ObamaCares works!

Something the Dog Said wrote: But you are misleading. You are comparing an HSA with PPO and claiming the differences are due to ObamaCares when in reality you are comparing apples to oranges. The polices described in the Kaiser study are PPO policies and are coming in less expensive than comparable PPO polices currently being offered. If you are satisfied with bureaucratically managed health care then by all means an HSA policy may be the way to go. But why bring an HSA policy into the discussion to compare against a PPO policy other than to mislead? Start your own thread about the benefits of managed health care vs. PPO health care and the cost differentials. Don't try to pretend that the current HSA policy you used as an example is comparable to the silver policies under the ACA as those are two separate animals. Of course you can claim that too is a "typo". And under the ACA, you can certainly select an HSA policy, but the Kaiser study was direct to PPO policies under the ACA. I personally prefer pay a bit more not to have a bureaucrat managing my health care, but that is a discussion for a different thread.

Hmm, when you take my statements out of context, they are considered misleading, but your misleading statements are simply "typos".

Edited to add: And under ObamaCares, HSAs are still in effect. The only change is that OTC medications are not covered and there is a higher penalty for use of funds on non qualified purchases. But if you had simply googled that, you would know that.

First of all, the Kaiser article isn't clear what kind of policy they are talking about. Searching for "PPO" all I see is...

A variety of plan types (e.g., HMOs or PPOs) are offered in most exchanges.

How specific is that? And as I mentioned in my first post, they don't mention a deductible, so that makes it even harder to compare (though I very much prefer a low max out of pocket expense over a low deductible).

My guess is they were talking about a PPO, but who knows? I was very clear I was talking about an HSA. Nit pick all you want, but it doesn't matter anyway. When shopping for individual health insurance we all have a choice between a PPO, HMO, or HSA. You simply read the premiums, coverages, terms, etc and make your own choice. There is nothing wrong with comparing them, because that is what people do with individual health insurance all the time. You pick the best deal for you among the bunch.

And I'll stand by taking a $2500 HSA with max $2500 out of pocket expense over a PPO or HMO with a Max $6350 out of pocket expense considering the premiums are similar (and if Denver is a bit more, I'm sure the tax savings from an HSA savings account would more than make up for it).

So I'm misleading when I accidently say "deductible" instead of "max out of pocket" after I clearly said out of pocket every time before that? But you aren't misleading when you say FSA instead of HSA? Keep nit picking. I assume you made a mistake too, unless you intended to compare an FSA to an HSA which doesn't make much sense to me.

This is dumb. Like I said, let's just wait until Oct 1st and compare the Colorado rates then. And it's perfectly fine to compare all the plans offered and pick out the best one for you . It is not "apples and oranges". It is comparing health insurance plans.

So it was just "typos" when you implied that ObamaCares eliminated HSAs when that was false, or that under ObamaCares out of pocket expenses would double to over $12000 when that was false? A bureaucratically managed health care may be preferable to you but I prefer to pay a bit more for the control of my health care to be between myself and my doctor.

What a joke that is. Obamacare has its own bureaucratic board built into it, so your care is still going to be subject to bureaucratic oversight, same as it ever was, especially given that Obamacare is little more than the force of government being used to compel participation in the the health insurance market by the population of the Union. The bureaucratic load is greater now than it was before, not less Dog.

Some more food for thought given the recent discussion about HSAs and Obamacare:

Supporters of the Affordable Care Act have heralded the recent slowdown in health-care spending as evidence that the law is working. Unfortunately for them, Obamacare has nothing to do with the trend.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-0 ... acare.html

Something the Dog Said wrote: So it was just "typos" when you implied that ObamaCares eliminated HSAs when that was false, or that under ObamaCares out of pocket expenses would double to over $12000 when that was false? A bureaucratically managed health care may be preferable to you but I prefer to pay a bit more for the control of my health care to be between myself and my doctor.

Now you are just making stuff up.

