fees, are the kind of things Democrats are known for omitting in their cost studies.
very true.

Level 5

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#92 Oct 1, 2013
spud wrote:
<quoted text>I know math isn't the lefts favorite subject but even you should be able to understand that two states can't both be paying the tenth highest cost.
I'm not the one that doesn't comprehend in 50 states, one will pay the most, and one will pay the least, and PS: yes, Shug, there could be ties.
sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#93 Oct 1, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The only western industrial country that doesn't have health care.
People who were raised right should be ashamed of what this country did to the Japanese Americans in WWII, those who fought so hard to keep blacks from voting in the 60s, disco in the 70s, beating up on Grenada and pretending it was a great victory for that dope Reagan in the 80s...
And not having health insurance for 1 in four kids today.
People who were raised right.
Christ: even some third world countries have universal healthcare.
Straying from health INSURANCE to controversial US history will not rationalize or justify the ACA aka Obama Care.

Those one in four kids without health INSURANCE are not getting care? Or don't have any programs available to or for them?

Many states have cheap health insurance for kids. I've known people who only paid 35 dollars a month for a 10 year old. The premiums have gone up as they child aged but at last check it was 75$ a month. AND the same person at one point was eligible for welfare benefits but they still chose to pay the 35$ a month. Not everyone wants a handout.

No one is saying don't help those in need but again there is a difference between those in need and those that don't have INSURANCE until today a voluntary optional form of payment the patients and providers chose to use & abuse for decades.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

#94 Oct 1, 2013
sheepleloveroyalty wrote:
<quoted text>
Straying from health INSURANCE to controversial US history will not rationalize or justify the ACA aka Obama Care.
Those one in four kids without health INSURANCE are not getting care? Or don't have any programs available to or for them?
Many states have cheap health insurance for kids. I've known people who only paid 35 dollars a month for a 10 year old. The premiums have gone up as they child aged but at last check it was 75$ a month. AND the same person at one point was eligible for welfare benefits but they still chose to pay the 35$ a month. Not everyone wants a handout.
No one is saying don't help those in need but again there is a difference between those in need and those that don't have INSURANCE until today a voluntary optional form of payment the patients and providers chose to use & abuse for decades.
The ACA is not about poor people. As you mentioned they have options. The ACA is about middle class people who have to pay for their own insurance.

There are 300 million people in the US. 169 million receive health insurance through their employer and another 90 million people have government insurance (Medicare, Medicaid).

That leaves 50 million people who have to purchase their own insurance. Some of course have existing conditions and could never buy insurance. They simply had to pay their own medicals bills until they go bankrupt and then they can receive Medicaid. Not a good deal for anybody.

The other people have to buy individual policies. For group rates insurance companies charge about $300 a month, but if somebody had to buy the exact same policy as an individual the cost is about $1000 per peson. My family pays $3200 a month for insurance. That is a lot of money. Many hard working middle class people simply can not afford to pay that much every month so they go without insurance. Eventually they will be wards of the state too.

Under the ACA my monthly rate will go down by $1500 per month. It is still a lot of money, but it is better than before. Now more people will be able to afford insurance.

It is remarkable that the self proclaimed party of "personal responsibility" is going to such great lengths to prevent people from buying insurance with their own money.
Justin

United States

#95 Oct 1, 2013
Well, some state will end up having the 10th highest rates in the nation. It's better than being the 1st highest. Why not California?
sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#96 Oct 1, 2013
Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
......
It is remarkable that the self proclaimed party of "personal responsibility" is going to such great lengths to prevent people from buying insurance with their own money.
No one is stopping people buying INSURANCE with their own money. But mandated health INSURANCE purchases, fines and/or taxes on things like medical devices is not one's own money. It's akin to forcing everyone to shop at Walmart or buy a Chevy. The ACA makes INSURANCE the only form of payment. INSURANCE as a form of payment should be AN option for the provider and patient.

INSURANCE is a voluntary optional form of payment. Patients and providers have voluntarily opted to use INSURANCE as their preferred form of payment for decades. Mandatory INSURANCE purchases might not benefit everyone because it depends on your INSURANCE company. If someone's premiums went down it's probably because more enrolled with that company. If premiums went up either fewer enrolled or more high risk patients enrolled with your present company. There is too much disparity in costs. If this is supposed to be a tax as declared by the big bad John Roberts court it's turning into unequal and discriminatory enforcement of tax law. It's costing the consumer.

Too top it off you know how many office visits one could buy for 32000$ a month, even with inflated insurance based pricing that's at least a half dozen doctor visits a month. And there in lies the problem with the abuse and misuse of INSURANCE by the patient and provider. INSURANCE was/is meant to be for individual catastrophic events like MAJOR procedures and hospitalization. And NOT routine maintenance. Routine maintenance should be on the individual.

But all that is a moot point. The problem with health CARE COSTS is THE cost and not who is paying for it. Mandatory INSURANCE purchases is simply throwing money at the problem. It caused and causes medical care and INSURANCE inflation. COST is the problem that needs to be addressed. Not who is paying for it.

