|
snip:
The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide something different. For example, instead of a health insurance plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money, called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could use that money to select insurance at their state exchange marketplace.
|
If you think the federal deficit is high now - just wait until Uncle Sam is running health insurance and every person with a pre-existing condition that has never had insurance jumps on the train.
Now it is possible to have a cell phone, public housing, food stamps, and full medical coverage and do absolutely nothing - for all your life. There seems to be no incentive for a child with parents dependent on a public handout to get a job. They'd have to make $20K (a guess) just to get to the first dollar more than they would get for doing nothing.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562" <teamb562@...> wrote:
snip:
The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide something different. For example, instead of a health insurance plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money, called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could use that money to select insurance at their state exchange marketplace.
|
The more interesting snip is the following: "Health insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a competitive private health insurance market that should provide one-stop shopping."
Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care coverage? I don't see it.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562" <teamb562@...> wrote:
snip:
The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide something different. For example, instead of a health insurance plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money, called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could use that money to select insurance at their state exchange marketplace.
|
Anyone who thinks the ACA is going to reduce medical care costs is living in a dream world. ?There is a Reason why many of the provisions are being phased in over a period of several years. ?If all the rules in this legislation kicked in at once, the nation would go into Sticker Shock. ?Any fees, etc., added to the health care providers will Surely be passed along to the consumers and patients. ?The Private Insurance companies have their needs well protected under this legislation, and any costs they incur will be passed along to their subscribers in the form of higher premiums and co-pays. ?For Seniors, this combination of Medicare, and the IBM Supplemental plans, are probably one of the best deals out there....let's hope the government doesn't screw with them too much. ?
Ultimately, the medical costs are going to keep rising at a pace that makes care unaffordable for much of the nation....and we will be forced to adopt some form of a SP-UHC system similar to what most of the other nations have been using for years. ?I see that happening before this decade is out. ?We cannot keep paying twice as much for care, as most other nations...and continue to be ranked way down the list in terms of value received for that money. ?The data at the CDC indicates that over 80% ?of this nations medical costs are expended upon
less than 15% of our population. ?Much of that is spent on the elderly in the last weeks of their lives, as our Health Care Industry uses them as Lab Rats to sustain life with every possible heroic measure. ?Then, we have to overcome the practice of Defensive Medicine...where doctors are having to order multiple, expensive tests...so as to protect themselves from the army of ambulance chasing lawyers that are just looking for an excuse to bring a multi-million dollar lawsuit for every perceived error in treatment. ?Many doctors pay well over $100K a year for Malpractice Insurance, so as to be protected from these Legal Buzzards....and you KNOW who pays for that. ? ?
Our current health care system is destined to implode under its own weight...and the ACA is going to only hasten the day when that happens. ? ? ? ? ??
From: "zimowski@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:35 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
?
The more interesting snip is the following: "Health insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a competitive private health insurance market that should provide one-stop shopping."
Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care coverage? I don't see it.
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> snip:
> The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide something different. For example, instead of a health insurance plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money, called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could use that money to select insurance at their state exchange marketplace.
>
|
Considering the high cost of the IBM insurance the private exchanges will probably be cheaper.? Within?9 years our costs went from $60 to $1400/month for just the 2 of us.? ACA makes them give free preventive care so over time this should lower costs as people take care of things before conditions worsen and become more expensive to treat.? If right wingers hadn't made?such a fuss inaccurately claiming "death panels" there would be doctor sessions where the doctor could explain about palliative care as opposed to extreme measures for those who are terminal.? There was a good article in Money magazine saying that palliative care was not only cheaper but actually extended the patient's life.? The ACA also requires that the insurance companies spend more money on actual patient care and less on overhead like the millions to
the CEO.? Those companies that?spent too much money on overhead?had to give money back to the people or in the case of company provided coverage, to the company.?In August $1.1 billion in all was suppose to be returned.?I wonder if IBM used any of the money to lower premiums or just used it to increase their profit?
??
|
--- On Fri, 12/28/12, Don Mininger wrote:
From: Don Mininger
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: "ibmpensionissues@..."
Date: Friday, December 28, 2012, 1:42 PM
?
Anyone who thinks the ACA is going to reduce medical care costs is living in a dream world. ?There is a Reason why many of the provisions are being phased in over a period of several years. ?If all the rules in this legislation kicked in at once, the nation would go into Sticker Shock. ?Any fees, etc., added to the health care providers will Surely be passed along to the consumers and patients. ?The Private Insurance companies have their needs well protected under this legislation, and any costs they incur will be passed along to their subscribers in the form of higher premiums and co-pays. ?For Seniors, this combination of Medicare, and the IBM Supplemental plans, are probably one of the best deals out there....let's hope the government doesn't screw with them too much. ?
Ultimately, the medical costs are going to keep rising at a pace that makes care unaffordable for much of the nation....and we will be forced to adopt some form of a SP-UHC system similar to what most of the other nations have been using for years. ?I see that happening before this decade is out. ?We cannot keep paying twice as much for care, as most other nations...and continue to be ranked way down the list in terms of value received for that money. ?The data at the CDC indicates that over 80% ?of this nations medical costs are expended upon less than 15% of our population. ?Much of that is spent on the elderly in the last weeks of their lives, as our Health Care Industry uses them as Lab Rats to sustain life with
every possible heroic measure. ?Then, we have to overcome the practice of Defensive Medicine...where doctors are having to order multiple, expensive tests...so as to protect themselves from the army of ambulance chasing lawyers that are just looking for an excuse to bring a multi-million dollar lawsuit for every perceived error in treatment. ?Many doctors pay well over $100K a year for Malpractice Insurance, so as to be protected from these Legal Buzzards....and you KNOW who pays for that. ? ?
Our current health care system is destined to implode under its own weight...and the ACA is going to only hasten the day when that happens. ? ? ? ? ??
From: "zimowski@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:35 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
?
The more interesting snip is the following: "Health insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a competitive private health insurance market that should provide one-stop shopping."
Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care coverage? I don't see it.
--- In , "teamb562" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> snip:
> The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide something different. For example, instead of a health insurance plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money, called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could use that money to select insurance at their state exchange marketplace.
>
|
"Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees...."
Yes, that was the main reason I posted this article. I've been searching for answers on how ACA dovetails with current retiree benefits and have gotten no where. I posted it here since discussion about ACA is stupidly prohibited by Kathy on the ibmpension board.
Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who are already covered by their companies health care(no matter the cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing that for several reasons.
