Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Save Now, But Pay More Later

Higher out-of-pocket prescription costs also predicted

September 26, 2013

WASHINGTON — You might be pleased with the low monthly premium for one of the new health insurance plans under President Barack Obama’s overhaul, but the added expense of copayments and deductibles......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(55)

Gooseman

Sep-26-13 2:54 AM

"Save Now, But Pay More Later"

That would be much better than our current employer provided insurance in which we pay more now but we would save if we were catastrophically taken ill or dying. And at least now with Obamacares, our insurance company will have a harder time dropping us when we need health care the most.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LogHog

Sep-26-13 5:22 AM

There is a very good reason that Insurance companies love obycare. They are going to make bigger profits.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 6:28 AM

daHog is right, you idiots! Whom do think WROTE the law? Opie?

BBWAHAHAHAH!

Lobbyists and lawyers for BIG INSURANCE, DUH!

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 6:29 AM

BreitBart:

"Andy and Amy Mangione of Louisville, Kentucky say their health insurance nearly tripled overnight from $333 a month to $965 due to Obamacare.

"When I saw the letter when I came home from work, it said 'your action required, benefit changes, act now.' Of course, I opened it immediately," said Andy Mangione.

Andy Mangione told Fox News veteran reporter Jim Angle that nothing had changed about the health of his wife, himself, or their two boys.

"This is a high deductible plan where I'm assuming a lot of risk for my health insurance for my family," Mangione told Fox News. "And nothing has changed, our boys are healthy—they're young—my wife is healthy. I'm healthy, nothing in our medical history has changed to warrant a tripling of our premiums."

The Mangiones's insurance company, Humana, declined to comment."

Get hosed now, get hosed WORSE later!!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 6:31 AM

Get hosed now, worse later:

"We know this because at the same time the White House was releasing its broad study, Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander released his analysis of the report's portion on his state. He found that Obamacare will cost far more than what many of his constituents are paying today, some by as much as 190 percent.

— Today, a 27-year-old man in Memphis can buy a plan for as low as $41 a month. On the exchange, the lowest state average is $119 a month — a 190 percent increase.

— Today, a 27-year-old woman in Nashville can also buy a plan for as low as $58 a month. On the exchange, the lowest-priced plan in Nashville is $114 a month — a 97 percent increase. Even with a tax subsidy, that plan is $104 a month, almost twice what she could pay today.

— Today, women in Nashville can choose from 30 insurance plans that cost less than the administration says insurance plans on the exchange will cost, even with the new tax subsidy."

OBAMACARE: FAIL!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 6:31 AM

There ain't no free lunch, Nooseman, you are just hanging yourself in stupidity here.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dyingov

Sep-26-13 6:40 AM

Health insurance is very complicated and obiecare will not make it any clearer!

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Wvcoffee

Sep-26-13 7:08 AM

Cue daWmoron. Wrong again. The cheap Tennesee plans in question didn't meet minimum coverages required by ACA. Seems like Tennessee was selling substandard insurance coverage all along. As for the challenge of deciding what policy to pick: lower deductibles or lower premiums; same old same old. Been that way with EVERY policy I ever bought. Seems the real question is, why such disparity between states? PS. The GOP lost the election because they made the ACA their lightning rod, the people have spoken. BBWAHAHAHAH! :)

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dyingov

Sep-26-13 7:21 AM

coffee, I would speculate that insurance companies in all states provide crap coverage to gold plated coverage and the consumer decides what to buy or not buy!

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 7:34 AM

WvCoughy, sorry idiot 68% of the American people say the Government is headed in the wrong direction and between 59% and 70% are OPPOSED to Obamacare BEFORE all of these rates came out.

I say again to the dimwit liberal morons, Obamacare was WRITTEN LOCK STOCK and BARREL by the Insurance companies and big Pharma. WTF do you THINK they would do????

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 7:38 AM

The MARRIAGE TAX:"If a married couple have identical earnings totaling $65,000, which will usually net down to $50,000 or below after all income and payroll taxes, their Obamacare exchange Silver Plan premium next year with the same earnings will be $16,382, or about one-third of what used to be their take-home pay. (And they call it the “Affordable Care Act”?)

What can this couple do? Well, they could decide to earn a few thousand dollars less, which will negate the five-figure premium hit. Encouraging ordinarily willing workers to put in less effort isn’t good in any economy, but especially not this one. But if either spouse’s earnings are unpredictable or hard to precisely track, they could still “mess up” and get socked with a premium they can’t afford.

The “easiest” solution would be to avoid the “wedding tax” entirely by getting divorced while still living together. Here’s what would happen if they make that choice:

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 7:38 AM

Marriage Tax contd;

"Here’s what would happen if they make that choice:

Instead of facing an exorbitant premium increase once their combined earnings hits $62,041 if they were to stay married, each cohabiting adult can earn up to $45,960 before Obamacare’s “tax credit”-free premiums kick in. Their annual after-tax savings at age 60 if they shack up and keep their individual earnings between $31,021 and $45,960 will range from $7,650 to over $11,000. The annual savings will slightly increase every year until Medicare kicks in at age 65. That kind of money can buy a lot of gifts for the grandkids. "

daFACTS are in, the Science is Settled: OBAMACARE IS DIASASTER!!