The ACA is nothing but a backdoor prop to institute Universal or government health care which will be paid for with more taxes and costs to the consumer.
fatbacks x

Portland, OR

#97 Oct 1, 2013
Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
The ACA is not about poor people. As you mentioned they have options. The ACA is about middle class people who have to pay for their own insurance.
There are 300 million people in the US. 169 million receive health insurance through their employer and another 90 million people have government insurance (Medicare, Medicaid).
That leaves 50 million people who have to purchase their own insurance. Some of course have existing conditions and could never buy insurance. They simply had to pay their own medicals bills until they go bankrupt and then they can receive Medicaid. Not a good deal for anybody.
The other people have to buy individual policies. For group rates insurance companies charge about $300 a month, but if somebody had to buy the exact same policy as an individual the cost is about $1000 per peson. My family pays $3200 a month for insurance. That is a lot of money. Many hard working middle class people simply can not afford to pay that much every month so they go without insurance. Eventually they will be wards of the state too.
Under the ACA my monthly rate will go down by $1500 per month. It is still a lot of money, but it is better than before. Now more people will be able to afford insurance.
It is remarkable that the self proclaimed party of "personal responsibility" is going to such great lengths to prevent people from buying insurance with their own money.
For thirty two hun a month you should have private quarters at the hospital casino.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

#98 Oct 1, 2013
fatbacks x wrote:
<quoted text>For thirty two hun a month you should have private quarters at the hospital casino.
No I don't. I have a ridiculously high deductible and a policy that does not even pay for doctor visits. The ACA policy will be a lot better.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

#99 Oct 1, 2013
sheepleloveroyalty wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is stopping people buying INSURANCE with their own money. But mandated health INSURANCE purchases, fines and/or taxes on things like medical devices is not one's own money. It's akin to forcing everyone to shop at Walmart or buy a Chevy. The ACA makes INSURANCE the only form of payment. INSURANCE as a form of payment should be AN option for the provider and patient.
INSURANCE is a voluntary optional form of payment. Patients and providers have voluntarily opted to use INSURANCE as their preferred form of payment for decades. Mandatory INSURANCE purchases might not benefit everyone because it depends on your INSURANCE company. If someone's premiums went down it's probably because more enrolled with that company. If premiums went up either fewer enrolled or more high risk patients enrolled with your present company. There is too much disparity in costs. If this is supposed to be a tax as declared by the big bad John Roberts court it's turning into unequal and discriminatory enforcement of tax law. It's costing the consumer.
Too top it off you know how many office visits one could buy for 32000$ a month, even with inflated insurance based pricing that's at least a half dozen doctor visits a month. And there in lies the problem with the abuse and misuse of INSURANCE by the patient and provider. INSURANCE was/is meant to be for individual catastrophic events like MAJOR procedures and hospitalization. And NOT routine maintenance. Routine maintenance should be on the individual.
But all that is a moot point. The problem with health CARE COSTS is THE cost and not who is paying for it. Mandatory INSURANCE purchases is simply throwing money at the problem. It caused and causes medical care and INSURANCE inflation. COST is the problem that needs to be addressed. Not who is paying for it.
The ACA is nothing but a backdoor prop to institute Universal or government health care which will be paid for with more taxes and costs to the consumer.
You are correct that there is nobody telling you to buy a Chevy. You can drive whatever kind of car you want, but you are required to purchase auto insurance. Nobody ever called that socialism or suggested that it would be the end of the world.
sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#100 Oct 1, 2013
Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
You are correct that there is nobody telling you to buy a Chevy. You can drive whatever kind of car you want, but you are required to purchase auto insurance. Nobody ever called that socialism or suggested that it would be the end of the world.
The ACA does tell people HOW they will pay for medical care they MIGHT need or utilize. It's your choice to go the doctor and/or how you will pay for it as it is to drive. INSURANCE is not the only way to pay for medical care.

The ACA is backdoor socialism because it's ment to plant the seeds for fully subsidized government health care, especially after the ACA fails. The problem with the ACA is it involves mandates and regulates the private sector. For profit private sector mandates and regulation won't work on a system ment for non profit government administration.
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

#101 Oct 1, 2013
sheepleloveroyalty wrote:
<quoted text>
The ACA does tell people HOW they will pay for medical care they MIGHT need or utilize. It's your choice to go the doctor and/or how you will pay for it as it is to drive. INSURANCE is not the only way to pay for medical care.
The ACA is backdoor socialism because it's ment to plant the seeds for fully subsidized government health care, especially after the ACA fails. The problem with the ACA is it involves mandates and regulates the private sector. For profit private sector mandates and regulation won't work on a system ment for non profit government administration.
If you are that opposed to insurance then pay the $95 penalty and just show up at the emergency room when you have a problem. I wish I could solve my problems with an annual $95 fee.