1)It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less expensive then retiree coverage, especially if you're living on the pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and quality for the ACA subsidy.
2)Ibm retiree health care does not cover maintenance and preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for preventative? This makes no sense.
3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned up before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost of your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for maybe half the cost?
There are many of us who will struggle to make it to age 65 (Medicare)
with medical coverage. If anyone has any sources of information that details how ACA dovetails with retiree health care benefits, please post and advise. Thank you.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...> wrote:
The more interesting snip is the following: "Health insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a competitive private health insurance market that should provide one-stop shopping."
Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care coverage? I don't see it.
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562" <teamb562@> wrote:
snip:
The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide something different. For example, instead of a health insurance plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money, called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could use that money to select insurance at their state exchange marketplace.
|
Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who
are already covered by their companies health care(no matter the
cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing that
for several reasons. A certain political party did all they could to prevent changes to the current health care system. They view the health care exchanges as "government run health care" even though commercial insurance companies will be offering insurance on the exchanges. Therefore, it makes sense from their point of view to exclude as many people as possible from having access to the exchanges. 1) It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less expensive
then retiree coverage, especially if you're living on the
pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and quality
for the ACA subsidy. Even though you may be on a pension and have a low income, that certain political party doesn't want you to have access to any subsidized health insurance because they view that as an expense to taxpayers. 2) Ibm retiree health care does not cover maintenance and
preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with
company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for
preventative? This makes no sense. Yes, it makes no sense. But IBM and other large companies lobbied heavily to make sure that retiree plans were excluded from most requirements of the ACA. 3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned up
before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost of
your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for maybe
half the cost? I think you are dreaming if you think that insurance on the exchanges will be half the cost of what IBM charges. Perhaps if you were eligible for a substantial subsidy it might be. But as I said, I doubt that IBMers will be allowed to have access, even at full cost. --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562" <teamb562@...> wrote:
"Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees...."
Yes, that was the main reason I posted this article. I've been searching for answers on how ACA dovetails with current retiree benefits and have gotten no where. I posted it here since discussion about ACA is stupidly prohibited by Kathy on the ibmpension board.
Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who are already covered by their companies health care(no matter the cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing that for several reasons.
1)It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less expensive then retiree coverage, especially if you're living on the pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and quality for the ACA subsidy.
2)Ibm retiree health care does not cover maintenance and preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for preventative? This makes no sense.
3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned up before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost of your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for maybe half the cost?
There are many of us who will struggle to make it to age 65 (Medicare)
with medical coverage. If anyone has any sources of information that details how ACA dovetails with retiree health care benefits, please post and advise. Thank you.
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@" <zimowski@> wrote:
The more interesting snip is the following: "Health insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a competitive private health insurance market that should provide one-stop shopping."
Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care coverage? I don't see it.
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562" <teamb562@> wrote:
snip:
The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide something different. For example, instead of a health insurance plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money, called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could use that money to select insurance at their state exchange marketplace.
|
|
|
Found this on another board:
Every American citizen over the age of 65 should press their congressmen or state legislatures to compel any doctor who received any government assistance or government loan in their education or career to accept any senior citizen who is covered by Medicare.
|
|
|
Outstanding!!! ?You nailed almost every point. Especially, your very first point. ? That was this: THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, THEIR FAMILIES, AND STAFF, ARE EXEMPT FROM THE ACA.? Not only now but forever!
I would like to suggest to the members of this and other forums, that we determine a means and method of RESTRICTING LEGISLATIVE BODY'S AND FEDERAL EXECUTIVES, AND STAFF FROM EXEMPTING THEMSELVES FROM GENERALLY APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.
From: "KenSP@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Cc: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
?
I think the person who wrote the attached note needs to do more research on the ACA.
First if ACA is so good why does it not apply to members of Congress or the President and their families.? They are exempt including their staff members.
The second thing is he/she should look at is the number of States that have opt out of the new Medicare and Medicaid rules which would have double Medicaid participants in states such as Texas.? Also I think between 30 and 36 States have refused to spend money on setting up the insurance exchanges and therefore this must be done by the Federal Government at their expense. I don't think the Federal Government has the man power or money to set it up and therefore don't hold your breath waiting for the exchange.
As to subsidies for healthcare insurance, where is the money coming from? At the moment, the US government is borrowing 46 cents of every dollar it spends.? US is
becoming like Greece and sooner or later cuts in everyone's benefits will have to be made.
Medicare and Social Security is going broke and now ACA will add to the cost.? Someone has to pay? It will be all of us on a fixed pension when inflation comes. Obama tax rate increases on the rich, if passed, will only pay for running the government for 8 days but does nothing to stop the borrowing and printing of money.
The Federal Reserve is printing the money and then buys US Bonds at $50 billion a month. This is how the government is getting some of the money it needs. This is the reason the price of gold keeps going up.? So when you see your grocery bills increase as well as your other expenses and your income (pension and social security) does not, you will know the fixed income retirees are the ones who will truly pay for these great benefits and subsidies.
Finally as to IBM retirement health benefits being excluded form
ACA, all IBM and the other companies told Obama is that if included they would drop the retiree health plans.? Legally, they can do this any time. It is in the fine print of the plans.? Could you imagine what would have happen if Obama was telling everyone if they like their plan they could keep it, and then IBM tells its retired employees it is dropping their health care due to ACA.
Regards
an IBM Retiree
----- Original Message -----
From: edward_berkline
Date: Friday, December 28, 2012 9:57 pm
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: ibmpensionissues@...
> > Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who
> > are already covered by their companies health care(no matter
> the
> > cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing that
> > for several reasons.
>
> A certain
political party did all they could to prevent changes
> to the current health care system. They view the health care
> exchanges as "government run health care" even though commercial
> insurance companies will be offering insurance on the exchanges.
> Therefore, it makes sense from their point of view to exclude
> as many people as possible from having access to the exchanges.
>
> > 1) It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less expensive
> > then retiree coverage, especially if you're living on the
> > pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and
> quality
> > for the ACA subsidy.
>
> Even though you may be on a pension and have a low income, that
> certain political party doesn't want you to have access to any
> subsidized health insurance because they view that as an expense
> to taxpayers.
>
> > 2) Ibm retiree health care does not cover maintenance and
> > preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with
> > company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for
> > preventative? This makes no sense.
>
> Yes, it makes no sense. But IBM and other large companies
> lobbied heavily to make sure that retiree plans were excluded
> from most requirements of the ACA.
>
> > 3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned up
> > before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost of
> > your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for maybe
> > half the cost?
