Off Topic Poker Forums

it's a medical/dental/vision/prescription plan. man, i haven't been to the dentist in 8 years. my poor teeth. teeth don't repair themselves, do they? maybe i'll just buy the plan for one year and get myself fixed up...

it's a medical/dental/vision/prescription plan. man, i haven't been to the dentist in 8 years. my poor teeth. maybe i'll just try it for one year and get myself fixed up... ?

This is totally something you should do. I have insurance through my employer, ~$100 a month plus $20/year for dental and eye. I've already been to the dentist, regular checkups, had cavities filled, teeth whitened, and I'm doing Invisalign right now. Not 100% covered, but I've probably had a couple grand of work done. Plus new contacts from the eye coverage.

That stuff adds up pretty quick. It's nice to have regular teeth cleanings, check ups and all that crap taken care of. Teeth stuff gets very painful quickly and is hugely expensive compared to the preventative maintenance. If it includes all this I think its a pretty good option. Are you a single guy? I am guessing yes. Forgive me if your earlier posts establish this. If you have kids or a wife I think this is pretty much a no-brainer.

This is totally something you should do. I have insurance through my employer, ~$100 a month plus $20/year for dental and eye. I've already been to the dentist, regular checkups, had cavities filled, teeth whitened, and I'm doing Invisalign right now. Not 100% covered, but I've probably had a couple grand of work done. Plus new contacts from the eye coverage.

nice. it's definitely +EV for the dental work alone. alright, i'm gonna buy it. and maybe i'll get hit by a meteor later on and thank you guys for that too.

nice. it's definitely +EV for the dental work alone. alright, i'm gonna buy it. and maybe i'll get hit by a meteor and thank you guys later.

lol If you do in fact get hit by a meteor, make sure someone posts about it on your behalf so that we can all be smug about the fact that we were right.

hoping a microscopic meteor only takes out an arm and a leg.









one time!

hoping a microscopic meteor only takes out an arm and a leg.

one time!

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/meteorite-strikes-alabama-woman

Seems like meteor strikes are survivable.

the pre-existing clause is there for a reason. yes, it sucks for sick people. but it's there for a reason. private insurance isn't welfare. i don't see why these insurance companies wouldn't just pull out of the US. oh wait, the US Govt is going to pay for it, that's why. and how does the government pay for something, with our money, so taxes will go up. so we're all going to pay for it, one way or another, whether we want to or not... nobody beats the house.

This is just nonsense.
The change in the pre-existing condition regulation is that now you cannot be refused coverage because of it and/or your insurance company cannot carve out coverage for a pre-existing condition. Stuff about discrimination or price hikes for pre-existing conditions has been law for more than a decade.


Employers will not start shifting health care burdens on employees. If your company has more than 50 employees, they have to offer health care or pay a fine of $2K/employee if any get health care from the new exchanges. If it has less, they will have a shared responsibility fee if you decide to buy some on your own. If the company's health care is too expensive, you get a tax credit and the company pays $3k towards that credit.
Companies don't have to provide insurance, but they don't have to provide it right now or two years ago if they didn't want to. Employer based insurance probably isn't going anywhere any time soon.


I don't know how the laws apply to people who try to buy insurance in the middle of an emergency or catastrophic event, but my guess is there is some leeway in how much they can charge someone based on what is currently going on. But again, those laws existed pre-ACA.



Poor people would only get chemo if they have Medicaid and it is covered. A private hospital would not provide chemo for them. General hospitals may. If you want to survive cancer, your best bet is to not be poor.






As for what you should do, I'm no expert, but if your employer offers more than one plan, you would be well served by a high deductible plan IMO. You have coverage in case you need to go to the doctor, so you'll just pay a copay for regular visits, it's less expensive than low deductible plans, and if something serious happens to you, the big expense is covered. You'll hardly ever see the doctor so having the high deductible won't hurt you much cause you won't use it.
It also has the side effect of making you question your doctor, which far too few people do. If the $500 for an MRI has to come out of your own pocket, you'll be asking your doctor if it's really necessary (something that you should be doing regardless of who pays, because doctors are in business to make money and don't always see a problem with equating # of tests to quality care. Not to mention they often own pieces of the testing facilities, including imaging centers so they are tagging you twice).

