How healthcare regulations affect even those who have good insurance plans
newyorker.com
newyorker.com
Including deductibles, I would have paid over $12000 a year. Plus my wife used a birth center instead of a regular OB for delivery. That wasn't covered by insurance either, so my potential max per year on "healthcare" was $16,000.
That basically means that unless I get cancer, it is cheaper to forgo insurance, which is what I did. Now I'm actually saving money and getting ready to finally build/buy a house.
Screw healthcare.
Costs need to come down, but opting out of the system because you're currently healthy isn't good.
And then when you do get cancer or some other expensive disease, the rest of us get to pay for your treatment.
Yes, that's the exact strategy that Obamacare rewards.The Democrats could have limited "preexisting condition" protections to those who obtained coverage in the first year for as long as they retained coverage (in any form, including MedicAid). They chose not to.
If you want coverage to be mandatory, make it really mandatory.
You can only start a new insurance plan for a few months around the new year, or if you move from one state to another, get married, or some other list of major life events.
I mean, if you want to have no insurance, and then expect to make a go of treating your cancer by waiting for a plan to kick in after the new year...
There are people who legitimately do not want medical care, because of religious beliefs, because they're 85, or just because f--- off.
It might sound harsh, but there should be a way for these people to really-for-really opt out.
Education taxes aren't for parents; they are for kids. And young children cannot yet plan or provide for their education.
Contrast that with retirement, healthcare, life insurance, auto insurance, etc. These are all decisions made by people who should have the right to choose to participate.
But young children can plan for their own healthcare, or the healthcare of their providers?
> retirement
Exactly, we have social security here in the US. You can't opt out of that.
Does this make sense for your situation? Maybe it does, maybe doesn't. But no one will force you to spend your life working to pay auto insurance.
My high deductible plan is now $400/month (I'm fully out of pocket for the first $6500); its $750 to cover my wife and my daughter on their own low deductible PPO plan. That's $1150/month | $13800/year. I spend $500/month to cover my disabled mother's health insurance and some of her medical expenses. I'm still paying off hospital bills from my daughter's birth in August.
With Trump's executive action, I can now drop my $400/month high deductible plan and still receive my tax refund next year. If I have a catastrophic emergency medical expense, I'll declare bankruptcy (Florida protects your primary residence and your retirement accounts from all creditors except the bank with your mortgage). If I get cancer? That's what my life insurance is for.
Disclaimer: I fully support single payer. These are the perils of healthcare in America.
"Socialized healthcare is by far and large better. Don't believe me, just compare the US to any other OECD country on public health metrics, including:
* Cost per capita (that's important yo!)
* Child Mortality before Age 5
* Current Life Expectancy (for someone born in this cohort)
* Number of bankruptcies due to health issues per capita
I'm a huge fan of the bootstrapping ideals of the US; emigrated from Europe to the US and one of the appeals is the strong push against building an entitlement culture.
But if we get beat on every metric when it comes to healthcare, let's please admit that other systems simply work better. If someone can come up with a purely capitalistic system (our current system is far from that) which provides equal or better public health stats, I'm all for that too.
I'm just not for spending more than anyone else while receiving less than anyone else in return."
This year cheapest plan in my state is $1,800 a month. Obamacare is a disaster.