>
> I think you are dreaming if you think that insurance on the
> exchanges will be half the cost of what IBM charges. Perhaps if
> you were eligible for a substantial subsidy it might be. But as
>
I said, I doubt that IBMers will be allowed to have access, even
> at full cost.
>
> --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562"
> wrote:
> >
> > "Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees...."
> >
> > Yes, that was the main reason I posted this article. I've been
> searching for answers on how ACA dovetails with current retiree
> benefits and have gotten no where. I posted it here since
> discussion about ACA is stupidly prohibited by Kathy on the
> ibmpension board.
> >
> > Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who
> are already covered by their companies health care(no matter the
> cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing
> that for several reasons.
> >
> > 1)It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less
> expensive
then retiree coverage, especially if you're living on
> the pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and
> quality for the ACA subsidy.
> >
> > 2)Ibm retiree health care does not cover maintenance and
> preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with
> company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for
> preventative? This makes no sense.
> >
> > 3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned
> up before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost
> of your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for
> maybe half the cost?
> >
> > There are many of us who will struggle to make it to age 65
> (Medicare)> with medical coverage. If anyone has any sources of
> information that details how ACA dovetails with retiree health
> care benefits, please
post and advise. Thank you.
> >
> >
> > --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@"
> wrote:
> > >
> > > The more interesting snip is the following: "Health
> insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be
> operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a
> competitive private health insurance market that should provide
> one-stop shopping."
> > >
> > > Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees
> that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care
> coverage? I don't see it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562"
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
>
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2012/12/27/boomers-obamacare-health-reform/1717009/
> > > >
> > > > snip:
> > > > The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers
> that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide
> something different. For example, instead of a health insurance
> plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money,
> called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could
> use that money to select insurance at their state exchange
> marketplace.> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
|
Thanks for posting that, ?I have not encountered that YET with my doctors. ?But for the last ten years I have always had an uneasy feeling that, I was going to be told that, by the receptionist. ?
From: "KenSP@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@... ten?
Sent: Friday, December 28,
2012 10:37 PM
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
?
Colleagues
It is truly interesting that many people focus on having insurance and not whether the doctor is going to accept your insurance. It really does not matter if you have insurance especially when trying to find a good or highly recommended doctor in New York City and Westchester area who is willing to take any insurance. Many refuse to accept insurance.
When you call for an appointment, they ask you what kind of insurance you have.? If it is Medicare or Medicaid, they tell you that they do not accept this insurance. So, unless you are willing to pay the fee for cash without any reimbursement, you continue to look. If you have private insurance you are told, that you must pay the fee with your credit card and they will give you the reimbursement that they receive from the insurance company. (My daughter's experience)
Please remember you cannot force a doctor to work or to treat patients since that would be
slavery.
The doctors are not refusing you treatment but merely refusing to accept your insurance. Cash is king. Many doctors are carrying medical school debt, large malpractice insurance, and the cost of setting up and maintaining a practice. (My neighbor is a doctor.) There are not enough doctors to treat everyone especially the increase in the number of NEW Medicaid patients in the New York area.
The doctors refuse to take Medicare or Medicaid patients especially since if they take a Medicare patient, a doctor is legally required to take a Medicaid patient and receives much less from the government for Medicaid patient even if the Medicare and Medicaid patient have the same illness. Does this make sense? For this reason, many doctors refuse to take Medicare and Medicaid patients.
So just because one has insurance especially Medicare does not mean, you are going to be able to fine a good doctor or specialist when he is needed. You
will find someone although he might not be consider good or one of the best. There are not enough doctors to treat everyone.
I wonder if the ACA rules will lead to more doctors refusing to accept insurance.
Regards from an IBM retiree who has experienced the above.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sheila Beaudry
Date: Friday, December 28, 2012 8:12 pm
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: ibmpensionissues@...
> Considering the high cost of the IBM insurance the private
> exchanges will probably be cheaper.? Within?9 years our costs
> went from $60 to $1400/month for just the 2 of us.? ACA makes
> them give free preventive care so over time this should lower
> costs as people take care of things before conditions worsen and
> become more expensive to treat.? If right wingers hadn't
>
made?such a fuss inaccurately claiming "death panels" there
> would be doctor sessions where the doctor could explain about
> palliative care as opposed to extreme measures for those who are
> terminal.? There was a good article in Money magazine saying
> that palliative care was not only cheaper but actually extended
> the patient's life.? The ACA also requires that the insurance
> companies spend more money on actual patient care and less on
> overhead like the millions to the CEO.? Those companies
> that?spent too much money on overhead?had to give money back to
> the people or in the case of
> company provided coverage, to the company.?In August $1.1
> billion in all was suppose to be returned.?I wonder if IBM used
> any of the money to lower premiums or just used it to increase
> their profit?
>
??
> --- On Fri, 12/28/12, Don Mininger wrote:
>
>
> From: Don Mininger
> Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may
> help Baby Boomers
> To: "ibmpensionissues@..."
> Date: Friday, December 28,
> 2012, 1:42 PM
>
>
>
> ?
>
>
>
>
>
> Anyone who thinks the ACA is going to reduce medical care costs
> is living in a dream world. ?There is a Reason why many of the
> provisions are being phased in over a period of several years.
> ?If all the rules in this legislation kicked in at once, the
> nation would go into Sticker Shock. ?Any fees, etc., added to
> the health care providers will Surely be passed along to the
> consumers and patients. ?The Private Insurance companies have
> their needs well protected under this
legislation, and any costs
> they incur will be passed along to their subscribers in the form
> of higher premiums and co-pays. ?For Seniors, this combination
> of Medicare, and the IBM Supplemental plans, are probably one of
> the best deals out there....let's hope the government doesn't
> screw with them too much. ?
>
>
> Ultimately, the medical costs are going to keep rising at a pace
> that makes care unaffordable for much of the nation....and we
> will be forced to adopt some form of a SP-UHC system similar to
> what most of the other nations have been using for years. ?I see
> that happening before this decade is out. ?We cannot keep paying
> twice as much for care, as most other nations...and continue to
> be ranked way down the list in terms of value received for that
> money. ?The data at the CDC indicates that over
80% ?of this
> nations medical costs are expended upon less than 15% of our
> population. ?Much of that is spent on the elderly in the last
> weeks of their lives, as our Health Care Industry uses them as
> Lab Rats to sustain life with every possible heroic measure.
