One might consider most people who worked paid 1.45% of there
FICA also matched by their employers for Medicare coverage which you can’t tap into until age
65 , unless your collecting social security disability. What exactly does one mean free ?

fake news

Free ? What part of FICA does one not understand?

people seem to be under the illusion that private companies are offering the kind of health insurance they did when they were in the work force. They are not. Many companies keep people working just under the amount of hours needed to get health insurance thu the company. Companies that still offer it, don't offer the type of plans that were once offered and it's almost never free anymore. To tie health insurance to work is archaic. There is no security in one's job anymore. Corporations think nothing of cutting jobs when they need to give more to their stock holders. doctors end up bringing patients in more often to increase revenue because reimbursements keep being cut. doctors have to employ people whose only jobs are to deal with insurance companies. the time has come for some kind of basic insurance for everyone. those that want more can buy supplemental plans. there are people that have insurance and have had a medical catastrophe and the deductibles and copays have caused them to declare bankruptcy. the individual mandate made sense--younger people's contributions helped pay for the program when they needed it less. Social Security was considered socialism once. and it ran on the same principle. yes, we paid into it, but it's the people in the work force now that keep it going. "The taxes paid by active workers help support today’s generation of retirees — which is a big reason why some policymakers are concerned about the program’s long-term solvency. In 1950, the average American lived for 68 years and retirees were supported by 16 active workers. Now, the average life expectancy is 78 and just three workers support every retiree." According to the institute’s data, a two-earner couple receiving an average wage — $44,600 per spouse in 2012 dollars — and turning 65 in 2010 would have paid $722,000 into Social Security and Medicare and can be expected to take out $966,000 in benefits. So, this couple will be paid about one-third more in benefits than they paid in taxes."Thus, Social Security is — and always has been — a transfer system from younger generations to older generations."
Urban Institute, "Social Security and Medicare Taxes and Benefits over a Lifetime," 2012

No such thing as FREE healthcare. Someone has to pay for it and no one wishes to pay higher taxes. No one is turned away from the ER and there are free clinics available in most states. Other countries that have "free" healthcare pay for it by taking half of your paycheck in taxes. Have any of you ever been to a socialized medicine country and stayed at one of their hospitals? Compared to ours, they are dumps. I went to one country where I was living in the capital of the nation and had to visit the main hospital for a some tests. No lights in the hallways, a broken window, a folding cot to sit on for an ultrasound test, and the MRI was done in a trailer in an alley. One country, you had to provide a blanket for a family patient. No private rooms in these countries, just wards.

American is GREAT!

Always amazes me that those that aren’t too well off seem to have enough money for sporting events, concerts, Starbucks and attending peaceful protests while others go to work. Priorities matter, no one deserves anything but the right to succeed, only they hold themselves back despite what some will preach. As the saying goes, “the harder you work, the luckier you get!”

No one is turned away from the ER and there are free clinics available in most states

going to the ER is the most expensive type of medical care and people going there because they don't have insurance is one of the reasons our collective health care costs increase.

as to "free" health care clinics. I would like you to list the available free clinics that you think are in such abundance. even if they do exist, there are far too few for all who need them.

Actually, the reason for our insurance increasing is because since Obamacare, we have to pay for services that we do not require. We also have to pay for those that can stay on their parent's policy until they are 26yo. We also have to pay because doctors have to pay up to or exceeding a quarter million bucks a year for malpractice insurance. We also have to pay because doctors must perform many tests that we may not need, based solely on worrying about malpractice suits against them if they don't. WE also have to pay because we cannot shop over state borders. AND we also have to pay for "pre-existing" enrollees. And don't worry because this administration has no intention of eliminating the "pre-existing" feature.

My premiums have risen EVERY year since I have had insurance. Not due to any particular administration. But now, some wish to increase everyone's taxes so that we can reduce the quality of the majority of insured so that everyone can have a reduced quality health care. It won't be just the rich paying. It will be EVERY earner that will sacrifice greatly. Anyone ever try living on half of your pay check earnings? Get ready for it, because that is the way every socialized medicine country is paying for universal health care. And only the rich will be able to pay for the quality we have now.

Not free, but the 1.45 percent plus the Medicare premiums after you turn 65 is nowhere near enough to pay for the health care costs.