EDIT:n/m about the high deductible plan. Just saw you have a solid gold plan offered that you would be a fool not to take advantage of, and appreciate you get so good a deal. The high deductible plan makes sense for others who are healthy and looking though.

Dental insurance doesn't have the same price distortions that health insurance does. I wonder why? I view my dental insurance as a decent value. Vision... I pay OOP (oops, that's a fine)... er, out of pocket. It works wonderfully that way. I wish ALL of healthcare sans catastrophic stuff were out of pocket with prices you know going in... just like when I go in for a vision exam and pay $50 and buy the prescription glasses or contacts with the prices right on the tag. I've even purchased back-up glasses online from a manufacturer in China for dirt cheap... gosh, fulfilling your prescriptions wherever, hmmm

Imagine that... prices stated up front, people paying out of pocket, paying for what you use and not less or more, no third party to decide on coverage, what gets paid, how much is paid, and how much is billed to you... what a world... I think it's called capitalism, but I've heard so many evil things about it. Seems good to me though

Dental insurance doesn't have the same price distortions that health insurance does. I wonder why? I view my dental insurance as a decent value. Vision... I pay OOP (oops, that's a fine)... er, out of pocket. It works wonderfully that way. I wish ALL of healthcare sans catastrophic stuff were out of pocket with prices you know going in... just like when I go in for a vision exam and pay $50 and buy the prescription glasses or contacts with the prices right on the tag. I've even purchased back-up glasses online from a manufacturer in China for dirt cheap... gosh, fulfilling your prescriptions wherever, hmmm

Imagine that... prices stated up front, people paying out of pocket, paying for what you use and not less or more, no third party to decide on coverage, what gets paid, how much is paid, and how much is billed to you... what a world... I think it's called capitalism, but I've heard so many evil things about it. Seems good to me though

Seems good until you find out what those prices are and can't afford to pay so much for anything and then health and life becomes available only to those rich enough to buy it. That's the fundamental problem with our system - costs are too high, and they are created by the companies in our health system.



I do agree the price should be known up front. Medical billing is atrocious, and purposefully deceptive. You should also know of any interest the doctor might have in the imaging center he/she sends you to, and any other incentives they get for procedures, pills, and other care.
Our health care system is so F'ed up it's ridiculous. Obamacare doesn't fix it but it's better to have it as the floor instead of what we had before. We won't fix it until the population gets incensed enough to mobilize, which it never will because of the polarization (which is why said polarization has been created).
What's odd about it to me is that insurance companies are naturally opposed in the market to doctors, pharma, medical equipment co.'s but instead of combating them, the ins. companies just try to mitigate their payouts, which is what they exist to do. They wouldn't have to pay out as much if costs were controlled. About 10-15 years ago, there was a government agency that studied medical practices to determine if they were being used efficiently, and found that spinal fusion surgeries were only effective for sciatica but were unnecessarily being done for all kinds of back issues. The doctors pooled resources with the medical equipment companies and got the agency dissolved (I believe it's back in the ACA). Where was the insurance company money? Why didn't they fight to keep the agency alive, since they ultimately were the ones paying for all these unnecessary back surgeries?

The whole thing is nuts and should be thrown over.

I actually don't have dental coverage, and due to the fact he doesn't have to mess with the insurance company it's pretty much dirt cheap.

I didn't go to the dentist for a few years ( due to lack of coverage) but he only charged me like 60 bucks for a cleaning and x-rays. Then I needed 4 fillings and that was like 150 bucks.
But one of the advantages of being a low carber is it's great for your dental health, no sugar = no plaque!

Naw, I think aflac only pays 5k if you lose a limb, you're better off getting cracked in the head with the meteor. They pay premium for head injuries you'll want your insurance though!

I didn't go to the dentist for a few years ( due to lack of coverage) but he only charged me like 60 bucks for a cleaning and x-rays. Then I needed 4 fillings and that was like 150 bucks.

Like I said, dental, for whatever reason, doesn't seem to have the same price distortions that other health care does. I pay a third of my dental out of pocket and changed dentist to make this more affordable to me. Ah... now I see that I wasn't acting like typical insured, I actually called around to get price quotes. I like to visit the dentist a minimum of 3x per year instead of the standard 2. My former dentist had all the bells and whistles and charged a hefty premium; loved the service, but not willing to pay for it.

