Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
Author Message
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,608
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 798
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #21
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
(03-18-2017 03:18 PM)Kronke Wrote:  It's a pretty straight forward equation. Just like Obamacare, there will be winners and losers. The 64 year old making just enough money not to qualify for Medicaid will be the biggest loser. Their subsidies will be drastically cut, and thus their costs will sky rocket.

That's not really much of a solution since that's the guy who probably needs it most. My guess is the assumption by the plans crafters is costs will not go up at 25% a year. Realistically, at some point, virtually no one will be able to afford healthcare if it just keeps going up 25% a year. So, somewhere along the way, the increases have to moderate or go the other way or the whole healthcare system collapses anyway.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2017 06:59 PM by Attackcoog.)
03-18-2017 06:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fo Shizzle Offline
Domestic Terrorist and Iconoclast
*

Posts: 33,488
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 621
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #22
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
I call fabrics on the 700 percent increase..but..still I oppose this BS bill.
03-18-2017 07:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,608
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 798
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #23
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
(03-18-2017 07:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I call fabrics on the 700 percent increase..but..still I oppose this BS bill.

Pretty sure its phoney maths.

Honestly, I cant say if I am for or against it at this point. Too little hard info that one can trust on it yet. All I know is the status quo isn't working and will collapse in a year or two. One side needs to get that through their heads. The other side needs to understand that the "new replacement plan" has to work..and work for everyone. It cant just move around who wins and loses like a life or death version of musical chairs.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2017 09:20 PM by Attackcoog.)
03-18-2017 09:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ODU BLUE Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,635
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 83
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #24
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
Unfortunately it's not phoney math.

When the ACA was passed a lot of people with 30 to 40 years service on a private sector job were able to retire as planned. Over the past 25 years most private sector companies have dropped their pre-65 retirement healthcare (public sector doesn't have this problem, they retire at 55 with full benefits for life?). The ACA made it possible for many in the private sector to retire and buy their own at an affordable rate. Therefore we have a lot of private sector people between say 57 and 64 that will see a 750% increase in their monthly insurance bill. They retired at say 60 making room for a younger worker and now the republicans are changing the rules. Most of these retirees will have to go back to work at half what they were making just to have healthcare again. Or just do without healthcare for 5 years.

There's a solution, let these people buy into early medicare?
(This post was last modified: 03-19-2017 08:56 AM by ODU BLUE.)
03-19-2017 07:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mptnstr@44 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,663
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 165
I Root For: Nati Bearcats
Location:
Post: #25
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
(03-19-2017 07:35 AM)ODU BLUE Wrote:  Unfortunately it's not phoney math.

When the ACA was passed a lot of people with 30 to 40 years service on a private sector job were able to retire as planned. Over the past 25 years most private sector companies have dropped their pre-65 retirement healthcare (public sector doesn't have this problem, they retire at 55 with full benefits for life?). The ACA made it possible for many in the private sector to retire and buy their own at an affordable rate. Therefore we have a lot of private sector people between say 57 and 64 that will see a 750% increase in their monthly insurance bill. They retired at say 60 making room for a younger worker and now the republicans are changing the rules. Most of these retirees will have to go back to work at half what they were making just to have healthcare again. Or just do without healthcare for 5 years.

There's a solution, let these people buy into early medicare?

No unless there is a disability forcing early retirement.

Public workers retiring with pensions and paid health insurance at 55 are a huge drain on the public sector coffers and bankrupting cities. It is not sustainable to support people who have a 25-30 year retirement. They in no way pay in enough to cover what they eventually get out.

There's a reason why SS and Medicare kick in when it does to encourage people to keep working and retire at an older age. The idea of retiring at 55 or even 60 when people live to 80-90 has to go away unless the individual is financially prepared well enough to self support until SS kicks in.
03-19-2017 09:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ODU BLUE Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,635
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 83
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #26
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
(03-19-2017 09:30 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  
(03-19-2017 07:35 AM)ODU BLUE Wrote:  Unfortunately it's not phoney math.

