U.S. Politics: Hairpiece In the Middle East Part 2

[Altherion]

7 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Did you actually read what I wrote?

Yes? As far as I can tell, your new plan covers your needs, but does so for $6K more out-of-pocket than your old plan (which, given that you describe it as "basically 100% coverage of everything in network, forever"). Furthermore, your case is atypical in that you actually spend more than $6K per year for healthcare. For the vast majority of the people with the same plan, their out-of-pocket healthcare costs went way up with absolutely no redeeming features whatsoever.

[Kalbear]

Just now, Altherion said:

Yes? As far as I can tell, your new plan covers your needs, but does so for $6K more out-of-pocket than your old plan (which, given that you describe it as "basically 100% coverage of everything in network, forever"). Furthermore, your case is atypical in that you actually spend more than $6K per year for healthcare. For the vast majority of the people with the same plan, their out-of-pocket healthcare costs went way up with absolutely no redeeming features whatsoever.

My costs went up per year - that's true. My overall benefits also went up.

The benefits I got from it far outweigh that cost increase, however. Which I stated very clearly. 

For the vast majority of the people on the same plan at Microsoft, they got about $3k a year in HSA funds that paid for whatever their out of pocket costs were and could ALSO use that on things like aspirin. Turned out most everyone actually got a small bit of money. I pay more per year, so my  costs went up - but it also meant the people who were in network went up significantly. 

Which, as it turned out, was kind of a big deal when my son got cancer.

[Kalbear]

I mean seriously, this is what I said:

Quote

 

And with the treatments we've had this year for my son's cancer, it's shown how incredibly good it is. 

I can't imagine getting better insurance than I have now, and what I am paying now would cost absurd amounts if done privately.

 

But yeah, that sounds like I had an issue with it, huh?

[all swedes are racist]

37 minutes ago, Trebla said:

Gianforte's official statement.

 

looks like gianforte's office is revising their statement, in anticipation of forthcoming video of the incident

https://twitter.com/twitersgoodboy/status/867548355706146816

 

[kairparavel]

 

[Altherion]

42 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

For the vast majority of the people on the same plan at Microsoft, they got about $3k a year in HSA funds that paid for whatever their out of pocket costs were and could ALSO use that on things like aspirin.

Alright, in that case it is actually better for most people (and no, this is not obvious from what you wrote in that thread, but never mind). However, this kind of cash seems be limited to certain companies (I believe one other person in that thread also mentioned it). Here's an article with some data:

Quote

In 2008, the average employer-sponsored family plan cost a total of $12,680, with employees footing $3,354 of the bill, according to Kaiser data. By 2016, the cost of the average employer family plan was up to $18,142 for the year, with workers picking up $5,277 of the tab.

...

For another, the typical plan's deductible is quite different nowadays. In 2008, high deductibles were the minority: 18% of covered workers had deductible of at least $1,000, per the Kaiser Family Foundation, up from only 10% in 2006. For workers with employer-sponsored plans at small firms, 35% had deductibles of $1,000 or more in 2008, up from 16% in 2006.

Fast-forward to 2016, and high-deductible plans have become standard: 51% of all covered workers, and 65% of workers in small firms, face deductibles of at least $1,000. Workers at smaller firms must pay an average of $2,069 out of pocket before insurance payments kick in, versus $1,238 for workers at firms with 200 or more employees.

To be fair, the premium costs have been increasing in any case -- the increase even slowed down for a bit before accelerating again. However, the deductible change is almost certainly due to ACA and I doubt most companies are as generous as Microsoft.

[Sivin]

13 hours ago, Nasty LongRider said:

Having worked both in warehousing and trucking, I would say that yeah, union has turned good jobs into shit jobs and temporary jobs.  Just what manufacturing has done as well.  Stories from

front line employees in Tesla's car company in the Calif. Bay Area and Amazon's fulfillment warehouse in Northern Nevada are not pretty.  Temp jobs, long hours, pay OK to decent but with mandatory overtime and weekend work, who has time to spend it?  Very few workers rights as temps don't have many rights.  Really, it's terrible.

 

 

Trucking companies have a turnover rate of 98% because it's cheaper to exploit a new crop of inexperienced drivers than to pay experienced ones a decent wage. And they have no bargaining power.

 

18 minutes ago, kairparavel said:

 

Damn, I was gonna say that!

[The Anti-Targ]

13 hours ago, Nasty LongRider said:

Having worked both in warehousing and trucking, I would say that yeah, union has turned good jobs into shit jobs and temporary jobs.  Just what manufacturing has done as well.  Stories from

front line employees in Tesla's car company in the Calif. Bay Area and Amazon's fulfillment warehouse in Northern Nevada are not pretty.  Temp jobs, long hours, pay OK to decent but with mandatory overtime and weekend work, who has time to spend it?  Very few workers rights as temps don't have many rights.  Really, it's terrible.

 

 

 

13 hours ago, Nasty LongRider said:

Still can't edit, the post above should read'  union busting has turned good jobs into shit jobs.'

Man, that makes a Yuge difference. Unfortunately it will be possible for someone, somewhere at some time to lift the first quote, ignoring the second correction, and cite it as proof for why unions are bad for workers.

Hopefully you can edit the original some time.