Seems good until you find out what those prices are and can't afford to pay so much for anything and then health and life becomes available only to those rich enough to buy it

In other words, hospitals would be tiny because only 5% of people would be able to actually purchase health care. And then all those doctors would sit around twiddling their thumbs.

Put another way, how did the prices get so exorbitant in the first place? There are price distortions. The system worked very well up through the 1960s; people never had employer insurance and paid for health care out of pocket. Now we spend 20% of GDP on healthcare and it WILL go higher and higher. Why is that?

Put another way... why are US college tuition so high that the typical person can't pay for them without a loan? Put another way, why did housing in the US (and Australia, and Canada, etc) go through the roof so that a typical person couldn't just buy one in cash with two times their annual paycheck?

All of these systems have price distortions, and they're all similar. I would propose the cure is also similar, BUT that's not really worth debating since it will never happen and those solutions have never, nor will ever be on the table, IMO. Healthcare, though, is particularly nefarious in the USA. None of those other markets threaten to take down the entire financial structure of a world economic powerhouse... and healthcare has the most distortions IMO. I don't think that's coincidence.

I'm not against insurance. Insurance is good. Hellmuth buys insurance all the time at the poker tables... what we're discussing is actually not insurance. DUCY?

This is just nonsense.
The change in the pre-existing condition regulation is that now you cannot be refused coverage because of it and/or your insurance company cannot carve out coverage for a pre-existing condition. Stuff about discrimination or price hikes for pre-existing conditions has been law for more than a decade.

but the brutal truth is that allowing pre-existing conditions while paying the same as a healthy person is bad for the insurance business. someone already sick is going to use up more resources and money than a healthy person. so yeah, if you're too poor to pay for stuff, you're gonna suffer. life sucks. and it's a great incentive to want to not be poor! in a free society, you're free to be poor or free to pursue a better life. but when there are no consequences to being poor anymore, we take away people's motivations to better themselves.

but now that the US has socialized medicine, who is going to pay for all the newly insured with pre-existing conditions? not the goverment. government has no money of its own. we're going to pay for it. and furthermore, what happens to medical services in countries with socialized medicine? the quality of services go down and waiting times go up. the rich will still have their good private care. the poor will be better off. and it's the middle class that loses.

Employers will not start shifting health care burdens on employees. If your company has more than 50 employees, they have to offer health care or pay a fine of $2K/employee if any get health care from the new exchanges. If it has less, they will have a shared responsibility fee if you decide to buy some on your own. If the company's health care is too expensive, you get a tax credit and the company pays $3k towards that credit.
Companies don't have to provide insurance, but they don't have to provide it right now or two years ago if they didn't want to. Employer based insurance probably isn't going anywhere any time soon.

i don't know about that. companies can make a cost/benefit analysis as well when the government has basically given them an out for not offering healthcare to its employees.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/free_enterprise/2012/07/should-businesses-drop-healthcare-under-obamacare.html

EDIT:n/m about the high deductible plan. Just saw you have a solid gold plan offered that you would be a fool not to take advantage of, and appreciate you get so good a deal. The high deductible plan makes sense for others who are healthy and looking though.

but how long will it stay good under Obamacare? i intend to use it for now, as long as it's offered, but expect the actual service to get worse over time.

Put another way, how did the prices get so exorbitant in the first place? There are price distortions. The system worked very well up through the 1960s; people never had employer insurance and paid for health care out of pocket. Now we spend 20% of GDP on healthcare and it WILL go higher and higher. Why is that?

Put another way... why are US college tuition so high that the typical person can't pay for them without a loan? Put another way, why did housing in the US (and Australia, and Canada, etc) go through the roof so that a typical person couldn't just buy one in cash with two times their annual paycheck?

All of these systems have price distortions, and they're all similar. I would propose the cure is also similar, BUT that's not really worth debating since it will never happen and those solutions have never, nor will ever be on the table, IMO. Healthcare, though, is particularly nefarious in the USA. None of those other markets threaten to take down the entire financial structure of a world economic powerhouse... and healthcare has the most distortions IMO. I don't think that's coincidence.