> ?Then, we have to overcome the practice of Defensive
> Medicine...where doctors are having to order multiple, expensive
> tests...so as to protect themselves from the army of ambulance
> chasing lawyers that are
> just looking for an excuse to bring a multi-million dollar
> lawsuit for every perceived error in treatment. ?Many doctors
> pay well over $100K a year for Malpractice Insurance, so as to
> be protected from these Legal Buzzards....and you KNOW who pays
> for that. ? ?
>
>
> Our current health care system is destined to implode under its
> own weight...and the ACA is going to only hasten the day when
> that happens. ? ? ? ? ??
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "zimowski@..."
> To: ibmpensionissues@...
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:35 AM
> Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help
> Baby Boomers
>
>
>
> ?
>
> The more interesting snip is the following: "Health insurance
> will not necessarily be less costly. It will be operated by
> state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a competitive
> private health insurance market that should provide one-stop
> shopping."
> Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees that
> are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care coverage? I
> don't see it.
>
> --- In
ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562"
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2012/12/27/boomers-obamacare-health-reform/1717009/
> >
> > snip:
> > The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that
> still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide
> something different. For example, instead of a health insurance
> plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money,
> called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could
> use that money to select insurance at their state exchange
> marketplace.>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
Congress and the President are exempt from ACA and therefore are
more equal then other US citizens when it comes to healthcare.
Would the law have passed if they knew it would be applied to them
and their family? You've been falling for too much of the right wing-nut propaganda about the ACA. or excerpt: So, here's the real deal – As things currently stand, Members of Congress and their staff, until 2014, will continue to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). This program, considered among the best in the nation, allows federal employees- including Members of Congress and their staff- to choose from a wide range of health plans and select the one that best suits their needs. Note that the current plan is neither `government' insurance, `free' insurance nor any other sort of sweet deal that the public has been led to believe is the case. The federal employee's program involves private insurance policies with premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etc. Here's the surprise – come 2014, when the lion's share of the ACA provisions come on line, Members of Congress and their staff will be required to buy their health insurance on an exchange. In fact, their choices will be even more limited than our own. While it is expected that some 24 million people will elect to purchase their health care policy on a state run exchange, we are not required by law to do so. Members of Congress and their staff, however, must buy their insurance in this way. --- In ibmpensionissues@..., KenSP@... wrote:
Perhaps, the government with such a? law forcing doctors to take Medicare and Medicaid patients should also further reduce the Medicare and Medicaid? doctor's reimbursement to one dollar per visit to save tax dollars. Once such a law goes through, what rational person will want to become a doctor or stay in the US rather than going elsewhere to practice medicine. Should we forbid doctors from leaving the country? Other countries just like the US will always allow and accept doctors within its borders .? So with such a law forcing doctors to accept Medicare and Medicaid patients, we will have even? less doctors than we have today.In some areas of Canada, you have to wait 3 years to be assigned a primary care physician.? It is this doctor who determines what tests you need or don't need under their system.? To avoid this issue, ACA, makes a registered nurse a patient's primary care person and she determines whether you see the doctor or what test you need..? (Remember Nancy said you have to pass ACA first before you know what is in it.)However for treatment in many countries, if you pay cash just like in England, any doctor is willing to see at any time and treat you first before he treats those with government health care insurance. Doctors can set priority rules as to what patients they see first and who they see last unless this also is going to be regulated by the government.? -- Is this Socialism or Communism? When working for IBM in Europe, as a US citizen I had to pay cash and then file with IBM for medical reimbursement since I was not covered under the European system. I had no problems in finding doctors or dentists who were US trained.Save your money for US medical treatment especially when a 15 member non-medical appointed government board who are exempt from ACA will decide what is covered and not covered under Medicare or ACA. Trust the government.Ask yourself why did the Canadian PM go to the Florida and pay cash for a heart operation rather than staying in Canada? for treatment.? When asked about this, his reply was that no one should tell him how to spend his money.But in a socialistic state, all persons are equal but some (party or govenrment officials) are more equal than others.? Congress and the President are exempt from ACA and therefore are more equal then other US citizens when it comes to healthcare. Would the law have passed if they knew it would be applied to them and their family? RegardsFrom an IBM retired person in his 70's and having limited income, who watches this area closely.----- Original Message -----From: ibmchiapetrescue Date: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:02 pmSubject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby BoomersTo: ibmpensionissues@...> Found this on another board: > > Every American citizen over the age of 65 should press their > congressmen or state legislatures to compel any doctor who > received any government assistance or government loan in their > education or career to accept any senior citizen who is covered > by Medicare.> >
|
The free preventative care that ACA offers is more hype than substance - just an ACA buzzword for those who have been tricked into voicing support for this program but never take the time to investigate what it really provides. There is a very short list of procedures that are covered, and when I perused the list, I could not find a single procedure that I think I'll need. What a joke....
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@...> wrote:
Considering the high cost of the IBM insurance the private exchanges will probably be cheaper.?? Within??9 years our costs went from $60 to $1400/month for just the 2 of us.?? ACA makes them give free preventive care so over time this should lower costs as people take care of things before conditions worsen and become more expensive to treat.?? If right wingers hadn't made??such a fuss inaccurately claiming "death panels" there would be doctor sessions where the doctor could explain about palliative care as opposed to extreme measures for those who are terminal.?? There was a good article in Money magazine saying that palliative care was not only cheaper but actually extended the patient's life.?? The ACA also requires that the insurance companies spend more money on actual patient care and less on overhead like the millions to the CEO.?? Those companies that??spent too much money on overhead??had to give money back to the people or in the case of
company provided coverage, to the company.??In August $1.1 billion in all was suppose to be returned.??I wonder if IBM used any of the money to lower premiums or just used it to increase their profit?
????
--- On Fri, 12/28/12, Don Mininger <don_m64015@...> wrote:
From: Don Mininger <don_m64015@...>
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: "ibmpensionissues@..." <ibmpensionissues@...>
Date: Friday, December 28, 2012, 1:42 PM
??
Anyone who thinks the ACA is going to reduce medical care costs is living in a dream world. ??There is a Reason why many of the provisions are being phased in over a period of several years. ??If all the rules in this legislation kicked in at once, the nation would go into Sticker Shock. ??Any fees, etc., added to the health care providers will Surely be passed along to the consumers and patients. ??The Private Insurance companies have their needs well protected under this legislation, and any costs they incur will be passed along to their subscribers in the form of higher premiums and co-pays. ??For Seniors, this combination of Medicare, and the IBM Supplemental plans, are probably one of the best deals out there....let's hope the government doesn't screw with them too much. ??