[Fez]

29 minutes ago, kairparavel said:

 

An estimated 60% of the vote is already in thanks to Montana's widespread use of vote-by-mail; plus its the night before election day, not much time for news to spread. If the story gets covered by local news and makes the local papers tomorrow, maybe it'll have some impact. But there's just not much time for it to changed anything. 

Of course, if Quist does win now, national Republicans will say this was the reason and try to pretend its not because the national environment is getting real bad for them.

[Kalbear]

Can he be impeached after he wins?

[all swedes are racist]

13 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Can he be impeached after he wins?

of course he CAN, but the question is would he be

[OldGimletEye]

Just now, Altherion said:

To be fair, the premium costs have been increasing in any case -- the increase even slowed down for a bit before accelerating again. However, the deductible change is almost certainly due to ACA and I doubt most companies are as generous as Microsoft.

Perhaps. In assessing the truth or validity of this claim it would be in my view helpful to have some kind of time series data on this matter. If somebody knows where said time series data is, I'd be happy to look at.

The reason why said time series data is important is to look at general trends before the ACA was passed. It could be the ACA caused deductibles to rise. Or it could be that deductibles started to rise as employers were trying to deal with ever rising premium cost. Or it could be a combination of both.

The only time series data I could find on this matter is here:

http://kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2016-summary-of-findings/

As you are aware the law was not signed until 2010. From chart F, it would appear that there was a general trend in higher user cost (well technically, where deductibles were over 1000 per year).

Now I'll admit this data is limited because it only tells us how many plans, by firm type, had deductibles of 1000 or more. It doesn't tell us the average size of deductibles.

[Kalbear]

Just now, commiedore said:

of course he CAN, but the question is would he be

My understanding is that it would be something for Montana, which I suspect might not be super kind to him if he won and had to spend a while in jail for unprovoked assault. 

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

6 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

I understand that if your income changes then your subsidies will change...but it is highly stressful, because as someone who is a freelancer, hence why no employer insurance, my income does vary sometimes hugely from year to year, but it's another unknown expense, and then who knows how long all that paperwork takes.  I have other issues w/ACA related mandates, like how the electronic system is MUCH worse than what existed before in terms of your records and prescriptions.  For single payer to not suck like the VA does, we would need massive, massive overhauling of everything.  Literally everything related to medicine in this country.  

We used the ACA one year, and half way though the year I got a decent paying full time job, instead of the part time work I was doing. I didn't realize I had to report my change of income when it happened, so when we did our taxes, we got penalized $750 (max is $1500). Even paying the $750 we still saved money as the ACA saved us $200 a month.  (so we paid $450 less than the husband's work offered).  

It really comes down to how much you think you need the insurance each year.  And our Silver plan was pretty good. My quarterly doctor visits, our (3) annual exams, and sick visits are just the co-pay, so I have no idea what you said you had to pay for each visit with a silver plan, but it was $20 for us.  My son broke his foot, and then needed months of physical therapy (an avulsion fracture) and I needed gall bladder surgery. Neither are huge things, but the way the deductibles worked out, we didn't pay the deductible all at once. I also take 3 daily medications, and we never hit the full deducible amount. 

It's possible we won't need that much this year, but who knows with a teenager and two parents old enough to be in AARP. It's not a risk most people can afford to take.

Like you said to Kalbear about his situation not being common, the same is even more true for you.

[Brendan Moody]

3 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

My understanding is that it would be something for Montana, which I suspect might not be super kind to him if he won and had to spend a while in jail for unprovoked assault. 

Members of Congress aren't subject to any form of local or state recall. Only the House itself can remove a member, by a two-thirds vote. In the past the process has only been used for disloyalty to the country (mostly Confederates during the Civil War) and abuse of the office, rather than for "ordinary" crimes. There's also been a reluctance to remove people elected or reelected after the crime became public, though most of the vote already being in would complicate that question. Not that Republicans these days would risk losing a vote under any circumstances if they could possibly avoid it...

[all swedes are racist]

16 minutes ago, Fez said:

An estimated 60% of the vote is already in thanks to Montana's widespread use of vote-by-mail; plus its the night before election day, not much time for news to spread. If the story gets covered by local news and makes the local papers tomorrow, maybe it'll have some impact. But there's just not much time for it to changed anything. 

Of course, if Quist does win now, national Republicans will say this was the reason and try to pretend its not because the national environment is getting real bad for them.

sounds like canvassers are going door to door playing the audio. is this race close enough that this could have any noticable effect?

[LongRider]

4 minutes ago, commiedore said:

sounds like canvassers are going door to door playing the audio. is this race close enough that this could have any noticable effect?

test, could it be, my problems with the site have been resolved?

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, commiedore said:

sounds like canvassers are going door to door playing the audio. is this race close enough that this could have any noticable effect?

Actually, yeah, it could. While 60% of the vote was in, it favors Quist - Gianforte had been counting on the day vote to swing it for him. This...might actually be pretty decent after all. 

[all swedes are racist]

Just now, Nasty LongRider said:

test, could it be, my problems with the site have been resolved?

youre welcome

[Kalbear]

Just now, Nasty LongRider said:

test, could it be, my problems with the site have been resolved?

no, you still have a shitty username