Grumble, Grumble, Grumble!!
-
*shrug* My mother and sister use glasses/contacts. Their insurance does not cover those, a set of new glasses from lenscrafters which includes exam, lenses, frames, misc stuff runs them anywhere from $600 to $1000. I'd hardly say this is competitive pricing. Something that simple shouldn't cost that much.
You mother and sister are getting ripped off. I get my glasses from my optometrist. Exam, regular prescription glasses, and prescription reading glasses totalled just under $400, and I don't have vision insurance. I've dealt with Lenscrafters before; they push you to the most expensive frames claiming the cheaper ones are out of stock, and their quality sucks. I broke a pair of glasses once and went to Lenscrafters to have some made quickly. They took three hours to make my glasses (instead of the one hour in their ad). I ended up having new ones made less than a year later when the Lenscrafter frames fell apart.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
I don't think Obama and the Dems necessarily have the answer, but 45 Million Americans don't have health insurance. Something needs to be done. But one small bit of reform is not going to stop the Global Corporate Feudalism that we are living under. Things probably won't getter for another 1000 years, if ever.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
but 45 Million Americans don't have health insurance. Something needs to be done.
who cares how many don't have health insurance...but i do care that around that number don't have access to proper health care - something should be done about that! treat the cause not the symptom -
Opium is my business. The bridge mean more traffic. More traffic mean more money. More money mean more power. Speed is important in business. Time is money. You said opium was money. Money is Money. Well then, what is time again? icalburner.net
-
I don't think Obama and the Dems necessarily have the answer, but 45 Million Americans don't have health insurance. Something needs to be done. But one small bit of reform is not going to stop the Global Corporate Feudalism that we are living under. Things probably won't getter for another 1000 years, if ever.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
45 Million Americans don't have health insurance
How come? Is it because they do not have work? Or because they have a work and no employer-provided health insurance? In the first case, the most important thing to do would be to restart the economy. In the second case, how about providing incentives for companies to provide health insurance?
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
-
I don't think Obama and the Dems necessarily have the answer, but 45 Million Americans don't have health insurance. Something needs to be done. But one small bit of reform is not going to stop the Global Corporate Feudalism that we are living under. Things probably won't getter for another 1000 years, if ever.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Ah, the minority of people don't have something so the solution is to destroy what the majority of the people enjoy. Brilliant. The day the US government fixes the Indian Health Service and Medicare is the day they can START talking about "fixing" the rest of the medical system. Until then, I'd rather the entire country not end up like Massachusetts.
-
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
45 Million Americans don't have health insurance
How come? Is it because they do not have work? Or because they have a work and no employer-provided health insurance? In the first case, the most important thing to do would be to restart the economy. In the second case, how about providing incentives for companies to provide health insurance?
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
The 45M number is from a few years ago (I presume recent stats would be higher), IIRC half the total was either people with short term (3-6mo) gaps between jobs, or short term gaps + people who chose not to buy an employer offered health plan. I think the 50% figure was just the first, but it's been a while since I saw an article with the breakdown by type.
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
-
Ah, the minority of people don't have something so the solution is to destroy what the majority of the people enjoy. Brilliant. The day the US government fixes the Indian Health Service and Medicare is the day they can START talking about "fixing" the rest of the medical system. Until then, I'd rather the entire country not end up like Massachusetts.
-
*shrug* My mother and sister use glasses/contacts. Their insurance does not cover those, a set of new glasses from lenscrafters which includes exam, lenses, frames, misc stuff runs them anywhere from $600 to $1000. I'd hardly say this is competitive pricing. Something that simple shouldn't cost that much.
I too wonder where they are going. I bought the glasses I have now with only the $35 exam covered. Total cost was under $150. My wife and daughter just got new glasses at Walmart. Both cost less than $150. My next pair will be about $250 since I'll need bifocals and I'm going with superthin high quality lenses. (What's rather stunning is how little prices of glasses have changed in the twenty years. Meanwhile, contact lens prices have plummeted.)
-
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
45 Million Americans don't have health insurance
How come? Is it because they do not have work? Or because they have a work and no employer-provided health insurance? In the first case, the most important thing to do would be to restart the economy. In the second case, how about providing incentives for companies to provide health insurance?
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
Actually, that figure is from a few a years ago.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
-
The 45M number is from a few years ago (I presume recent stats would be higher), IIRC half the total was either people with short term (3-6mo) gaps between jobs, or short term gaps + people who chose not to buy an employer offered health plan. I think the 50% figure was just the first, but it's been a while since I saw an article with the breakdown by type.
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
dan neely wrote:
people with short term (3-6mo) gaps between jobs
they can keep their former employer insurance, this is garanteed by law.
dan neely wrote:
people who chose not to buy an employer offered health plan
So if they choose not to subscribe it is not because of a hole in the system, it is because of their own choice. So to me, it does not look like the system needs to be fixed there.
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
-
I too wonder where they are going. I bought the glasses I have now with only the $35 exam covered. Total cost was under $150. My wife and daughter just got new glasses at Walmart. Both cost less than $150. My next pair will be about $250 since I'll need bifocals and I'm going with superthin high quality lenses. (What's rather stunning is how little prices of glasses have changed in the twenty years. Meanwhile, contact lens prices have plummeted.)
Joe Woodbury wrote:
Both cost less than $150
Actually this matches my recollection, and again this "decent" price was fully reimbursed by an "average" health insurance plan.
