Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

California

SHRED

(28,136 posts)

24. Pre-ACA there is no insurance avaiable to us

Reply to JDPriestly (Reply #20)

Thu Oct 24, 2013, 08:05 AM

Oct 2013

We "pre-existing" conditions like the rest of the 86% of those over 55.

We have two choices:

1. Stay in my employer's group at full cost which is $1,700-$2,000 per month.
2. Go without insurance and risk our life's savings.

Now there is a third...the ACA.

For the record I am a single-payer advocate. I have been very critical of the ACA and still am on many levels.
But this is what we have for now and it won't just help me and my wife. We are talking about millions who were denied access to any meaningful healthcare because they had no way to pay for it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

38 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Here's my Covered California "Obamacare" rates...THANK YOU OBAMA!!! [View all] SHRED Oct 2013 OP

Thank you, SHRED, for posting the actual numbers. I am also in California and see the same results. NYC_SKP Oct 2013 #1

you are welcome SHRED Oct 2013 #2

Thanks SHRED.. russspeakeasy Oct 2013 #3

ur welcome SHRED Oct 2013 #4

That's like $8700 a year the Feds will spend on you. Do you pay that much in federal income tax? dkf Oct 2013 #5

You think the ACA is funded via Federal income tax? SHRED Oct 2013 #8

The subsidy, yes. Where else does it come from? dkf Oct 2013 #23

okay I didn't know... SHRED Oct 2013 #25

That goes towards Medicare, not towards funding the ACA. dkf Oct 2013 #33

Just call him a moucher and be done with it. JoePhilly Oct 2013 #27

I'm just wondering who will be left to actually pay taxes. dkf Oct 2013 #34

Clearly it will not be the 47% Mitt Romney was talking about. JoePhilly Oct 2013 #35

That used to be the function of a shitty economy. dkf Oct 2013 #36

All I can say, thank gawd for Tricare itsrobert Oct 2013 #6

Those copays are crazy NoOneMan Oct 2013 #13

what copays itsrobert Oct 2013 #16

Oh no! I meant copays for those plans shown in OP NoOneMan Oct 2013 #18

I have the lowest cost Medicare Advantage Plan. JDPriestly Oct 2013 #19

To be honest, no. NoOneMan Oct 2013 #21

In LA, you sometimes have to pay to park at your doctor's office. Strange don't you think? JDPriestly Oct 2013 #22

As long as their is profiteering then none of it is "fair" SHRED Oct 2013 #29

be sure to thank those who are paying much more for your subsidy :-) nt msongs Oct 2013 #7

bullshit SHRED Oct 2013 #9

Just use the same ages/zip, but double the income to $104,000 itsrobert Oct 2013 #10

What would a couple pay now for the same insurance? SHRED Oct 2013 #11

How is it funded? itsrobert Oct 2013 #12

I will agree... SHRED Oct 2013 #14

where does the subsidy come from? itsrobert Oct 2013 #15

Here's a bit of it SHRED Oct 2013 #17

This message was self-deleted by its author lostincalifornia Oct 2013 #31

The OP concerns a couple 50 and 55 years old. JDPriestly Oct 2013 #20

Pre-ACA there is no insurance avaiable to us SHRED Oct 2013 #24

I could have *forced* an insurer to cover me since I had had continuous coverage Kolesar Oct 2013 #38

This message was self-deleted by its author lostincalifornia Oct 2013 #32

Clearly he's part of the 47% that Mitt Romney was talking about, right? JoePhilly Oct 2013 #28

My rates look like they will double (according to the RWNJ's I know) Turbineguy Oct 2013 #26

This message was self-deleted by its author lostincalifornia Oct 2013 #30

ACA Tax Provisions IronLionZion Oct 2013 #37