Foreign aid isn't much. Good luck getting Americans to spend less on military.
Last edited:
Open Enrollment - Let's All Complain
- Thread starter AlaskanAssassin
- Start date
AlaskanAssassin
Well-Known Member
Totally agree with this. I've gotten into the habit of asking providers how much something is going to cost. The look they give me is ridiculous. They almost act offended (or annoyed) that I want to know how much something costs. Price transparency is something that everyone seems to agree on.....yet nothing gets done. Both parties (currently) have their hands in the pockets of healthcare.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
This might be why-
https://www.healthinsurance.org/obamacare-enrollment-guide/off-exchange-plans/
In the fall of 2017, the Trump Administration announced that the federal government would no longer fund the ACA’s cost-sharing reductions (CSR). States and insurers took varying approaches to address this, but the most common strategy was to add the cost of CSR to silver plan premiums, since CSR benefits are only available on silver plans. The resulting increase in silver plan rates meant that premium subsidies grew significantly for 2018 in many states (since the premium subsidy amounts are based on the cost of silver plans), and have remained disproportionately large ever since, making many subsidized enrollees better off than they would otherwise have been.
But what about people who don’t get premium subsidies? Regulators realized that if those enrollees wanted to buy silver plans, they’d be stuck with the higher premiums. So some states and insurers opted to add the cost of CSR only to on-exchange silver plan rates, and create slightly different off-exchange versions of those plans, without the cost of CSR added to the premiums (in some states, the off-exchange plans are identical to the on-exchange versions, but the cost of CSR has only been added to the on-exchange version; CMS eliminated the “meaningful difference” rule altogether as of 2019). And the majority of the states took this “silver switch” approach for 2019. The result is lower-cost off-exchange silver plan rates, compared with the on-exchange silver plan rates, for people who don’t qualify for premium subsidies. This is considered the strategy that’s most protective for the greatest number of consumers.
Source: https://www.healthinsurance.org/obamacare-enrollment-guide/off-exchange-plans/
Follow us: @hio_org on Twitter | healthinsurance.org on Facebook
enchilada_style
Well-Known Member
Does anyone actually like their insurance plan? CNN likes to say most of us love our insurance!
framer
Well-Known Member
Pre-ObamaCare, I know that the rates in Utah were actually quite low in comparison with other states due to the healthy lifestyle and average age of the residents. Cost of insurance in Montana was nearly double.
reignman40
Well-Known Member
Speaking of military. Much of these countries can afford government paid healthcare because they spend little to nothing on defense, knowing the US military will come to the rescue if anything happens.
Jazzta
Guest
That’s the kind of arrogant talk that many don’t appreciate overseas. No that’s not the reason at all, legislators in Spain and other countries aren’t thinking about that when approving M4A. In most cases it came out of grassroot movements and work unions that pushed for it.
SM stands for School of Medicine. Very good benefits.
Cancer diagnoses can run in the hundreds of thousands, even millions to treat. Who pays for it when people opt out?
You mean, shocked how, despite the Conservative party has been cutting the NHS for the last few years, they still get better service overall than we do?
By which metric?
Which doesn't change that the government could provide the same coverage more inexpensively.
We might save some money by not building aircraft carriers that can't launch jets and planes that constantly break down.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
2000 deductible. A little shy of 200 per month premium.
Somewhere near a 1/3 personal, 2/3 employer premium split.
Single person.
Somewhere near a 1/3 personal, 2/3 employer premium split.
Single person.
Yeah, foreign aid is peanuts to us and keeps large portions of the world dependant on us and therefore friendly to our policies. It is the best spent money in the entire government IMHO.
The new aircraft carriers are a very needed advance in our technology. I spent 4 years of my life on the USS Nimitz, the first of the the current/previous generation of aircraft carriers. The Ford class carriers are going to cost less to use and be significantly more effective.
If you want to argue that we should never build another aircraft carrier I'd take that opinion more seriously. But if we are going to build new aircraft carriers they need to be modernized.
The U.S. is the only nation that has perfected steam catapult launch systems, but those systems are more than 50 years old and they beat the **** out of aircraft. The new EMALS system is going to be hard to perfect, but we need to move to that system. It is better in pretty much every way. The new ammunition elevators are having issues. Those issues will be solved.
The Ford class aircraft carriers are what we should build if we're going to build new aircraft carriers.
Aircraft carriers, especially the U.S. ones, are the closest thing to a "death star" that humans currently build. They matter. We don't need to be building outdated aircraft carriers because it's hard to perfect next generation technology for new ones. We need to build the new stuff and learn how to make it work.
I agree. However, if we are going to build them, we need to get them working correctly before they are deployed.