When the ACA was passed a lot of people with 30 to 40 years service on a private sector job were able to retire as planned. Over the past 25 years most private sector companies have dropped their pre-65 retirement healthcare (public sector doesn't have this problem, they retire at 55 with full benefits for life?). The ACA made it possible for many in the private sector to retire and buy their own at an affordable rate. Therefore we have a lot of private sector people between say 57 and 64 that will see a 750% increase in their monthly insurance bill. They retired at say 60 making room for a younger worker and now the republicans are changing the rules. Most of these retirees will have to go back to work at half what they were making just to have healthcare again. Or just do without healthcare for 5 years.

There's a solution, let these people buy into early medicare?

No unless there is a disability forcing early retirement.

Public workers retiring with pensions and paid health insurance at 55 are a huge drain on the public sector coffers and bankrupting cities. It is not sustainable to support people who have a 25-30 year retirement. They in no way pay in enough to cover what they eventually get out.

There's a reason why SS and Medicare kick in when it does to encourage people to keep working and retire at an older age. The idea of retiring at 55 or even 60 when people live to 80-90 has to go away unless the individual is financially prepared well enough to self support until SS kicks in.

I agree mostly. But nothing is changing in the public sector (Civil Service workers for example). And how do you change the rules on a private sector person after he or she has already retired.
03-19-2017 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mptnstr@44 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,663
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 165
I Root For: Nati Bearcats
Location:
Post: #27
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
(03-19-2017 09:39 AM)ODU BLUE Wrote:  
(03-19-2017 09:30 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  
(03-19-2017 07:35 AM)ODU BLUE Wrote:  Unfortunately it's not phoney math.

When the ACA was passed a lot of people with 30 to 40 years service on a private sector job were able to retire as planned. Over the past 25 years most private sector companies have dropped their pre-65 retirement healthcare (public sector doesn't have this problem, they retire at 55 with full benefits for life?). The ACA made it possible for many in the private sector to retire and buy their own at an affordable rate. Therefore we have a lot of private sector people between say 57 and 64 that will see a 750% increase in their monthly insurance bill. They retired at say 60 making room for a younger worker and now the republicans are changing the rules. Most of these retirees will have to go back to work at half what they were making just to have healthcare again. Or just do without healthcare for 5 years.

There's a solution, let these people buy into early medicare?

No unless there is a disability forcing early retirement.

Public workers retiring with pensions and paid health insurance at 55 are a huge drain on the public sector coffers and bankrupting cities. It is not sustainable to support people who have a 25-30 year retirement. They in no way pay in enough to cover what they eventually get out.

There's a reason why SS and Medicare kick in when it does to encourage people to keep working and retire at an older age. The idea of retiring at 55 or even 60 when people live to 80-90 has to go away unless the individual is financially prepared well enough to self support until SS kicks in.

I agree mostly. But nothing is changing in the public sector (Civil Service workers for example). And how do you change the rules on a private sector person after he or she has already retired.

When it comes to the government, the rules are always changing.
Tax code changes, Fuel economy requirements change, NSA rules change, etc.
The ACA changed the rules. Lot's of people were negatively impacted.
The next health insurance plan will change the rules again. There will be people negatively impacted.
And likely in another few years the rules will change again and again people will be negatively impacted.

There are no guarantees and depending on the government to cover you or smooth that way for you is fool's gold. It is up to the individual to plan for the unexpected. If someone doesn't plan, then they have left themselves open to be negatively impacted by the decisions of others.

As an aside, the rules for Civil Service workers must change. They are unsustainable.
03-19-2017 09:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ODU BLUE Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,635
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 83
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #28
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
(03-19-2017 09:49 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  As an aside, the rules for Civil Service workers must change. They are unsustainable.

When that one changes, you can change mine without any argument .04-rock

It's not going to happen. At least not for those that are 55.
(This post was last modified: 03-19-2017 09:57 AM by ODU BLUE.)
03-19-2017 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,608
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 798
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #29
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
(03-19-2017 07:35 AM)ODU BLUE Wrote:  Unfortunately it's not phoney math.