Ultimately, the medical costs are going to keep rising at a pace that makes care unaffordable for much of the nation....and we will be forced to adopt some form of a SP-UHC system similar to what most of the other nations have been using for years. ??I see that happening before this decade is out. ??We cannot keep paying twice as much for care, as most other nations...and continue to be ranked way down the list in terms of value received for that money. ??The data at the CDC indicates that over 80% ??of this nations medical costs are expended upon less than 15% of our population. ??Much of that is spent on the elderly in the last weeks of their lives, as our Health Care Industry uses them as Lab Rats to sustain life with every possible heroic measure. ??Then, we have to overcome the practice of Defensive Medicine...where doctors are having to order multiple, expensive tests...so as to protect themselves from the army of ambulance chasing lawyers that are
just looking for an excuse to bring a multi-million dollar lawsuit for every perceived error in treatment. ??Many doctors pay well over $100K a year for Malpractice Insurance, so as to be protected from these Legal Buzzards....and you KNOW who pays for that. ?? ??
Our current health care system is destined to implode under its own weight...and the ACA is going to only hasten the day when that happens. ?? ?? ?? ?? ????
From: "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...>
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:35 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
??
The more interesting snip is the following: "Health insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a competitive private health insurance market that should provide one-stop shopping."
Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care coverage? I don't see it.
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562" <teamb562@> wrote:
snip:
The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide something different. For example, instead of a health insurance plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money, called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could use that money to select insurance at their state exchange marketplace.
|
|
|
test2btrue, you made a point earlier in this thread about doctors not accepting Medicare, that perhaps our priorities are wrong worrying about insurance affordability and that "cash is king". I can't argue with any of that except to say for those without cash (and there are many more then with) their #1 priority IS insurance and #2 finding a doctor that accepts whatever insurance they can afford. Most of our citizens, other then the 1% haven't the cash to pay for routine stuff let alone a needed surgery. This leads me to my second point.
With all the pessimistic bashing here about ACA, it's our only current hope of driving down the exploding cost of health care. I have not seen the "other" side make a serious move to drive down health care cost. I assume this is because that might hurt their rich friends. We are in a new economy, never going back to the old. Everyone is having to give up and pay something. So, similar to the need for term limits and campaign finance reform to fix our problems in Washington, health care should NOT be and never should have been a for-profit enterprise.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., KenSP@... wrote:
I think that you are listening to the liberal press or people who hold a liberal point of view and the site you quote is known to be liberal. I consider myself a moderate but because I am in my 70's this issue is one I follow closely.Here is a quote from the government publication on the issue of FEHB versus Medicare and why people say that Congress and the President are exempt from ACA"It will almost always be to your advantage to keep your current FEHB
coverage without any changes. The exception is for those with limited
incomes and resources who may qualify for Medicare's extra help with
prescription drug costs. Contact your benefits administrator or your
FEHB Program insurer for information about your FEHB coverage before
making any changes." Does that sound like Medicare is a better plan than FEHB coverage. A majority of the States have refused to set up the required insurance exchanges. The Federal Government now must set up and pay for the creation of these exchanges. Do you believe that they will be setup by 2014? Given the current financial situation, do you think that the House would approve this expenditure and grow the government. In the real world and not the theoretical world, I believe it will be years before Congress or the President will be forced to buy insurance on a state exchange since none exist. Time will tell which one of us is correct. Do you know of anyone who has FEHB and is 65 electing to take Medicare rather than keeping their FEHB current insurance.? If IBM offered you a choice, their plan or Medicare would you chose Medicare? I would not since many doctors in the New York Area do not accept Medicare since Medicare's reimbursement rate is the lowest in the insurance industry. I and my wife did not have a problem finding a doctor when we had IBM employee medical coverage but now we do have some issues.Please Note:? My brother worked for and retired from working for the federal government, my mother was in the teachers' union when she retired, and I retired from IBM. My mother had the best medical retirement plan, followed by my brother, and then my Medicare and IBM retiree coverage.Medicare is better than nothing especially since IBM can cancel retiree healthcare insurance anytime it wishes.Nothing more need be said.? Believe what you want. Our beliefs and opinions are based on our personal life experiences. You have yours and I have mine.Regards? An IBM Retiree----- Original Message -----From: edward_berkline Date: Saturday, December 29, 2012 9:43 amSubject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby BoomersTo: ibmpensionissues@...> > > Congress and the President are exempt from ACA and therefore > are > > more equal then other US citizens when it comes to healthcare. > > Would the law have passed if they knew it would be applied to them> > and their family?> > You've been falling for too much of the right wing-nut > propaganda about the ACA. > > > > or> > > exempted-from-obamacare/> > excerpt:> > So, here's the real deal – As things currently stand, Members of > Congress and their staff, until 2014, will continue to > participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program > (FEHBP). This program, considered among the best in the nation, > allows federal employees- including Members of Congress and > their staff- to choose from a wide range of health plans and > select the one that best suits their needs. Note that the > current plan is neither `government' insurance, `free' insurance > nor any other sort of sweet deal that the public has been led to > believe is the case. The federal employee's program involves > private insurance policies with premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etc.> > Here's the surprise – come 2014, when the lion's share of the > ACA provisions come on line, Members of Congress and their staff > will be required to buy their health insurance on an exchange. > In fact, their choices will be even more limited than our own. > While it is expected that some 24 million people will elect to > purchase their health care policy on a state run exchange, we > are not required by law to do so. Members of Congress and their > staff, however, must buy their insurance in this way.> > --- In ibmpensionissues@..., KenSP@ wrote:> >> > Perhaps, the government with such a? law forcing doctors to > take Medicare and Medicaid patients should also further reduce > the Medicare and Medicaid? doctor's reimbursement to one dollar > per visit to save tax dollars. Once such a law goes through, > what rational person will want to become a doctor or stay in the > US rather than going elsewhere to practice medicine. Should we > forbid doctors from leaving the country? Other countries just > like the US will always allow and accept doctors within its > borders .? So with such a law forcing doctors to accept Medicare > and Medicaid patients, we will have even? less doctors than we > have today.In some areas of Canada, you have to wait 3 years to > be assigned a primary care physician.? It is this doctor who > determines what tests you need or don't need under their > system.? To avoid this issue, ACA, makes a registered nurse a > patient's primary care person and she determines whether you see > the doctor or what test you need..? (Remember Nancy said you > have to pass ACA first before you know what is in it.)However > for treatment in many countries, if you pay cash just like in > England, any doctor is willing to see at any time and treat you > first before he treats those with government health care > insurance. Doctors can set priority rules as to what patients > they see first and who they see last unless this also is going > to be regulated by the government.? -- Is this Socialism or > Communism? When working for IBM in Europe, as a US citizen I had > to pay cash and then file with IBM for medical reimbursement > since I was not covered under the European system. I had no > problems in finding doctors or dentists who were US trained.Save > your money for US medical treatment especially when a 15 member > non-medical appointed government board who are exempt from ACA > will decide what is covered and not covered under Medicare or > ACA. Trust the government.Ask yourself why did the Canadian PM > go to the Florida and pay cash for a heart operation rather than > staying in Canada? for treatment.? When asked about this, his > reply was that no one should tell him how to spend his money.But > in a socialistic state, all persons are equal but some (party or > govenrment officials) are more equal than others.? Congress and > the President are exempt from ACA and therefore are more equal > then other US citizens when it comes to healthcare. Would the > law have passed if they knew it would be applied to them and > their family? RegardsFrom an IBM retired person in his 70's and > having limited income, who watches this area closely.----- > Original Message -----From: ibmchiapetrescue Date: Friday, > December 28, 2012 11:02 pmSubject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health > care law(PPACA) may help Baby BoomersTo: > ibmpensionissues@...> Found this on another board: > > > Every American citizen over the age of 65 should press their > > congressmen or state legislatures to compel any doctor who > > received any government assistance or government loan in their > > education or career to accept any senior citizen who is covered > > by Medicare.> >> >> > >
|
In 2014 when the ACA is in full force Congress is required to use it.? See ? p 81
"3D MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE.-
???? (i)? REQUIREMENT.- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or Congressional staff shall be health plans that are_
???? (I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or
???? (II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act)."
