ACA/Obamacare for American Cruisers Abroad MERGED THREADS

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

My very expensive tax advisor told me, years ago, that the main things are paying taxes in your host country as a resident, having a local driver's license, having utility bills there, and similar indicators of where you are practically living.

Is anybody here smart enough (certainly not me) to start a "St Brendan's Isle" company for citizenship abroad?........................That has health insurance contracts for the USA.

Cause almost all insurance companies pay half or less of "charges". The "charges" come off a "chargmaster" that is a secret. Medicare (big brothah) keeps reducing the payments to providers and the insurance companies point to that and reduce theirs. Their rates continue upward as do taxes. Who is getting the money?

[ohdrinkboy]

This will be a tough transition for many. Lots of "middle class" people who have not bought health insurance in the past will now have to. That money doesn't come out of thin air. People will have to cut back in other places which could have negative economic impacts.

Healthcare needs some major change. I'm just not sure these go far enough and are in the right direction. I think we will wind up with a single payer system....which isn't all bad.

My personal plan through my employer changed dramatically last year with premiums going up over 25% and on top of that huge increase we went from a co-pay of $20 system to the deductible and max out of pocket. This year my premium went up 10%. Health insurance was a major reason I stayed with my employer because of pre-existing conditions. Now that the plan is not very good and I have other options I am seriously considering changing jobs. This is probably an unintended consequence of ACA.

No matter how you cut it, there will be winners and losers.

[sailpower]

Originally Posted by Boatguy30

So since you're with him and his talk of how the nurses are the new wealthy to have their taxes destributed. You're ok with his untrue statements?

What I'm not OK with are trolls who love the sound of their own voices but that's not the topic here is it?

[sailpower]

Originally Posted by sabray

Not really. Federal employees will have to select coverage using the ACA marketplace. They continue to have healthcare coverage as a co pay to the program. Like many employees that co pay. Except they are required to use the ACA marketplace to choose their plan.

If you are using the term co-pay to describe the portion of the premium that the employer contributes to an employee health insurance plan then no I don’t believe you are correct as I stated above.

"Don't forget that ACA is in addition to what the private sector and federal government provide their workers. Those plans can be subsidized for any amount up 100%. Private insurance is still here.


Under the new law employers cannot subsidize premiums for those that go on ACA. This was deliberate as the fear was that employers would simply drop their employee coverage which would force their workers onto the exchanges. If they subsidized the premiums it would still be a much better deal for employers as they would eliminate all of their own overhead associated with providing health care.



So, for the above reasons, employers are not allowed to subsidize exchange premiums under the new law. Congress apparently has realized that this also applies to them so there is a proposal to exempt them from that part of the law. i. e. give themselves and their staffers special treatment. The justification was even advanced that staffers aren’t paid that much and couldn’t afford the increased exchange cost that would result even with the tax credits and subsidies. Make of this what you will.


For now Congress, their staffers and Federal workers can simply keep what they already have but there are bills being proposed that will require them to go on the exchanges. If that happens, Congress wants the special treatment stated above".

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by ohdrinkboy

No matter how you cut it, there will be winners and losers.

Ah...the Meat of the issue! So the question is simply put: "it is the role of the Federal Government to pick the winners and losers or is it better to be left to the individuals?

[sabray]

Yes we agree I used co pay in larger term when related to insurance premiums. Standard in the private sector.
Federal employees are required to use the ACA but continue to receive the benefit of the employer paying a portion similar to the benefit when they were hired.
Really bad way to treat employees. What ever. No business that wanted performance would do what the governing body is doing today. These idiots should be looking to get top performance from the employees.
I think were good enough to get universal health care that isn't so complicated and change some really bad programs.
Hey gay marriage was like taboo, couldn't happen without social fabric falling apart. Now it's no big deal. Sequestration was a doomsday. We did okay. Maybe we could do healthcare, tighten our belts, balance the budget, and off topic let Washington, D.C. Spend its local tax dollars without these idiots giving us approval.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Boatguy30

thanks for being such a patriot.

Actually I am a patriot. Although I grew up overseas.

It is the politics that ruin it for me.

Pass the FAIRTAX everybody.

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by Boatguy30

Ok, so this isn't political.

In countries that have single payer, that's the nice thing, you just pay your taxes. And go to the doctor.

My first hand experience is in NZ. There are no special healtcare tax or monthly payment which ends up feeling like a screw job. You also don't have to worry about anyone deciding not to get coverage.

Now there are plenty of issues with all health systems, but when you look at the total amount of money the US spends on healtcare there is more than enough money being spent to give every American the VERY best care.

the problem for any approach is breaking the medical industrial complex we've built up. No doubt half those big yachts they can't build fast enough belong to implant CEOs, insurance CEOs, pharma, etc, etc

Again, there's no reason why we shouldn't have the best care and we already spend the money. but it's hard as hell to come up with a system when only 1/2 of the people are willing to try to fix the problem. and the other 1/2 spend literally billions to fight it.

I agree, and I like the term "medical industrial complex".

I don't want to go political so I'll stop here.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by sabray

Not really. Federal employees will have to select coverage using the ACA marketplace. They continue to have healthcare coverage as a co pay to the program. Like many employees that co pay. Except they are required to use the ACA marketplace to choose their plan.