By the way, my car insurance bill includes a $3 per month fee to cover me for damages caused by uninsured drivers. Why should I have to pay for less responsible people. If you decide that you do not want to use health insurance and prefer to stick the taxpayer that is your choice, but a $95 fee for this is reasonable.
spOko

Oakland, CA

#102 Oct 1, 2013
Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
You are correct that there is nobody telling you to buy a Chevy. You can drive whatever kind of car you want, but you are required to purchase auto insurance. Nobody ever called that socialism or suggested that it would be the end of the world.
Oh I'm sure a few t-baggers have :-)

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#103 Oct 1, 2013
Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
Seriously? That is what you were told?
Obamacare covers everybody. Nobody is "exempt". The whole point of the law is to provide people without employer sponsored insurance plans an opportunity to buy insurance at reasonable rates.
Members of Congress, the Senate and government employees like you already have medical insurance. There is no reason for you or anybody else who already has insurance and are happy with it to need Obamacare. It does not apply to you, but to say that you or your fellow government employees in Congress are "exempt" is incorrect.
CONGRESS IS EXEMPT. The reason isnt because they already have insurance, like all federal employees, it's because they have "Cadillac" health plans that would be highly taxed and penalized...

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#104 Oct 1, 2013
Memo From Turner wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, my car insurance bill includes a $3 per month fee to cover me for damages caused by uninsured drivers. Why should I have to pay for less responsible people. If you decide that you do not want to use health insurance and prefer to stick the taxpayer that is your choice, but a $95 fee for this is reasonable.
But there is a big difference, you dont HAVE to pay the $3 per monthly fee on your drivers insurance. You have a choice if you want that coverage or not.
I no longer have that choice with my health insurance. Now I am told to buy it, where to buy it, how much coverage someone else feels I need, what my deductible and max is, etc... I no longer get to make those choices once I enter my states insurance exchange.
You all that want Obamacare need to google " Massachusetts Doctor wait time". They have improved from a state average of over 45 days to an amazing 33 day wait.
My employer has 5 employees and always payed 100% for my insurance. Because of Obamacare, my company can no longer find comparable insurance and the insurance company we are currently with is leaving the small employer pool in Calif after the 1st of Jan. My employer is telling us to go on the exchange for insurance. So what I used to get for free, I now have to pay for. My employer will give us $50 a week extra in place of insurance. I cant find comparable insurance for $200 a month, the plans at that cost are worthless with large co-pays and huge out of pocket maximums. On top of that, I now get to pay tax on that extra $200 a month and my employer no longer gets to right that off their taxes.
Remember that BS about being allowed to keep the insurance you already have? Remember that BS about no one making under $250k will see their taxes go up??
The Repubs in the House need to back off, let this stinking heep of dung sink next year, then come to the rescue. Why they are trying to saving the enemies sinking ship is beyond me.
My analogy...two ships are engaging in a fight shooting cannons at each other. Suddenly the Blue ship catches on fire. Does the Red ship then help the Blue ship put out their fire so the fight can continue at a later time? No, they let the ship burn and sink...
Memo From Turner

Bellmore, NY

#105 Oct 1, 2013
edsmith1360 wrote:
<quoted text>
But there is a big difference, you dont HAVE to pay the $3 per monthly fee on your drivers insurance. You have a choice if you want that coverage or not.
I no longer have that choice with my health insurance. Now I am told to buy it, where to buy it, how much coverage someone else feels I need, what my deductible and max is, etc... I no longer get to make those choices once I enter my states insurance exchange.
You all that want Obamacare need to google " Massachusetts Doctor wait time". They have improved from a state average of over 45 days to an amazing 33 day wait.
My employer has 5 employees and always payed 100% for my insurance. Because of Obamacare, my company can no longer find comparable insurance and the insurance company we are currently with is leaving the small employer pool in Calif after the 1st of Jan. My employer is telling us to go on the exchange for insurance. So what I used to get for free, I now have to pay for. My employer will give us $50 a week extra in place of insurance. I cant find comparable insurance for $200 a month, the plans at that cost are worthless with large co-pays and huge out of pocket maximums. On top of that, I now get to pay tax on that extra $200 a month and my employer no longer gets to right that off their taxes.
Remember that BS about being allowed to keep the insurance you already have? Remember that BS about no one making under $250k will see their taxes go up??
The Repubs in the House need to back off, let this stinking heep of dung sink next year, then come to the rescue. Why they are trying to saving the enemies sinking ship is beyond me.
My analogy...two ships are engaging in a fight shooting cannons at each other. Suddenly the Blue ship catches on fire. Does the Red ship then help the Blue ship put out their fire so the fight can continue at a later time? No, they let the ship burn and sink...
There is a choice about the uninsured motorist coverage, but there is no choice when it comes to buying auto insurance. If a patriotic flag waving teabagger thinks he is making a statement by not having medical insurance, the taxpayers do not have a choice about having to pay to pick up the tab when he does get sick.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Immigration Reform Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 14 min abc 7,325
News Donald Trump's immigration policy: Then and now 20 min Go Blue Forever 1
News If Donald Trump Was President, Here's What Woul... (Oct '15) 1 hr Character before ... 10,968
News Can Sheriff Joe Arpaio win re-election in the f... 1 hr Donnie 1
News Washington Post: U.S. needs illegal immigrants ... 4 hr Dee Dee Dee 1
Do Mexicans poop a lot eating all that spicey f... (Aug '10) 4 hr Horse 2
News Latinos: A New Immigration Plan From Donald Tru... 4 hr HOLLA ISABELLA 3
More from around the web