There are lots of reasons those things have become so expensive. Healthcare is not the same as it was in the 60s in part for the same reason GM turned their factories over to the government during WWII and would never even begin to contemplate doing that again.
Ultimately, what changed from the past is culture, and there will be no going back.
There are definitely distortions, and will continue to be as long as moneyed interests can effect policy. I agree that true solutions are to reduce the burden rather than shift it around, and I agree that it makes too much sense for it ever to become real.
Given that, I think it is foolish to suggest people carry the burden themselves first, because it is too great and will crush them. It has to be manageable before you can expect people to manage it.

but the brutal truth is that allowing pre-existing conditions while paying the same as a healthy person is bad for the insurance business. someone already sick is going to use up more resources and money than a healthy person. so yeah, if you're too poor to pay for stuff, you're gonna suffer. life sucks. and it's a great incentive to want to not be poor! in a free society, you're free to be poor or free to pursue a better life. but when there are no consequences to being poor anymore, we take away people's motivations to better themselves.

but now that the US has socialized medicine, who is going to pay for all the newly insured with pre-existing conditions? not the goverment. government has no money of its own. we're going to pay for it. and furthermore, what happens to medical services in countries with socialized medicine? the quality of services go down and waiting times go up. the rich will still have their good private care. the poor will be better off. and it's the middle class that loses.

This is even more nonsensical than before. People don't need incentive to not be poor. Poor people may be free to pursue a better life, but not only is the deck stacked against them, there are several stacked decks stacked on top of each other for them. I've been working with kids for a nonprofit in the inner city for merely a year, and I shudder to think about what their lives are likely to be through no fault of their own.

As for you or us or the taxpayer footing the bill, what exactly do you think happens with your car insurance money, health care money, and taxes? Might be your last year's tax bill went to a couple bolts on an M1A4 tank or a rivet on an F35. That's what happens to more than 30% of the population's taxes. That tank doesn't sit in front of your house protecting it, that F35 doesn't fly over your skies. You don't get to drive or pilot either one. Your state tax doesn't necessarily go to the salary of the specific fireman who responds to your 911 call. I have no idea where this idea that tax money shouldn't get spent on things that don't directly benefit you personally and only you came from but it's the dumbest idea a man or woman has ever had. Your car insurance money goes to someone who has just been in a wreck. That's the nature of it.

Furthermore, the US does not have socialized medicine now. That's talking point bullshit. The government is setting up exchanges in which private companies will operate and provide the care. A small percentage of people will get added to Medicaid. Second, Germany or Finland have better health care than we do, not worse, yet they manage costs and to cover their people. Third, look around. The middle class has been losing in everything for the past few decades. They are going to be the poor. Wealth disparity is growing in the this country. Look at what Stueyskid said about college and housing. If everything becomes 3x as expensive, sure you're free to become 3x as rich, but how are you going to do that? How is everyone going to do that? Upward mobility is a great concept, but how are you going to implement it when the ladder rungs get further and further apart for more and more people? It becomes a concept that doesn't exist in reality.

i don't know about that. companies can make a cost/benefit analysis as well when the government has basically given them an out for not offering healthcare to its employees.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/free_enterprise/2012/07/should-businesses-drop-healthcare-under-obamacare.html

Pre-ACA, no company had to offer health care. They did anyway. That did not change under the ACA. The only reason businesses will stop offering it is if they think it will be cheaper to force you to buy your own+ paying fines or shelling out for tax credits. 5 years ago your company could have decided not to offer employees health care. That's not different now. They didn't because they think it's not cheaper and/or felt it was necessary to offer in order to gain and retain employees. Forgive me if I laugh at your article's thesis that guilt over employees not having health care is what made companies provide it.

but how long will it stay good under Obamacare? i intend to use it for now, as long as it's offered, but expect the actual service to get worse over time.

There is no basis for this. No one knows how the costs are going to shake out, nor how the service will change if at all. Hopefully, if costs are projected to increase, the healthcare industry players will react and adjust in responsible ways to maintain or reduce costs. This is even happening now. Health care companies are talking about preventive care and incentivizing healthy behaviors, and approaching care at the primary level differently. It could be that the approach will change and costs will go down. Don't worry though, I'm not holding my breath. I'm also not dumb enough to think that costs were going down or were going to go down if ACA died. I don't think anyone (who was not benefitting financially) was looking around and thinking health care was such a great low cost system 3 years ago. If you think health care costs were going to go down if not for ACA, I've got some beachfront property in AZ to sell you.