The details that I read a while back said that the bottom line was that if they did not get some sort of "help" they would not be able to afford it if they followed the rules like Joe Shmo. So now they made a provision, exemption or whatever you want to call it. Joe Shmo is stuck with it though.

[jkindredpdx]

Originally Posted by ohdrinkboy

This will be a tough transition for many. Lots of "middle class" people who have not bought health insurance in the past will now have to. That money doesn't come out of thin air. People will have to cut back in other places which could have negative economic impacts.

Healthcare needs some major change. I'm just not sure these go far enough and are in the right direction. I think we will wind up with a single payer system....which isn't all bad. . .

I tend to agree. I think the ACA was conceived as a single payer system, but was modified along the road so it would pass. I watched my employers cut benefits, increase employee paid portion for insurance, and increase the deductibles since ~ 2000 maybe before. We did get FSAs and HSAs to help ease the pain, but I think as long as Healthcare is provided by employers there will be issues.

In general I believe costs have risen as new drugs and procedures have been developed to keep us alive when before we might have died... that seems like a good thing. It seems easy to point fingers. Unraveling the current system and rebuilding will take a long time, but I think ACA is a good first step, albeit fraught with uncertainty.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by sailpower

If you are using the term co-pay to describe the portion of the premium that the employer contributes to an employee health insurance plan then no I don’t believe you are correct as I stated above.

"Don't forget that ACA is in addition to what the private sector and federal government provide their workers. Those plans can be subsidized for any amount up 100%. Private insurance is still here.


Under the new law employers cannot subsidize premiums for those that go on ACA. This was deliberate as the fear was that employers would simply drop their employee coverage which would force their workers onto the exchanges. If they subsidized the premiums it would still be a much better deal for employers as they would eliminate all of their own overhead associated with providing health care.



So, for the above reasons, employers are not allowed to subsidize exchange premiums under the new law. Congress apparently has realized that this also applies to them so there is a proposal to exempt them from that part of the law. i. e. give themselves and their staffers special treatment. The justification was even advanced that staffers aren’t paid that much and couldn’t afford the increased exchange cost that would result even with the tax credits and subsidies. Make of this what you will.


For now Congress, their staffers and Federal workers can simply keep what they already have but there are bills being proposed that will require them to go on the exchanges. If that happens, Congress wants the special treatment stated above".

Yep.
And my answer to that is real simple. "Screw them".

[Therapy]

Some help could come from cutting back (rationing, if you will) the amount of money spent in the last 30 days of life by Medicare alone. 30%. But Americans just can't listen when told someone has led a full life and this is just prolonging the end.

I am leaving for the moment and want to sleep so will end with something from another thread.

Thanks Coops.

Thought for the day: There is more money being spent on breast implants and Viagra today than on Alzheimer's research. This means that by 2040, there should be a large elderly population with perky Boobs and huge erections and absolutely no recollection of what to do with them.

[sabray]

The problem with the screw them philosophy is its screw like well its me. You want to screw me. My dad served as a AA to a US senator for 30 years . I believe he served the state of Rhode Island very well. Should he not have the healthcare that he agreed to when he was hired. Not as a distinct group that gets some odd public stoning. It's what was offered when he was hired. Obviously I think my dad served the people. I have heard from people he served. I know he worked long and hard for the people of Rhode island. So if you telling my dad screw you. Guess you'll get a good idea of my opinion. Maybe screw you is as deep as your thought process gets. It's a tad more difficult then that. Kinda like chucking tea it takes vision for it become a party. That's what were lacking vision compassion and party. Pretty sure you can find those characteristics and retract the screw you part of your point.

[ohdrinkboy]

Originally Posted by sabray

The problem with the screw them philosophy is its screw like well its me. You want to screw me. My dad served as a AA to a US senator for 30 years . I believe he served the state of Rhode Island very well. Should he not have the healthcare that he agreed to when he was hired. Not as a distinct group that gets some odd public stoning. It's what was offered when he was hired. Obviously I think my dad served the people. I have heard from people he served. I know he worked long and hard for the people of Rhode island. So if you telling my dad screw you. Guess you'll get a good idea of my opinion. Maybe screw you is as deep as your thought process gets. It's a tad more difficult then that. Kinda like chucking tea it takes vision for it become a party. That's what were lacking vision compassion and party. Pretty sure you can find those characteristics and retract the screw you part of your point.

I understand your situation. It's no different than when the government told all of the GM retires to "screw you." No different than my employer killing my pension, or .....the list goes on and on. So please don't give us the holier than thou. Everybody gets screwed by the system your father no different. It's not right, but sad fact of life that you can't count on a promise.

[monstads]

Originally Posted by Therapy

Thought for the day: There is more money being spent on breast implants and Viagra today than on Alzheimer's research. This means that by 2040, there should be a large elderly population with perky Boobs and huge erections and absolutely no recollection of what to do with them.

One of my 401K funds is called the "2040 Target Fund". Until that comment, 2040 seemed not only like a long ways off for retirement, but also extremely boring. Now, I'm at least looking forward to boobs, huge erections and having to feel my way around... . Just like that summer camp back when I was 15....