Here is what I said about HSAs...

pineinthegrass wrote: I'm still not clear if Obamacare will offer HSA accounts. If they do, I'm worried it would be a $6350 HSA which is too high an out of pocket expense, IMO. Hopefully there will be plans available with lower out of pocket expense, but I'm not sure.

I simply said I wasn't sure if HSAs will be offered, and was concerned they might have too high a deductible/out of pocket if they were offered. Only in your mind could you say I "implied" they won't be offered. How can I possibly imply something when I said I'm not sure? I was actually hoping HSAs will be offered, but with low deductibles/out of pocket expenses.

In fact there has been uncertainty about HSAs in Obamacare, but it is getting a bit clearer now as we near Oct 1st. Here is one article that talked about it, and they also think the HSA deductibles/out of pocket might be very high at about $6000 (which if true would be a cheap policy, but lousy coverage)...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2013/03/27/health-savings-accounts-will-survive-obamacare-at-least-for-now/

It looks like Colorado will offer HSAs, but I can't find any details about them yet. But it doesn't look like HSAs will be offered by our most populous state, California (at least not in 2014)...

[/url] coveredca.com/news/PDFs/CC_Health_Plans_Booklet-rev1-8-6.pdf [/url]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353543/no-obamacare-health-savings-accounts-calif-wesley-j-smith

It appears California will only offer PPOs, HMOs, or EPOs. The Silver plan shows that $6350 max out of pocket we've been talking about, however the much more expensive Platinum plan lowers it to $4000. I still don't see any deductibles mentioned. But personally, even if the deductible were zero, I'd prefer a $2500 HSA to a plan with a $6350 max out of pocket.

So far as the $12,700 goes, this is what I said...

pineinthegrass wrote: And has been discussed before, there is a problem with the law in that $6350 could in some cases apply to medical care and prescriptions separately, raising the out of pocket expense to as much as $12,700 in 2014.

That is a factual statement ("could in some cases apply") and makes no mention about specific types of plans. I later provided a link giving more details and pointed out that it applies to some group plans, not individual plans. In fact if you read the link, it's even possible there will be no out of pocket limit for prescriptions in some group plans for 2014, so it could even be higher than $12,700 in a very few cases. And again, I kept mentioning the $6350 max out of pocket throughout the discussions as well.

When I said "And has been discussed before" I was referring to a previous thread in this forum where this was talked about. I don't have the link at the moment, but it was back around August 12th I think (close to the date of that article).

Anyway, I'm looking forward to see just what Colorado will offer. If there is a $2500 HSA with a reasonable premium, that would be great!

The "Bronze" Plan under Obamacare:

[youtube:2qcetpe6][/youtube:2qcetpe6] :rofllol

Check out the "assistant" at 1:49.

Something the Dog Said wrote: So it was just "typos" when you implied that ObamaCares eliminated HSAs when that was false, or that under ObamaCares out of pocket expenses would double to over $12000 when that was false? A bureaucratically managed health care may be preferable to you but I prefer to pay a bit more for the control of my health care to be between myself and my doctor.

Your sources are press releases masquerading as objective journalism.

FredHayek wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: So it was just "typos" when you implied that ObamaCares eliminated HSAs when that was false, or that under ObamaCares out of pocket expenses would double to over $12000 when that was false? A bureaucratically managed health care may be preferable to you but I prefer to pay a bit more for the control of my health care to be between myself and my doctor.

Your sources are press releases masquerading as objective journalism.

At least I have sources, Fred. Further, the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Rand Organization are about as reputable and impeachable sources that exist. So Fred, what are your sources?

PrintSmith wrote: What a joke that is. Obamacare has its own bureaucratic board built into it, so your care is still going to be subject to bureaucratic oversight, same as it ever was, especially given that Obamacare is little more than the force of government being used to compel participation in the the health insurance market by the population of the Union. The bureaucratic load is greater now than it was before, not less Dog.