Your Social Security is a hand out after about five years. That's when you received back all the money you paid in. Who do you think is now paying for it? I guess it's ok to take from people but not give to people. Sad. But true. Conservatively speaking of course.

my insurance increased every year I've had it which was long before Obamacare. and I'm pretty sure you'd find hard core republicans who've had children or grandchildren who have benefited by being able to stay on their parents insurance until they are 26. Most parents already had a family plan and nothing changed by keeping the kids on a few more years. as to the doctors and their malpractice...well, why haven't the republicans done something about it? they controlled the house and senate and presidency for the first two years of this administration. same with medicine prices....recent executive order was all for show. why can the VA negotiate prices for meds but medicare not? and it's pretty easy for someone on Medicare who doesn't have to worry about a pre-existing condition to complain about others who do.

Mods, delete this poster. This is blatantly political.

Here we go again with misinformation.

1.) the ACA is INSURANCE. It is NOT health care.

2.) Health care is given to anyone in need at our hospitals whether they have insurance or not,

3.) NO ONE is saying let's eliminate pre existing conditions. That ship has sailed.

4.) The bigger concern should be the current shortage of over 10,000 Physicians in this country and growing. THAT will impact health care and no insurance plan can address that.

That is a "progressive" group with an agenda.

"3.) NO ONE is saying let's eliminate pre existing conditions. That ship has sailed."

So we are to ignore our attempt at the Supreme Court, still not decided ?

Lots of excuses, but no facts or suggestions. Just because someone "benefits" from a gov. program does not make it a good program. Blaming one political party or another is also an excuse but not a suggestion or a reason.
The subject is "pre-existing" conditions. No one is suggesting that we get rid of this requirement and the president has promised that "pre-existing" stays and won't be messed with. Believe him or not, you won't know until or if it changes.

Crying wolf has gotten to be a political ploy and the reason folks call "hoax" today is because it is done way too much by both parties to gain votes by fear. The only thing you should fear is when a politician wishes to gain votes by scaring you with his promises.

I am surprised that this thread is allowed since it is undoubtedly a politically themed subject. I found it very difficult to converse on this subject without acknowledging the political nature of the subject. I apologize in advance if I have violated the "political" rule of the forum. It was not my intention.

Do you honestly believe that Congress ( both houses) will allow that to happen? Of course they won't. If a law is deemed Unconstitutional, that's it. We move on and fix the problem. That's how our Constitutional Republic works.

The suit was filed by The United States Government.

The largest cause on personal Bankruptcies are due to medical bills. Hospitals sell your debit to collection companies they are the ones who come after you and thru the courts.

"...after about 5 years" is not true...first that calculation doesn't factor in the impact of compounding interest on the monies that you actually paid in over a 40 - 50 year period of of continuous contributions...which is what most of us in TV have done

secondly, receiving more than what you paid in is no more of a handout than a monthly Annuity payment is once you've received more in payments than you paid in to fund it... lifetime payments was the contractual deal that was promised and agreed to.

at least with an annuity we had a choice to buy in...there was no choice with Society Security

No private insurance company would agree to a contractual deal where the benefits greatly outweigh the premiums. Over an average lifetime, one will receive much more in Social Security and Medicare benefits than is ever paid in; this a cold, hard fact.

For a group that likes to rail against socialism, benefits for the poor, welfare "queens", etc., nobody suckles more at the government teat than entitled villagers.

So you are saying you return your social security check in whole to the Treasury based on your statement.

So? Is it not the right of the Executive Branch to validate with the Judicial Branch whether a law passed by the Legislative Branch is Constitutional? Are you saying you don't believe in the Constitution?

No, I suggest that those hypocrites on this forum that believe that any whiff of socialism is evil, and that all vestiges of socialism should be eradicated, should return their checks.

"ACA" insurance is mostly myth and doctors "accepting" insurance is mostly myth. The insurance company I have health care with is FloridaBlue, which is an offshoot of Anthem Blue Cross. Most doctors in the area are participating providers, and "in network" physicians.