Also see ?and .
?
We are the ones not allowed to use the Exchanges because we have private insurance that meets the requirements, unless IBM drops it.
???
|
--- On Sat, 12/29/12, KenSP@... wrote:
From: KenSP@...
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Date: Saturday, December 29, 2012, 12:34 PM
?
I think that you are listening to the liberal press or people who hold a liberal point of view and the site you quote is known to be liberal. I consider myself a moderate but because I am in my 70's this issue is one I follow closely.
Here is a quote from the government publication on the issue of FEHB versus Medicare and why people say that Congress and the President are exempt from ACA
"It will almost always be to your advantage to keep your current FEHB coverage without any changes. The exception is for those with limited incomes and resources who may qualify for Medicare's extra help with prescription drug costs. Contact your benefits administrator or your FEHB Program insurer for information about your FEHB coverage before making any changes."
Does that sound like Medicare is a better plan than FEHB coverage.
A majority of the States have refused to set up the required insurance exchanges. The Federal Government
now must set up and pay for the creation of these exchanges. Do you believe that they will be setup by 2014? Given the current financial situation, do you think that the House would approve this expenditure and grow the government. In the real world and not the theoretical world, I believe it will be years before Congress or the President will be forced to buy insurance on a state exchange since none exist. Time will tell which one of us is correct.
Do you know of anyone who has FEHB and is 65 electing to take Medicare rather than keeping their FEHB current insurance.? If IBM offered you a choice, their plan or Medicare would you chose Medicare? I would not since many doctors in the New York Area do not accept Medicare since Medicare's reimbursement rate is the lowest in the insurance industry. I and my wife did not have a problem finding a doctor when we had IBM employee medical coverage but now we do have some issues.
Please
Note:? My brother worked for and retired from working for the federal government, my mother was in the teachers' union when she retired, and I retired from IBM. My mother had the best medical retirement plan, followed by my brother, and then my Medicare and IBM retiree coverage.
Medicare is better than nothing especially since IBM can cancel retiree healthcare insurance anytime it wishes.
Nothing more need be said.? Believe what you want. Our beliefs and opinions are based on our personal life experiences. You have yours and I have mine.
Regards?
An IBM Retiree
----- Original Message -----
From: edward_berkline
Date: Saturday, December 29, 2012 9:43 am
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: ibmpensionissues@...
>
> > Congress and the President are exempt from ACA and therefore
> are
> > more equal
then other US citizens when it comes to healthcare.
> > Would the law have passed if they knew it would be applied to them
> > and their family?
>
> You've been falling for too much of the right wing-nut
> propaganda about the ACA.
>
> http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/congress-exempt-from-health-bill/
>
> or
>
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/12/08/congress-
> exempted-from-obamacare/
>
> excerpt:
>
> So, here's the real deal – As things currently stand, Members of
> Congress and their staff, until 2014, will continue to
> participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program
> (FEHBP). This program, considered among the best in the nation,
> allows federal employees- including Members of Congress and
> their staff- to choose from a wide range of health plans and
> select the one
that best suits their needs. Note that the
> current plan is neither `government' insurance, `free' insurance
> nor any other sort of sweet deal that the public has been led to
> believe is the case. The federal employee's program involves
> private insurance policies with premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etc.
>
> Here's the surprise – come 2014, when the lion's share of the
> ACA provisions come on line, Members of Congress and their staff
> will be required to buy their health insurance on an exchange.
> In fact, their choices will be even more limited than our own.
> While it is expected that some 24 million people will elect to
> purchase their health care policy on a state run exchange, we
> are not required by law to do so. Members of Congress and their
> staff, however, must buy their insurance in this way.