Typical BS by Printsmith. Not a single fact, just unfounded opinions being passed off s "facts". No, under ObamaCares all medical decisions will be made between myself and my medical providers, not a bureaucrat, not a bean counter.

pineinthegrass wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: So it was just "typos" when you implied that ObamaCares eliminated HSAs when that was false, or that under ObamaCares out of pocket expenses would double to over $12000 when that was false? A bureaucratically managed health care may be preferable to you but I prefer to pay a bit more for the control of my health care to be between myself and my doctor.

Now you are just making stuff up.

Here is what I said about HSAs...

pineinthegrass wrote: I'm still not clear if Obamacare will offer HSA accounts. If they do, I'm worried it would be a $6350 HSA which is too high an out of pocket expense, IMO. Hopefully there will be plans available with lower out of pocket expense, but I'm not sure.

I simply said I wasn't sure if HSAs will be offered, and was concerned they might have too high a deductible/out of pocket if they were offered. Only in your mind could you say I "implied" they won't be offered. How can I possibly imply something when I said I'm not sure? I was actually hoping HSAs will be offered, but with low deductibles/out of pocket expenses.

In fact there has been uncertainty about HSAs in Obamacare, but it is getting a bit clearer now as we near Oct 1st. Here is one article that talked about it, and they also think the HSA deductibles/out of pocket might be very high at about $6000 (which if true would be a cheap policy, but lousy coverage)...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2013/03/27/health-savings-accounts-will-survive-obamacare-at-least-for-now/

It looks like Colorado will offer HSAs, but I can't find any details about them yet. But it doesn't look like HSAs will be offered by our most populous state, California (at least not in 2014)...

[/url] coveredca.com/news/PDFs/CC_Health_Plans_Booklet-rev1-8-6.pdf [/url]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353543/no-obamacare-health-savings-accounts-calif-wesley-j-smith

It appears California will only offer PPOs, HMOs, or EPOs. The Silver plan shows that $6350 max out of pocket we've been talking about, however the much more expensive Platinum plan lowers it to $4000. I still don't see any deductibles mentioned. But personally, even if the deductible were zero, I'd prefer a $2500 HSA to a plan with a $6350 max out of pocket.

So far as the $12,700 goes, this is what I said...

pineinthegrass wrote: And has been discussed before, there is a problem with the law in that $6350 could in some cases apply to medical care and prescriptions separately, raising the out of pocket expense to as much as $12,700 in 2014.

That is a factual statement ("could in some cases apply") and makes no mention about specific types of plans. I later provided a link giving more details and pointed out that it applies to some group plans, not individual plans. In fact if you read the link, it's even possible there will be no out of pocket limit for prescriptions in some group plans for 2014, so it could even be higher than $12,700 in a very few cases. And again, I kept mentioning the $6350 max out of pocket throughout the discussions as well.

When I said "And has been discussed before" I was referring to a previous thread in this forum where this was talked about. I don't have the link at the moment, but it was back around August 12th I think (close to the date of that article).

Anyway, I'm looking forward to see just what Colorado will offer. If there is a $2500 HSA with a reasonable premium, that would be great!

Colorado is not "offering" any insurance plans. Instead, Colorado is operating an exchange where qualified plans may be offered to individuals and small businesses by insurance companies. This does not mean that all other insurance plans will not be available. Rocky Mountain Health can still offer their current plans if they so choose. If those plans meet the critiera established by the state and the DHS, then they can be marketed through the exchange. Otherwise, things stay as the currently are.

The apples to apples marketing in the exchanges along with the navigator services to help individuals and small businesses select plans that make sense for them and the assistance with determining if they are elgible for tax credits is the key component of ObamaCares. The 17 states and DC that chose to set up their own exchanges to tailor plans that suit their residents have seen that the cost of plans being offered are lower than even the best expectations of the GAO and the authors of the ACA. Those states who refused to participate and are going to federal one size fit's all exchange may not see as benefits as good. What is incredible is that many of those states such as Texas and Oklahoma are even trying to prevent their residents from getting information about the benefits of the exchanges.