When the ACA was passed a lot of people with 30 to 40 years service on a private sector job were able to retire as planned. Over the past 25 years most private sector companies have dropped their pre-65 retirement healthcare (public sector doesn't have this problem, they retire at 55 with full benefits for life?). The ACA made it possible for many in the private sector to retire and buy their own at an affordable rate. Therefore we have a lot of private sector people between say 57 and 64 that will see a 750% increase in their monthly insurance bill. They retired at say 60 making room for a younger worker and now the republicans are changing the rules. Most of these retirees will have to go back to work at half what they were making just to have healthcare again. Or just do without healthcare for 5 years.

There's a solution, let these people buy into early medicare?

First off, we don't have "a lot" of people retired between 57 and 64---and those that are---are among the wealthiest in thier age group.

The reality is that the average retirement savings for people between the age of 55-65 (about 10 years or less from retirement) is $45,447. Sixty percent have less than $50k saved towards thier retirements. That's really bad. What's worse? Forty percent of that age group have absolutely nothing at all saved. So, if healthcare costs increase that dramatically, AT LEAST 60% of that 55-64 age group would not be able to afford healthcare---so, I don't think any plan with that outcome is likely to pass or even be proposed.

Like I said before, if you take current healthcare increases and compound that rate over the next 10 years, my guess is the number is about the same or worse. The current increases are just as unsustainable.

That's why I'm pretty sure that's not a real number.
(This post was last modified: 03-19-2017 05:47 PM by Attackcoog.)
03-19-2017 11:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,608
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 798
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #30
RE: AARP is strongly opposed to the American Health Care Act (AHCA)
(03-19-2017 09:49 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  
(03-19-2017 09:39 AM)ODU BLUE Wrote:  
(03-19-2017 09:30 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  
(03-19-2017 07:35 AM)ODU BLUE Wrote:  Unfortunately it's not phoney math.

When the ACA was passed a lot of people with 30 to 40 years service on a private sector job were able to retire as planned. Over the past 25 years most private sector companies have dropped their pre-65 retirement healthcare (public sector doesn't have this problem, they retire at 55 with full benefits for life?). The ACA made it possible for many in the private sector to retire and buy their own at an affordable rate. Therefore we have a lot of private sector people between say 57 and 64 that will see a 750% increase in their monthly insurance bill. They retired at say 60 making room for a younger worker and now the republicans are changing the rules. Most of these retirees will have to go back to work at half what they were making just to have healthcare again. Or just do without healthcare for 5 years.

There's a solution, let these people buy into early medicare?

No unless there is a disability forcing early retirement.

Public workers retiring with pensions and paid health insurance at 55 are a huge drain on the public sector coffers and bankrupting cities. It is not sustainable to support people who have a 25-30 year retirement. They in no way pay in enough to cover what they eventually get out.

There's a reason why SS and Medicare kick in when it does to encourage people to keep working and retire at an older age. The idea of retiring at 55 or even 60 when people live to 80-90 has to go away unless the individual is financially prepared well enough to self support until SS kicks in.

I agree mostly. But nothing is changing in the public sector (Civil Service workers for example). And how do you change the rules on a private sector person after he or she has already retired.

When it comes to the government, the rules are always changing.
Tax code changes, Fuel economy requirements change, NSA rules change, etc.
The ACA changed the rules. Lot's of people were negatively impacted.
The next health insurance plan will change the rules again. There will be people negatively impacted.
And likely in another few years the rules will change again and again people will be negatively impacted.

There are no guarantees and depending on the government to cover you or smooth that way for you is fool's gold. It is up to the individual to plan for the unexpected. If someone doesn't plan, then they have left themselves open to be negatively impacted by the decisions of others.

As an aside, the rules for Civil Service workers must change. They are unsustainable.

THIS

For instance---Lots of people were negatively impacted when the Social Security age was changed. Lots more will be negatively impacted when the Social security benefit they are being promised is cut (and it will be because that system is as unsustainable as Obama Care).
(This post was last modified: 03-19-2017 11:36 AM by Attackcoog.)
03-19-2017 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.