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
-
Skymir wrote:
It reads like a right wing talking points l
My post was not about politics, but about everyday life in one country or another. France has a big government type health care system, and my everyday experience is when in the US my payment for a health insurance was not that bad (I mean compared to what I have to pay in France) and the coverage was not that bad either (been part in various plans like HMOs and PPOs).
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
when in the US my payment fora health insurance was not that bad
If you were working in an unskilled job for minimum wadge you might think differently about the cost of health insurance.
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
the coverage was not that bad either (been partin various plans like HMOs and PPOs).
Unless you can't afford insurance like 47 million people in the US. Census Bureau: Number of U.S. Uninsured Rises to 47 Million Americans are Uninsured[^]
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
Think inside the box! ProActive Secure Systems
I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopes -
dan neely wrote:
people with short term (3-6mo) gaps between jobs
they can keep their former employer insurance, this is garanteed by law.
dan neely wrote:
people who chose not to buy an employer offered health plan
So if they choose not to subscribe it is not because of a hole in the system, it is because of their own choice. So to me, it does not look like the system needs to be fixed there.
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
dan neely wrote: people with short term (3-6mo) gaps between jobs they can keep their former employer insurance, this is garanteed by law.
But they have to pay 100% of the total. For a family plan that's typically $1000-2000month. Very few people can afford to pay that much/month without a pay check.
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
So to me, it does not look like the system needs to be fixed there.
You've still got the other 20+M who have a (typically low paying) job that doesn't offer an insurance plan and who can't afford to buy one because it would cost more than their salary to do so. The problem exists, it's just that statistical lying is used to inflate its size.
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
-
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
dan neely wrote: people with short term (3-6mo) gaps between jobs they can keep their former employer insurance, this is garanteed by law.
But they have to pay 100% of the total. For a family plan that's typically $1000-2000month. Very few people can afford to pay that much/month without a pay check.
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
So to me, it does not look like the system needs to be fixed there.
You've still got the other 20+M who have a (typically low paying) job that doesn't offer an insurance plan and who can't afford to buy one because it would cost more than their salary to do so. The problem exists, it's just that statistical lying is used to inflate its size.
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
dan neely wrote:
But they have to pay 100% of the total. For a family plan that's typically $1000-2000month. Very few people can afford to pay that much/month without a pay check.
The numbers seem high. When using Cobra, it should not cost such a high amount.
dan neely wrote:
job that doesn't offer an insurance plan
So in this case, the problem is not to "fix" the system but to provide incentives to companies so more of them will offer insurance, especially since companies can already get tax deductions from their group plans.
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
-
dan neely wrote:
But they have to pay 100% of the total. For a family plan that's typically $1000-2000month. Very few people can afford to pay that much/month without a pay check.
The numbers seem high. When using Cobra, it should not cost such a high amount.
dan neely wrote:
job that doesn't offer an insurance plan
So in this case, the problem is not to "fix" the system but to provide incentives to companies so more of them will offer insurance, especially since companies can already get tax deductions from their group plans.
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
The numbers seem high. When using Cobra, it should not cost such a high amount.
Yes it does. With Corba you pay 100% of the cost, as opposed to your employer paying 75% and you 25%. For a friend of mine who recently lost his job, corba for his family would've been ~$1500/mo. I'm single, and if I lost my job it'd cost me ~$300/mo vs my employer currently paying 100% of the cost. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080317133213AAZKIU2[^]
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
-
Actually, that figure is from a few a years ago.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
An article in this weeks The Economist, put the number at 50M (it didn't indicate how old the figure is); and that almost 1/3rd of the total were illegals who wouldn't be covered under any of the reform plans being proposed. (paraphrasing from memory: "The plans would cover ~2/3rds of the total, most of the rest are illegals.")
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
-
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
The numbers seem high. When using Cobra, it should not cost such a high amount.
Yes it does. With Corba you pay 100% of the cost, as opposed to your employer paying 75% and you 25%. For a friend of mine who recently lost his job, corba for his family would've been ~$1500/mo. I'm single, and if I lost my job it'd cost me ~$300/mo vs my employer currently paying 100% of the cost. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080317133213AAZKIU2[^]
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.
This is pure BS!!! I went to the website of well-known health insurance company and got a quote for a family of four. That was around 300/month. And this is a regular coverage. So as with cobra you benefit from group coverage this would be cheaper than that. So please stop saying things that are completely undocumented and false. X| X| X|
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
-
This is pure BS!!! I went to the website of well-known health insurance company and got a quote for a family of four. That was around 300/month. And this is a regular coverage. So as with cobra you benefit from group coverage this would be cheaper than that. So please stop saying things that are completely undocumented and false. X| X| X|
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
You're not going to get *GOOD* family coverage in the US for only $300. Any plan at that low a cost is going to have restrictions and exclusions copays and coninsurance fees out the wazoo; and in practice be next to worthless for anything less than a heart attack requiring immediate surgical intervention. Even then the coinsurance fees will end up being a major financial burden. At that price you're basically putting money in the insurance companies pocket for little or no real gain. If you don't believe me, start a new thread and ask people what the total cost of their insurance packages (eg personal + employer paid shares) are. IIRC the cheapest family plan my employer offers has a total cost at least 2x (being single I didn't pay close attention to that part of the benefits powerpoint last fall); and it's basically catastrophic injury/illness protection for healthy people. (Restrictions on covered prescriptions are large enough and copays high enough that someone taking lots of pills would end up spending less total on a more full featured plan.
The European Way of War: Blow your own continent up. The American Way of War: Go over and help them.