There are other insurance companies that don't require a participating provider; you go to your doctor, you (the patient) submit the claim, just like we used to do back in the day before HMOs were invented, and the insurance company either accepts your claim and reimburses you, or they don't. The doctor has no say in the matter, he has no part of the decision. That's one of those old fashioned 80/20 plans that still exist, and some of them are options for people in some states who qualify for ACA subsidies.

In addition, the ACA isn't an insurance. It is a set of guidelines, and it's a subsidy option for people who fall within a certain income range. It isn't even technically a subsidy - it's a tax rebate. People who have never paid into the system - are not eligible for ACA subsidies. In the state of Florida, you must have a certain MINIMUM income, in order to qualify for ACA subsidies. That is why I still work part time, even though I theoretically retired from the workforce two years ago.

However, that means they probably qualify for Medicaid, which is a whole other system.

Trump has appointed over 200 Federal life time judges. Think he will get it through? Hope the Supreme Court doesn’t ok it or we are sunk!!

Complete misunderstanding on your part. SS contributions are put into a government trust account invested in Treasury bonds that pay a near zero interest rate and that is why the SS fund is running low. Had it been invested in the S&P 500 there would be a huge surplus. And the kicker was your contributions in the trust fund were used for various social experiments. That’s the cold hard fact.

The United States Government has filed suit to eliminate ACA.

The thread, which you are attempting to dismantle was discussing the elimination of coverage of pre existing conditions. The suit filed by the United States Government was to totally dismantle the law, not validate it.

We were told that a new super duper plan would be unveiled over 3 years ago. Sometimes it was within a week or two...or a month or so. But, it has been over 3 years and still nothing. Based on track record alone and the fact that those in the admin who are responsible for putting those plans together saying NO such plan exists, I think it is clear as with Covid, we are being hoodwinked into watching millionslose healthcare in the middle of a pandemic.

If you think otherwise,please explain why you feel that way, and why no parties to the suit say what you say.

When health insurance was "invented" in the 1930s in Texas it was a cooperative operated by the hospitals. Everyone pitched in a few dollars monthly and any member needing to be hospitalized had their bill paid out of the fund.

The idea grew into the Blue Cross system, a network of licensees covering the country. There were hundreds at one time and now 36 separate licensees.

When commercial insurance companies entered the health insurance market, they began "underwriting" applicants, avoiding the currently sick. They were therefore able to undercut the Blue plans who began to suffer adverse selection. That is when all plans began underwriting and, for individual insurance, added pre existing clauses.

To work, pre existing must apply to all insurers and there must be some penalty for those who don't pay for insurance until they get a grave diagnosis. If they are allowed to sign up for health insurance in the emergency room, WE all pay as health insurance is a cost plus business just like all other industries.

Pre-existing conditions are not covered right now by insurance companies.And us that have medicare, let's hope not depleted and terminated or cut by 2023. Medicare and SS money is being used for other purposes right now! That affects us!

Gee, I came from a country with FREE healthcare (Australia). Great system, no forever bills coming in the mail - swipe your Medicare card once at time of service and you were done. Plus taxes are not much different than they are here, and 30 years later they still soldier on with it even though many claim it can't last.

My relative got a hip replacement a couple of years ago - ZERO cost, no bills in the mail, no insurance companies to deal with. Now if you want your choice of hospital with a private room (vs a shared room), and with your own doctor, you can supplement the government provided coverage with your own private insurance. But it is optional - some people get it just for the better food in the private hospitals.

I've no idea why people in this country fear a single payer system, or healthcare coverage for all. Wouldn't we all lead happier lives if healthcare costs were taken out of the equation? No need to worry about pre-existing conditions. And if you asked me is the healthcare provided better here - I'd say no difference at all. In fact, if I had a major illness I wish I could return home just so I wouldn't face potential financial ruin.

All my aging friends back in my home country constantly remind me of how happy they are with the medical system there. I lived my first 30 years there with their health coverage system, and now 30 years here with ours - trust me that our system sucks and I much prefer what they have there. No reason why we can't do something similar here.

Which country would you be referring to? Venezuela? I think your sample size needs to be expanded and perhaps include the G7.

Nothing is for free. Everything that the government "pays for or subsidizes" is paid from tax dollars, which we ALL pay. Unfortunately, some do not want to pay their share.

Thank you.