>
> --- In
ibmpensionissues@..., KenSP@... wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps, the government with such a? law forcing doctors to
> take Medicare and Medicaid patients should also further reduce
> the Medicare and Medicaid? doctor's reimbursement to one dollar
> per visit to save tax dollars. Once such a law goes through,
> what rational person will want to become a doctor or stay in the
> US rather than going elsewhere to practice medicine. Should we
> forbid doctors from leaving the country? Other countries just
> like the US will always allow and accept doctors within its
> borders .? So with such a law forcing doctors to accept Medicare
> and Medicaid patients, we will have even? less doctors than we
> have today.In some areas of Canada, you have to wait 3 years to
> be assigned a primary care physician.? It is this doctor who
>
determines what tests you need or don't need under their
> system.? To avoid this issue, ACA, makes a registered nurse a
> patient's primary care person and she determines whether you see
> the doctor or what test you need..? (Remember Nancy said you
> have to pass ACA first before you know what is in it.)However
> for treatment in many countries, if you pay cash just like in
> England, any doctor is willing to see at any time and treat you
> first before he treats those with government health care
> insurance. Doctors can set priority rules as to what patients
> they see first and who they see last unless this also is going
> to be regulated by the government.? -- Is this Socialism or
> Communism? When working for IBM in Europe, as a US citizen I had
> to pay cash and then file with IBM for medical reimbursement
> since I was not covered under the
European system. I had no
> problems in finding doctors or dentists who were US trained.Save
> your money for US medical treatment especially when a 15 member
> non-medical appointed government board who are exempt from ACA
> will decide what is covered and not covered under Medicare or
> ACA. Trust the government.Ask yourself why did the Canadian PM
> go to the Florida and pay cash for a heart operation rather than
> staying in Canada? for treatment.? When asked about this, his
> reply was that no one should tell him how to spend his money.But
> in a socialistic state, all persons are equal but some (party or
> govenrment officials) are more equal than others.? Congress and
> the President are exempt from ACA and therefore are more equal
> then other US citizens when it comes to healthcare. Would the
> law have passed if they knew it would be
applied to them and
> their family? RegardsFrom an IBM retired person in his 70's and
> having limited income, who watches this area closely.-----
> Original Message -----From: ibmchiapetrescue Date: Friday,
> December 28, 2012 11:02 pmSubject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health
> care law(PPACA) may help Baby BoomersTo:
> ibmpensionissues@...> Found this on another board: >
> > Every American citizen over the age of 65 should press their >
> congressmen or state legislatures to compel any doctor who >
> received any government assistance or government loan in their >
> education or career to accept any senior citizen who is covered
> > by Medicare.> >
> >
>
>
>
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- On Sat, 12/29/12, Just Puttin' wrote:
From: Just Puttin'
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: "ibmpensionissues@..."
Date: Saturday, December 29, 2012, 1:59 AM
?
Outstanding!!! ?You nailed almost every point.
Especially, your very first point. ?
That was this:
THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, THEIR FAMILIES, AND STAFF, ARE EXEMPT FROM THE ACA.? Not only now but forever!
I would like to suggest to the members of this and other forums, that we determine a means and method of RESTRICTING LEGISLATIVE BODY'S AND FEDERAL EXECUTIVES, AND STAFF FROM EXEMPTING THEMSELVES FROM GENERALLY APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.
From: "KenSP@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Cc: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
?
I think the person who wrote the attached note needs to do more research on the ACA.
First if ACA is so good why does it not apply to members of Congress or the President and their families.? They are exempt including their staff members.
The second thing is he/she should look at is the number of States that have opt out of the new Medicare and Medicaid rules which would have double Medicaid participants in states such as Texas.? Also I think between 30 and 36 States have refused to spend money on setting up the insurance exchanges and therefore this must be done by the Federal Government at their expense. I don't think the Federal Government has the man power or money to set it up and therefore don't hold your breath waiting for the exchange.
As to subsidies for healthcare insurance, where is the money coming from? At the moment, the US government is borrowing 46 cents of every dollar it spends.? US is becoming
like Greece and sooner or later cuts in everyone's benefits will have to be made.
Medicare and Social Security is going broke and now ACA will add to the cost.? Someone has to pay? It will be all of us on a fixed pension when inflation comes. Obama tax rate increases on the rich, if passed, will only pay for running the government for 8 days but does nothing to stop the borrowing and printing of money.
The Federal Reserve is printing the money and then buys US Bonds at $50 billion a month. This is how the government is getting some of the money it needs. This is the reason the price of gold keeps going up.? So when you see your grocery bills increase as well as your other expenses and your income (pension and social security) does not, you will know the fixed income retirees are the ones who will truly pay for these great benefits and subsidies.
Finally as to IBM retirement health benefits being excluded form ACA, all IBM
and the other companies told Obama is that if included they would drop the retiree health plans.? Legally, they can do this any time. It is in the fine print of the plans.? Could you imagine what would have happen if Obama was telling everyone if they like their plan they could keep it, and then IBM tells its retired employees it is dropping their health care due to ACA.
Regards
an IBM Retiree
----- Original Message -----
From: edward_berkline
Date: Friday, December 28, 2012 9:57 pm
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: ibmpensionissues@...
> > Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who
> > are already covered by their companies health care(no matter
> the
> > cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing that
> > for several reasons.
>
> A certain political party
did all they could to prevent changes
> to the current health care system. They view the health care
> exchanges as "government run health care" even though commercial
> insurance companies will be offering insurance on the exchanges.
> Therefore, it makes sense from their point of view to exclude
> as many people as possible from having access to the exchanges.
>
> > 1) It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less expensive
> > then retiree coverage, especially if you're living on the
> > pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and
> quality
> > for the ACA subsidy.
>
> Even though you may be on a pension and have a low income, that
> certain political party doesn't want you to have access to any
> subsidized health insurance because they view that as an expense
> to taxpayers.
>
> > 2) Ibm
retiree health care does not cover maintenance and
> > preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with
> > company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for
> > preventative? This makes no sense.
>
> Yes, it makes no sense. But IBM and other large companies
> lobbied heavily to make sure that retiree plans were excluded
> from most requirements of the ACA.
>
> > 3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned up
> > before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost of
> > your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for maybe
> > half the cost?
>
> I think you are dreaming if you think that insurance on the
> exchanges will be half the cost of what IBM charges. Perhaps if
> you were eligible for a substantial subsidy it might be. But as
> I said, I doubt that
IBMers will be allowed to have access, even
> at full cost.
>
> --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562"
> wrote:
> >
> > "Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees...."
> >
> > Yes, that was the main reason I posted this article. I've been
> searching for answers on how ACA dovetails with current retiree
> benefits and have gotten no where. I posted it here since
> discussion about ACA is stupidly prohibited by Kathy on the
> ibmpension board.
> >
> > Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who
> are already covered by their companies health care(no matter the
> cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing
> that for several reasons.
> >
> > 1)It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less
> expensive then retiree coverage,
especially if you're living on
> the pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and
> quality for the ACA subsidy.
> >
> > 2)Ibm retiree health care does not cover maintenance and
> preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with
> company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for
> preventative? This makes no sense.
> >
> > 3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned
> up before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost
> of your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for
> maybe half the cost?
> >
> > There are many of us who will struggle to make it to age 65
> (Medicare)> with medical coverage. If anyone has any sources of
> information that details how ACA dovetails with retiree health
> care benefits, please post and advise. Thank you.
> >
> >
> > --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@"
> wrote:
> > >
> > > The more interesting snip is the following: "Health
> insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be
> operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a
> competitive private health insurance market that should provide
> one-stop shopping."
