Some people can’t buy health insurance because they have a pre-existing medical condition. But for most of the nation’s 47 million uninsured, cost is the big obstacle ”” especially if they don’t work for a company that pays part of the premium.
And even if they could find an affordable health plan, many are not used to building that cost into their monthly budget. Potential sticker shock is emerging as a key issue in the nation’s debate over whether everybody should be covered.
The 47 million figure is the reddest of herrings. It includes all sorts of people (like illegal immigrants and young adults who don’t want the expense because they’re perfectly healthy) that radically alter the numbers. It’s padded with all sorts of mendacious nonsense.
It also includes millions of people who choose to self-insure because their income is sufficient to do so.
More importantly, there is excellent insurance available at a very reasonably cost. We pay under $130 per month for the two of us, and were there children at home it would still be under $140. That’s a coffee plus a muffin per day, to insure an entire family. It’s about choices, people.
Here in Pittsburgh the Blue Cross / Blue Shield PPO group medical, plus a fairly decent dental, plus an almost pointless (so, very inexpensive!) optical plan coverage, at the family rate, comes to a tad over $14,000 per year, about $1,200 per month, in our 7/2008-6/2009 contract year. It’s not a cadillac plan, but probably these days would be something like a Buick, and as our diocesan compensation levels are submedian in terms of the wider church, this has been really important. I’m not sure what you get in Kansas for “coffee plus a muffin per day,” but I have a feeling we’re not talking about the same thing when we talk about adequate medical coverage. Self Insurance is a scary deal. Seven or eight years ago we had a medical situation in our family that was serious enough to require some high end care and nearly a month of hospitalization. The total bill came to more than $100,000.
Bruce Robison
#2, I don’t think $140 a month is available to many families. We pay $700 and the article mentions $1000…..
i was unemployed for most of a year back in 2000 after working in the health insurance field for 15 years. decent coverage ain’t cheap and that goes double if you have a pre-exist. i paid 100$ a month for myself back then for an individual policy and when it came time for me to need it, it covered absolutely nothing for my services. and i know a few people who happen to be unemployed and cannot afford insurance and they have gotten sick. i also administered cobra back in the 90’s for a third party administrator and it weren’t cheap for anyone back then even.
I pay $20,000/year for “Individual Advantage” (individual insurance) for three people via Aetna in NJ.
Unless you are extremely wealthy you would be crazy to voluntarily self insure, so I am willing to bet there are not millions of people voluntarily self insuring.
You do not have to support universal health care to admit millions of people cannot afford basic health care in the US. It seems as though those opposed to universal health care feel they must debunk a myth that there are 40+ million uninsured people in this country. Why is that? Any way you slice it there are tens of millions of people who cannot afford health insurance.
$20K? Well, that’s only…um…a dozen coffees plus at least as many muffins per day! It’s about choices, people!
I have two special needs kids which means we go to a lot of doctors a lot of times a year. I am continually thankful for my husband’s job which includes a really nice health care plan. Still, we pay about $200 a month anyway as our contributions towards it, plus lots of co-pays, especially on medication. My brother-in-law is self-employed and he’s paid about $1200 a month for the 5 of them (mom, dad, 3 kids) for years. And that’s the good deal. He shopped around. When I remember what my parents paid for me 20 years ago, the difference is stark.
[blockquote] Clinton and Obama have used the lie about 40-some million uninsured Americans to promote universal health insurance plans. Moore asserted in his film that providing health insurance to everyone is a moral and even religious obligation.
The mainstream media have played along, championing “ambitious†universal coverage plans and referring to the U.S. system as “deeply flawed.â€
“California’s ambitious plan to make health insurance available to almost everyone in the state is getting a lot of attention all over the country, and here’s why. According to the latest figures, the number of uninsured Americans has grown to more than 46 million,†said Katie Couric on the “CBS Evening News†January 9.
Journalists’ failure to question that high figure has furthered the cause of nationalized care.
“Proponents of universal health care often use the 46-million figure — without context or qualification. It creates the false impression that a huge percentage of the population has fallen through the cracks,†Gratzer told BMI. “Again, that’s not to suggest that there is no problem, but it’s very different than the universal-care crowd describes.â€
Dr. Grace-Marie Turner, a BMI adviser and president of the Galen Institute, agreed that “the number [on uninsured] is inflated and affects the debate.â€
Turner also pointed out that “45 percent of the uninsured are going to have insurance within four months [according to the Congressional Budget Office],†because many are transitioning between jobs and most people get health insurance through their employers.
So what is the true extent of the uninsured “crisis?†The Kaiser Family Foundation, a liberal non-profit frequently quoted by the media, puts the number of uninsured Americans who do not qualify for current government programs and make less than $50,000 a year between 13.9 million and 8.2 million. That is a much smaller figure than the media report.
Kaiser’s 8.2 million figure for the chronically uninsured only includes those uninsured for two years or more. It is also worth noting, that, 45 percent of uninsured people will be uninsured for less than four months according to the Congressional Budget Office.[/blockquote]
[url=http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2007/20070718153509.aspx]Business and Media[/url]
Jim Elliott
North Florida
DO NOT USE FACTS, Jim Elliot. They really confuse people. Why, anyone would think you might oppose the need to have the government do its usual superb job of spending money, especially under the big nanny state push underway at present. I have been numbered under the uninsured for all the years I had to purchase insurance as a self-employed individual – just because it wasn’t provided by an employer. That would be over half of my current practice life of 21 years. But we WERE insured, just not counted as such.
The counting system is DEEPLY FLAWED as your information so astutely notes.
Back in the mid 1980s when I worked on a contract basis, I was able to get a fairly limited plan– more of a catastrophic plan– from State Farm. It was quite a bit cheaper than a plan from a conventional medical insurer. It wasn’t free, of course, and I never really had to use it. But that’s kind of the point of insurance, after all, even if you are (as I was) young and healthy. Not too many years later I was waking up in the hallway to the fact that I would be on anticonvulsants for the rest of my life.
For debate purposes you can make statistics say anything you want, but obviously limiting the number by saying people who make more than 50k per year should not count is silly, and saying you do not believe a reputable group because they are “liberal” is also silly. In 2007 71% of Americans earned less than $50,000 per year, and 53% of US households earned less than $50,000.00 per year.
I have not made up my mind on universal health care yet, but as a small business owner, who is finding it almost impossible to continue to pay for my employee’s health insurance, I am convinced the current system is not sustainable, and those opposing universal health care never seem offer an alternative that will make things any better. Their answer seems to be I should just stop insuring my employees and leave them to their own devices. However, since my five employees make make between $22,500 per year and $38,500 per year, I just do not see how they could absorb a $300 to $500 per month pay cut. Not to mention the fact that without my group plan at least one possibly two of my employees would be uninsurable. Also, since none of my employees are disabled or supporting minor children none would qualify for government programs such as medicaid.
The problem we face in this country is that employers can no longer afford health insurance for their employees and employees can not afford to pay for it either. Furthermore American companies cannot compete with companies in other countries, when those companies do not have to insure their employees. As more and more employers drop out of paying or scale back on the percentage they will pay, more and more people will become uninsured.
Statistics clearly show that the average person in Western Europe and Canada lives longer than the average person in the United States, and the infant mortality rate in Western Europe and Canada is lower than that in the United States. That seems to suggest the belief that we in the US have the best health care in the world is wrong. There has got to be a better answer than if you can’t afford health insurance, you are not worth saving.
I am having a difficult time seeing the down side to having a system of government sponsored health care you can sign up for if you want to, or you can buy private insurance if you want to. That seems to offer something for everyone.
well said #13.