Free Market Health Insurance

[Aargh]

I am a survivor of a nasty Stage 4 cancer. The recovery cost me my job and my employee health insurance. The payments for Cobra were $1,100 a month, which was not a possibility with no employment.

I priced every insurance coverage available. I was absolutely and positively uninsurable. Not a single company would take me. I asked about cancer exclusions, but those weren't offered. The cancer I had is either fatal within 18 months, or generally non-recurring if the risk factors (smoking and oral contact with human papilloma virus) are eliminated.

I couldn't buy insurance that would cover me if I fell off a ladder and broke my leg.

I priced insurance for my wife. That was going to run about $700 a month for a 20% co-pay with around a $1000 deductible. Under Obmacare almost that exact same policy would cost me around $480 (without any government subsidies).

Your mileage may vary, but would someone try to tell me how the free market is a better option for me?

As long as I'm on this rant, my cancer caused me to end up with no income and i'm pretty much unemployable at my age. I don't qualify for any government assistance for Obamacare, so insurance for my wife still costs me the full price, even though I have no income.

Failure to expand Medicaid means that the State saves some money, but leaves me either spending $5,000+ a year for my wife's insurance or having no insurance on a 60-year-old woman. I have difficulty supporting the Republican stance that someone unemployable, who has worked and paid taxes for 40+ years should pay between $5,000 and $6,000 a year so that business owners do not have to pay taxes.

For those of you who might read the Eagle and the comments, a small business owner reported that job creation was successful because he refinished his basement with the $7,000 he never expected from his Kansas income tax savings. He was earning somewhere around $140,000 - $250,000 to have the tax savings he claimed.

I am not impressed that I have to pull out of my savings so that someone earning around $200.000 a year can refinish their baasement for about the same money that I have to pay to get insurance for my wife.

[kcshocker11]

Dear Aargh my heart goes out to you and your wife. I have personally known 2 people whose lives were saved by Obamacare. I know of one other (my best friend)whose wife suffered a stroke and is in locked in syndrome. His med bills capped over 1 mil in 2 months. Obamacare saved him financially by eliminating the caps. Though I live in Missouri, I will never and cant ever quit fighting for all Americans to not suffer as you have. I know many on this board dont agree with me but since Ks is where I was born, I hope for a change in Govt to allow medicaid expansion.

Please know that there are millions who care.

[Kung Wu]

Your wife's 700 is artificially high because she is subsidizing your 480 payment which is artificially low. If it weren't for 50+ years of Medicare/id your total tab (combined total) would have been substantially lower. In fact probably less than half of what it is.

Again, I am thankful you beat that crappy cancer. I am also sorry about your continuing struggle with the ecenomics of the situation.

[WuDrWu]

Nobody's life was saved by Obamacare you dolt.

[kcshocker11]

Nobody's life was saved by Obamacare you dolt.

Shove it Doc. And yes there have been.
Sad, If I said what I want to people like you I’d be banned from this board.

[DUShock]

Okay guys lets knock it off.

[SB Shock]

Though I live in Missouri

Heh, heh. This explains a lot.

[Kung Wu]

What factor of increase over inflation adjusted price of private health insurance since 1965 will it take to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a large percent of the $700 "free market" insurance is purely to cover the cost of the subsidized $480 insurance?

7x? 8x?

[kcshocker11]

Heh, heh. This explains a lot.

Yes but I own many acres and 2 houses in ks , some in Village west! Heh Heh

[SB Shock]

Yes but I own many acres and 2 houses in ks , some in Village west! Heh Heh

so you are part of the 1% - who want to give everybody else's money away because you have your in tax shelters or cheating the IRS - got it, thanks.

[SHOCKvalue]

You may not have income from wages or salary as an employee, but you have to have income of some sort or you would be qualifying for the Obamacare tax credits. There's no getting around that factoid.