A TRAIN WRECK in SLOW MOTION!!!

FAIL!!!

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 7:41 AM

I understand that the USA has a new $100 Bill.

On the front is picture of President Potatohead with a cat eating ***t grin giving America the middle finger.

On the back the Eagle has been replaced by the Buzzard as the office bird and the inscription says "Screw GOD, in BIG GOVERNMENT WE TRUST"

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Sep-26-13 7:41 AM

Obamascare is a joke, we're all gonna CROAK!

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Sep-26-13 7:46 AM

Wvcoffee “Tennessee was selling substandard insurance coverage all along.”

And of course you and Obankrupter know better than Tennesseans what they need, right? Why do dopy Democrits always know best what everyone else needs? The Audacity of Dope.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Sep-26-13 8:18 AM

Wvcoffee, and how about that Obumbler Opromise, “If you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.”

Maybe the Obankrupter forgot to add “... as long as WE decide your health-care plan is not ‘substandard.’” MILLIONS of Americans are finding out what’s in Obamascare. And they’re finding out Obama LIED to them, about cost, and about coverage. Obama LIED about keeping the plans they want, and about keeping the doctors they like.

Joe Wilson was right. You lie, Barry Bankrupter.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

anutterview

Sep-26-13 8:24 AM

The rich will continue to buy the health care that they need; the taxpayer will continue to buy the health care for the poor, new government agencies will delegate what the middle-class taxpayer needs and will pay for insurance, after they skim off administrative costs.

But what the heck, the sheeple want someone else to think for them, and when the elected officials can persuade the voter that they will be better off with a plan that those same elected officials do not want, so much the better.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Wvcoffee

Sep-26-13 8:58 AM

McCain also recalled the the 2009-2010 debate over Obamacare -- before Cruz was elected to the Senate -- saying "the people spoke" on the issue when they reelected President Barack Obama in 2012. McCain said lawmakers shouldn't "give up our efforts to repair Obamacare" but said it wasn't worth shutting down the government.

"We fought as hard as we could in a fair and honest manner and we lost," McCain said. "One of the reasons was because we were in the minority, and in democracies, almost always the majority governs and passes legislation."

BBWAHAHAHAH! Listen to your elders!'

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

anutterview

Sep-26-13 9:03 AM

WV, as of this morning you had one option in the medical exchange.

Should be some real competition for your taxpayer subsidized health care.

If you don't now have insurance, at least now you will be required to buy whatever they decide to sell you.

Wearing rose-colored glasses, I see no problems with for WV citizens.

But what the heck, the vote in this state nearly always goes Democratic anyway, no need for our Representatives to let us down now.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

anutterview

Sep-26-13 9:11 AM

Coffeetime: Its interesting that your concern appears to be shutting down the government, not a major debacle Unaffordable Health Care Plan that our representatives say isn't even palatable to their aides and workers.

Constitutionally, we have been operating beyond the rules of government, without a budget, for the last 5 years.

The Democrats like it that way, then every time someone tries to get some control of government spending, they cry, "but it will shut down government". If they really cared the Democratically lead government would pass a budget, thus eliminating the continuing resolutions that are the underlying reason that the government may be shut down.

Never mind the facts, the sheeple will continue to think that the Republicans only care about big business while the Democrats continue to legislate in support of their big business donors.

We all must live with the mess that we choose not to work to change.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

anutterview

Sep-26-13 9:37 AM

Coffee; Apparently, McCain had a "senior moment" and forgot the fact that this country is governed by a representative democracy.

Senator Cruz acted to represent the voters that elected him, disregarding the "official" Republican line; while apparently McCain is has admitted to be a defender of the "Democratic-Lite" Party.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hefner

Sep-26-13 9:53 AM

The President and the Congress are so separated from the people that we the people, for all intent and purpose, have given our lives over to servitude, when if fact, those who rule us should be criminally indicted and imprisoned. The 'Tea Party' and the likes of Senators Cruz, Rubio, and Paul can lead us out of the ruination of our country including any others who by deeds, not words, are willing to return us to constitutional government. Are you really ready to allow the government to decide if you should live or die? I'm not.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

anutterview

Sep-26-13 9:58 AM

All of these government 'fixes' continue to prove that you can't legislate common sense.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

anutterview

Sep-26-13 10:22 AM

With exception for those that were dropped from coverage, born with existing conditions, and other issues that could be solved with simple legislation, the 'government healthcare fix' is an attempt to force insurance on those that have chosen to go bare with the hopes that someone else would pay for their care.

With self-reliance being replaced by a government nanny state, the sheeple are being lead their demise.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

anutterview

Sep-26-13 11:18 AM

sorry,

"lead to their demise".

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 55 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: