Let's talk REAL NUMBERS, not abstract: From an analysis of the three bills:
To guarantee an adequate level of coverage, an "essential benefit package," with varying levels of cost-sharing, would be offered through the exchange. All three congressional bills ...
Let's talk REAL NUMBERS, not abstract
From an analysis of the three bills:
To guarantee an adequate level of coverage, an "essential benefit package," with varying levels of cost-sharing, would be offered through the exchange. All three congressional bills call for such a package, including hospital, physician, and preventive care, prescription drugs, and pediatric dental and vision services, among other services.
While keeping the benefits constant, the three congressional bills define three to four levels of cost-sharing tiers by actuarial value, or the average share of medical expenses covered by a health plan. The lowest-tier plans in both the House and Senate proposals cover less than what is covered by the typical insurance plan for workers and members of Congress. In the House bill, the actuarial value of the basic plan covers 70 percent of medical expenses and rises to 95 percent in the highest tier. In the Senate Finance proposal, the lowest-tier plan has an actuarial value of 65 percent and rises to 90 percent. By comparison, the average actuarial value in employer-based plans is an estimated 80 percent. The average actuarial value in the Blue Cross Blue Shield Standard Option in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, the typical plan for members of Congress and federal employees, is about 84 percent to 87 percent. [/quote]
So, bottom line is the distinct possibility that your NEW government-run healthcare will cost you more out-of-pocket than your current private insurance.
So, bottom line is the distinct possibility that your NEW government-run healthcare will cost you more out-of-pocket than your current private insurance.[/QUOTE]
Originally Posted by JPSartre12
Not if you are already a drain on the economy. If you are on welfare, food stamps, and have you medical card in pocket you aren't going to pay a penny. Its Joe or Jill Stupid who goes to work, beats his or her brains out all day, pays taxes, who is going to get bent over and done by these moronic bills.
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.
I’m afraid Joe and Jill Stupid are at least partly to blame, but not for working hard. From above;
Originally Posted by OldSarge
Things like “preventive care” most prescription drugs, dental and vision services, are not catastrophic, emergency situations, they are ROUTINE LIVING EXPENSES. If a more clear line were drawn to show a distinction between real unexpected emergency medical needs vs routine living expenses, it would go a long way to showing what the problems are concerning so many uninsured Americans, and what to do about it.
All three congressional bills call for such a package, including hospital, physician, and preventive care, prescription drugs, and pediatric dental and vision services, among other services.
Third payor coverage for routine living expenses started happening long ago, not from government, but from large companies, and largely with a union influence. Large companies started covering things like childbirth expenses for example, for employees long ago. I was given “dental insurance” in my first job as a teenager, from the large company I worked for in 1973, and was as mystified about it then as I am now. Today, not enough distinction is made between a company benefit vs a government handout.
I don’t think todays congressional bills would include so many routine living expenses in them if the constituents of the congressmen pushing them weren’t asking for them. They wouldn’t have asked for them in the 1940s or 1950s. Todays general public has a different mindset than it did 50 years ago. Why is another thread. The U.S wasn't founded on todays mindset.
Why is it that our children can't read a Bible in school, but they can in prison?
Just got started reading the bill and here are some real numbers so far.
The SECRETARY has these authorities.
30M For setting up state agencies. Section 2793 e,1
250M For state grants. Section 2794 c,2,a
5B for paying for expenses for the High risk pool that is to be set up. This 5B is above the money these people pay in for coverage. AND if this money is not enough to pay the costs incurred the the SECRETARY can take more money as needed to eliminatye a defict from an already broke treasury. Section 1101 g,1 & 2
This Seceratry is going to be an almighty powerful individual!!!!
The more I read into this part the more it sounds like (and I stress the work like) how student financial aid works. I do accounting type work for student financial aid about 3-4 months out of the year. To quote a director of SFA I worked with "I have to assume it benefits this students because if I knew the truth I couldn't work here".
So will be the same thing with this plan.