The annual amount you are belaboring with regards to insurance costs for your wife are actually less than it would cost to add me alone to my wife's (a school teacher) employer's plan. That's for a person of nearly half the age of your wife with no current or past health issues, to be added to a health insurance group plan negotiated by a public school district in the Wichita metro. Think about that for a minute.

I'm self-employed, and actually don't have health insurance. For me it is a cost-benefit analysis; as I am part of the younger demographic that essentially gets nothing out of health insurance, I am not game to give away several hundred dollars a month in what amounts to yet another massive government subsidy that I unwillingly find myself on the giving side of. I'm well aware that having no health insurance is a gamble. I will get it eventually, but honestly since our imperial government has dictated to me that I am required to buy a private market service I'm a little calloused at the moment. I'm showing a bit of a middle finger to a severe government over-reach into my personal life.

[SHOCKvalue]

Yes but I own many acres and 2 houses in ks , some in Village west! Heh Heh

I don't mean to sound like an arse, but if you own something of significance I would imagine you either inherited it or married into it. I've never come across anyone of notable worth communicate at a level as low as you do - not even close. I know some people with money; they don't sound like you.

[shocka khan]

So SHOCKvalue, do you feel the same way about the auto liability insurance? Especially since the imperial government of the state of Kansas requires you to buy a private market insurance policy?

I dated a woman in Dallas (once) who was such a scammer that she transferred all her assets to her children (she didn't have many) to make her judgment proof, as she thought the same way about car insurance as you do about health insurance. Except that you being young and not having health insurance actually makes some sense - I would probably have a high deductible cat cover in case I caught some dread disease or had a serious accident, but I can buy your logic. The only problem might be that if you had a catastrophe, you would probably lose your business and you might also have to declare bankruptcy (which if your future earning power would be impaired would give you the opportunity to totally walk away from your debt). I think totally walking away from your debt kinda' goes against the libertarian notion of being responsible for one's self and not being a drain on society.

What I found most ironic was that she was a Texas-Ex who thought nothing of buying tickets and boarding planes to attend as many of UT's (3-4X per year) football games as she could. She also had season tickets (that required her to drive to Austin and stay in a hotel) for the home games.

I dropped her after one date. She wasn't my type.

By the way and for the record, group insurance rates are set regardless of age and risk. A 60-year old will pay the same rate as a 21-year old (maybe you meant to say that but I didn't pick it up in your post). In addition, health insurance for school districts has a reputation of being notoriously poor and expensive. Especially given the (sometimes) conflicts of interest that arise when well-connected (to the school board and administrators) brokers start selling high-commission group policies.

[SHOCKvalue]

So SHOCKvalue, do you feel the same way about the auto liability insurance? Especially since the imperial government of the state of Kansas requires you to buy a private market insurance policy?

I don't have to own an asset that requires liability insurance; I have to have health insurance - PERIOD. It is a terrible ideological analogy - in more facets than just the point above - but an impotent angle I would expect you to utilize nonetheless.

By the way and for the record, group insurance rates are set regardless of age and risk. A 60-year old will pay the same rate as a 21-year old (maybe you meant to say that but I didn't pick it up in your post).

I'm aware.

In addition, health insurance for school districts has a reputation of being notoriously poor and expensive. Especially given the (sometimes) conflicts of interest that arise when well-connected (to the school board and administrators) brokers start selling high-commission group policies.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that health insurances for school districts are "notoriously poor and expensive." If my wife was an employee of USD 259 we would both have "free" health insurance. She works for another, smaller district (that presents much less headache in her daily life than if she were at 259), and they have much less leverage or financial means to secure primo health insurance.

I would argue the general public has the impression that most public school teachers have pretty plum health insurance packages, not the other way around.

[kcshocker11]

I don't mean to sound like an arse, but if you own something of significance I would imagine you either inherited it or married into it. I've never come across anyone of notable worth communicate at a level as low as you do - not even close. I know some people with money; they don't sound like you.

And you would be wrong