In many situations, the percentage of an American family’s income that goes to pay for health insurance is ridiculous. Premiums, deductibles, and out-of-pocket costs grow bigger each year — even for those who have access to plans through employers.

I have often wondered if those who are so vehemently opposed to an OPTION being offered by the federal government have ever looked at the reality of what working people face today in the scramble for health insurance coverage.

The elder-boomers (and those older) now have Medicare available to them. The very first boomers born are about 9 years into Medicare. The cost of health insurance to that age group — when they were still working — was not much more than a blip on their budget’s radar.

But ask anyone still working how much their employer health insurance costs now. Ask your adult kids.

Speaking of Medicare, I have several friends who have (or had) to continue to work until age 65 or had to wait for a younger spouse to turn 65 so Medicare could kick in. Working until 65 is often a choice made strictly based on health insurance coverage.

Health insurance? The solution can be in the middle with a Buy-In to a federally sponsored program available. Medicare works and I have not heard any of the self-absorbed “I got mine, too bad you don’t have yours” crowd volunteer to give up their Medicare.

The SC case is to be heard soon. I think there are a lot of people who have no idea what is happening behind the scenes because they do not look beyond what they are being told.

Back to Covid as a pre-existing condition — anybody who thinks insurance companies will miss the opportunity to term it a pre-existing condition in order to increase premium costs or to deny coverage is not paying attention.

The pre-existing conditions protection can be knocked out by the SC in their ruling on the case to dismantle the entire ACA. As I understand it, because part of it is already gone, the argument is that is what should render the rest of it unable to stand — and that is where the pre-existing conditions protection is — for now. (Loophole? I guess we will find out.)

The answer to our health insurance crisis is somewhere in the middle, but divisive emotions are running so high in this country right now that logic and clarity are getting trampled. We are in the throes of serious problems being purposely exacerbated instead of solutions being planned and offered.

I also want to thank you for your post. Did you happen to see the recent five-part series on PBS News Hour which looked at three universal coverage health care systems and how they differ from the U.S.: UK, Switzerland, and Australia? It is worth watching. Overall, Australians seem pretty happy with their system. The Best Health Care? America & the World | PBS NewsHour

So, for the last 4 years, where is the plan?

The individual mandate contained in obamacare is what is being contested, now at the supreme court level. The plaintiffs are arguing it is unconstitutional. Whether it is or isn't, the individual mandate has absolutely nothing to do with pre-existing conditions.

Prior to obamacare, pre-existing conditions were handled by several methods. Continuous coverage starting before the date of the pre-existing condition was all that was needed to insure someone. Also, group policies offered by employers provided pre-existing coverage. Some States as well had laws preventing denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions.

Someone mentioned earlier there is no politician calling for the insurance companies to be able to deny coverage for a pre-existing condition. That is my impression as well. Sounds like someone is trying to stir up the masses with a problem that really doesn't exist.

[QUOTE=Boomer;1834792]Thank you.




Back to Covid as a pre-existing condition — anybody who thinks insurance companies will miss the opportunity to term it a pre-existing condition in order to increase premium costs or to deny coverage is not paying attention.

I don't understand this at all. Covid -19 is a virus. There is nothing "pre-existing" about a virus. Either you have it or you don't.

Please explain how a government option would be less expensive.

Traditional Medicare does not pay for the full cost of care. Hospitals and medical providers rely on the higher reimbursement from traditonal insurance to make up the difference. (Yes, those under age 65 are subsidizing those of us on Medicare.)

The only example of costs truly being managed better are Medicare Advantage plans (offered by private carriers) which accept per capita reimbursement equal to the regional average cost per person through traditional Medicare. Many are able to manage costs and provide full coverage, including pharmaceuticals, for no out of pocket premium.

HHS realizes that government administered programs are not as efficient as private companies, that is why claims payment and medical management are contracted out to private companies (often the area Blue Cross plan).

[QUOTE=lkagele;1834930]You apparently do not understand how pre-existing is administered. If you contract Covid - 19 while insured it is not a pre-existing condition.

If you have active Covid-19 at the time you apply for insurance it is a pre-existing condition. (Believe it or not some people try to game the system. )

If you had Covid-19 and it has resolved and you later apply for insurance it will not be considered a pre-existing condition.