> > >
> > > Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees
> that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care
> coverage? I don't see it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562"
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
>
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2012/12/27/boomers-obamacare-health-reform/1717009/
> > > >
> > > > snip:
> > > > The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers
> that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide
> something different. For example, instead of a health insurance
> plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money,
> called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could
> use that money to select insurance at their state exchange
> marketplace.> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
|
I stand corrected, thank you.? ?I read a recent post that indicated that all government employees, including members of congress are to be covered by the ACA,,, but it was not quite clear as to whether they would not be included until 2019.? ?
From: Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@...>
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 7:54 PM
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
?
This is not true.
--- On Sat, 12/29/12, Just Puttin' wrote:
From: Just Puttin'
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: "ibmpensionissues@..."
Date: Saturday, December 29, 2012, 1:59 AM
?
Outstanding!!! ?You nailed almost every point.
Especially, your very first point. ?
That was this:
THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, THEIR FAMILIES, AND STAFF, ARE EXEMPT FROM THE ACA.? Not only now but forever!
I would like to suggest to the members of this and other forums, that we determine a means and method of RESTRICTING LEGISLATIVE BODY'S AND FEDERAL EXECUTIVES, AND STAFF FROM EXEMPTING THEMSELVES FROM GENERALLY APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.
From: "KenSP@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Cc: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
?
I think the person who wrote the attached note needs to do more research on the ACA.
First if ACA is so good why does it not apply to members of Congress or the President and their families.? They are exempt including their staff members.
The second thing is he/she should look at is the number of States that have opt out of the new Medicare and Medicaid rules which would have double Medicaid participants in states such as Texas.? Also I think between 30 and 36 States have refused to spend money on setting up the insurance exchanges and therefore this must be done by the Federal Government at their expense. I don't think the Federal Government has the man power or money to set it up and therefore don't hold your breath waiting for the exchange.
As to subsidies for healthcare insurance, where is the money coming from? At the moment, the US government is borrowing 46 cents of every dollar it spends.? US is becoming
like Greece and sooner or later cuts in everyone's benefits will have to be made.
Medicare and Social Security is going broke and now ACA will add to the cost.? Someone has to pay? It will be all of us on a fixed pension when inflation comes. Obama tax rate increases on the rich, if passed, will only pay for running the government for 8 days but does nothing to stop the borrowing and printing of money.
The Federal Reserve is printing the money and then buys US Bonds at $50 billion a month. This is how the government is getting some of the money it needs. This is the reason the price of gold keeps going up.? So when you see your grocery bills increase as well as your other expenses and your income (pension and social security) does not, you will know the fixed income retirees are the ones who will truly pay for these great benefits and subsidies.
Finally as to IBM retirement health benefits being excluded form ACA, all IBM
and the other companies told Obama is that if included they would drop the retiree health plans.? Legally, they can do this any time. It is in the fine print of the plans.? Could you imagine what would have happen if Obama was telling everyone if they like their plan they could keep it, and then IBM tells its retired employees it is dropping their health care due to ACA.
Regards
an IBM Retiree
----- Original Message -----
From: edward_berkline
Date: Friday, December 28, 2012 9:57 pm
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Health care law(PPACA) may help Baby Boomers
To: ibmpensionissues@...
> > Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who
> > are already covered by their companies health care(no matter
> the
> > cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing that
> > for several reasons.
>
> A certain political party
did all they could to prevent changes
> to the current health care system. They view the health care
> exchanges as "government run health care" even though commercial
> insurance companies will be offering insurance on the exchanges.
> Therefore, it makes sense from their point of view to exclude
> as many people as possible from having access to the exchanges.
>
> > 1) It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less expensive
> > then retiree coverage, especially if you're living on the
> > pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and
> quality
> > for the ACA subsidy.
>
> Even though you may be on a pension and have a low income, that
> certain political party doesn't want you to have access to any
> subsidized health insurance because they view that as an expense
> to taxpayers.
>
> > 2) Ibm
retiree health care does not cover maintenance and
> > preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with
> > company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for
> > preventative? This makes no sense.
>
> Yes, it makes no sense. But IBM and other large companies
> lobbied heavily to make sure that retiree plans were excluded
> from most requirements of the ACA.
>
> > 3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned up
> > before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost of
> > your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for maybe
> > half the cost?
>
> I think you are dreaming if you think that insurance on the
> exchanges will be half the cost of what IBM charges. Perhaps if
> you were eligible for a substantial subsidy it might be. But as
> I said, I doubt that
IBMers will be allowed to have access, even
> at full cost.
>
> --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562"
> wrote:
> >
> > "Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees...."
> >
> > Yes, that was the main reason I posted this article. I've been
> searching for answers on how ACA dovetails with current retiree
> benefits and have gotten no where. I posted it here since
> discussion about ACA is stupidly prohibited by Kathy on the
> ibmpension board.
> >
> > Anyway, in the recent past, some have posted that retirees who
> are already covered by their companies health care(no matter the
> cost) will be excluded from ACA. I have a hard time believing
> that for several reasons.
> >
> > 1)It could very well be that ACA coverage could be less
> expensive then retiree coverage,
especially if you're living on
> the pension(as I am). You might be considered low income and
> quality for the ACA subsidy.
> >
> > 2)Ibm retiree health care does not cover maintenance and
> preventive, yet ACA does. How could you be forced to stay with
> company X retiree health coverage and be forced to pay for
> preventative? This makes no sense.
> >
> > 3) For those on FHA, if your notional FHA dollars are burned
> up before age 65, could you really expected to pay the full cost
> of your retiree health care when you may be able to get ACA for
> maybe half the cost?
> >
> > There are many of us who will struggle to make it to age 65
> (Medicare)> with medical coverage. If anyone has any sources of
> information that details how ACA dovetails with retiree health
> care benefits, please post and advise. Thank you.
> >
> >
> > --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@"
> wrote:
> > >
> > > The more interesting snip is the following: "Health
> insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be
> operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a
> competitive private health insurance market that should provide
> one-stop shopping."
> > >
> > > Can anyone explain how the ACA benefits those IBM retirees
> that are lucky enough to have IBM subsidized health care
> coverage? I don't see it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In ibmpensionissues@..., "teamb562"
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
>
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2012/12/27/boomers-obamacare-health-reform/1717009/
> > > >
> > > > snip:
> > > > The ACA is likely to spark many more changes. Employers
> that still offer retiree health benefits may decide to provide
> something different. For example, instead of a health insurance
> plan, they may give Boomer retirees a fixed amount of money,
> called a premium reimbursement, Fontanetta says. Retirees could
> use that money to select insurance at their state exchange
> marketplace.> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
|
|
