real life ACA experience

I just completed my hell hole Obamacare.
it was a mess and took 3 weeks to figure it out.
bottomline it was a difficult process.but I have health insurance about the same as I had.
my solution would have been way different but this was better than the old alternative.
I challenge the losers that want this to fail to give a better plan given the political realities that you cranks created.
worked for me.

English please next time?

fly off the handle wrote: I just completed my hell hole Obamacare.
it was a mess and took 3 weeks to figure it out.
bottomline it was a difficult process.but I have health insurance about the same as I had.
my solution would have been way different but this was better than the old alternative.
I challenge the losers that want this to fail to give a better plan given the political realities that you cranks created.
worked for me.

The Massachusetts model would have worked out better on a state by state basis. This one size fits all scheme will bring ACA down on itself, or at least there will have to be many changes made before it is running smooth.

Someone should have read it before they passed it. I did. Why couldn't the polititrash have read it?

Good point about this would work better de-centralized. Wasn't that what Mitt Romney wanted?

FredHayek wrote: English please next time?

Stream of conscientious, knucklehead.

Walter L Newton wrote:

fly off the handle wrote: I just completed my hell hole Obamacare.
it was a mess and took 3 weeks to figure it out.
bottomline it was a difficult process.but I have health insurance about the same as I had.
my solution would have been way different but this was better than the old alternative.
I challenge the losers that want this to fail to give a better plan given the political realities that you cranks created.
worked for me.

The Massachusetts model would have worked out better on a state by state basis. This one size fits all scheme will bring ACA down on itself, or at least there will have to be many changes made before it is running smooth.

Someone should have read it before they passed it. I did. Why couldn't the polititrash have read it?

Agree but most States ignored the problem.
Colorado had an alternative that worked. I lost that option.
ACA is a mess but is better than what we had.

It is better than what we had for a small sliver of society. The rest suffer for you to feel good about spending three weeks to get back to where you were. I've already suggested tweaks and fixes. Quit asking.

fly off the handle wrote:

FredHayek wrote: English please next time?

Stream of conscientious, knucklehead.

VL is that you?

towermonkey wrote: It is better than what we had for a small sliver of society. The rest suffer for you to feel good about spending three weeks to get back to where you were. I've already suggested tweaks and fixes. Quit asking.

Agree works for some, not thrilled about the government dictated one-size fits all, lack of benefit choice, and same ol lack of tax deduct-ability inequality we always had in the individual "non-insurance" market. I'll probably be dropping my insurance next year and paying the penalty, doesn't work for me. No choice and my income is too variable to be bothered with the exchange bureaucracy BS Right now I would likely be forced into Medicaid by the bureaucrats although I certainly don't need it quite yet. By the end of Obama's term who knows?

The painful slow signup does not bode well for a big well balanced risk pool. Good luck Fly. Glad it works for u4now. Better check the Doc's list and formulator drug list. "Covered" means whatever the Gov't decides is in the current FY budget.

I looked at the health exchange prices in a fair amount of detail and here are my conclusions.

You are a loser if you are healthy and make more than about $46K for an individual or $62K for a couple. The policies generally cost more and have higher deductibles and more importantly (to me) higher max out of pocket expenses. And there is a marriage penalty if neither one of you have group coverage which covers your spouse. Just one example (there are many)... If you are both single without group insurance and make about $31K, you both get a large subsidy for individual insurance. If you are married, neither of you get a subsidy and you both pay the full amount.

You are a winner if you make less than those amounts, because you will be subsidized by the above losers.

You are also a winner if you are a retired millionaire younger than 65 and don't make more than the above amounts on your investments. You too will get subsidized by the above losers, even if those losers are in debt and don't have a dime in the bank.

Dealing specifically with Colorado, if you were refused insurance do to health issues, you had to pay a lot more to get Colorado's high risk insurance. From what I saw, the Obamacare policies generally cost about the same as those if you have to pay the full amount.

You are also a loser if you had individual insurance in Colorado with an HSA. Before, you would owe nothing above your deductible. Now you still have to pay for your prescriptions above your deductible until you reach your much higher max out of pocket expense. And in the past prescriptions had a fixed cost like $10-$50 depending on drug tier, but now higher tiers can cost you 30-50%.