# Union health insurace



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

No, not really.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

ACA will effect ALL health insurance, there is simply no way that it can't.

One way that ACA wil effect you as a union member is now when you are out of work for a while and loose your benefits, you'll have to pay a tax. Right at that time when you have no money and no health insurance, you'l owe the government money.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

StevenJames said:


> ACA will effect ALL health insurance, there is simply no way that it can't.
> 
> One way that ACA wil effect you as a union member is now when you are out of work for a while and loose your benefits, you'll have to pay a tax. Right at that time when you have no money and no health insurance, you'l owe the government money.


So, is this a guess or bar education?

How about facts?

http://healthreform.kff.org/the-basics/~/media/Files/KHS/Flowcharts/coverage_flowchart_3.pdf


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> So, is this a guess or bar education?
> 
> How about facts?


I posted the facts. If you have opposing facts, post them and refute what I said.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

StevenJames said:


> ACA will effect ALL health insurance, there is simply no way that it can't.
> 
> One way that ACA wil effect you as a union member is now when you are out of work for a while and loose your benefits, you'll have to pay a tax. Right at that time when you have no money and no health insurance, you'l owe the government money.


Yes, all insurance will be affected - in our case union members won't see any difference except broader family coverage and elimination of pre-existing condition rules...which has already happened.

As far as the out of work, losing your benefits, additional tax due in April part - that is everyone, not just union members, and we should be in good shape since we generally hold our insurance through layoffs much better than non union folks.

The ACA is a good thing for America, it brings to folks what unions have had for decades, a chance at affordable healthcare for themselves and their families.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

eejack said:


> Yes, all insurance will be affected - in our case union members won't see any difference except broader family coverage and elimination of pre-existing condition rules...which has already happened.


 The price will go up.



> As far as the out of work, losing your benefits, additional tax due in April part - that is everyone, not just union members


 I never said it was only union members.


> The ACA is a good thing for America, it brings to folks what unions have had for decades, a chance at affordable healthcare for themselves and their families.


It's going to significantly raise the cost of healthcare and insurance and it's going to tax those who cannot afford to pay for insurance.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

It really looks like a bailout for the insurance industry.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

StevenJames said:


> I posted the facts. If you have opposing facts, post them and refute what I said.


Did you check out the link?


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> Did you check out the link?


Did you refute what I said?


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

StevenJames said:


> The price will go up.
> It's going to significantly raise the cost of healthcare and insurance and it's going to tax those who cannot afford to pay for insurance.


What is remarkable is this bit of spin.

If everyone has insurance then the cost of healthcare should go down. 
Basic economics.
Right now those without insurance get free healthcare via our most expensive mechanisms - ie walking into an emergency room - or do without healthcare and become a burden on society in other ways - loss of productivity etc.

So, everyone has healthcare, costs should go down, everyone wins.

In my case the dropping costs will mean my union will be able to add additional coverages to our insurance ( increase dental, eye care etc. ). The only reason why I don't know if that is going to happen is politics. 

We hear a lot of 'bad things' are going to happen because of the ACA.

We hear these things from the same set of sources we hear tell us about the 'bad things' all kinds of other things will happen because of who is president.

If you tell the lies long enough, eventually folks start believing them and then start self fulfilling them.

Removing anecdote, where does the ACA increase costs to healthcare that is not balanced out by improved health in our society at large?

Nowhere.

Sure - lots of anecdotes, kindly old country doctors being forced to retire, death panels and whatnot. This is coming from the same folks who want you to make the rich richer and have you convinced they are coming for your bullets.

FUD. Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt.

Believe what you want to believe, you have that right, but educate yourself.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

StevenJames said:


> Did you refute what I said?


Yes, and yes


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

eejack said:


> What is remarkable is this bit of spin.


 It's not spin, it's the truth. 

People who can't afford to pay for healthcare will have to pay a tax instead. That is 100% correct and factual. The people without jobs and income are now going to be taxed even more money to pay into the ACA. Both union and non-union alike.

Now if you want spin, just refer to the rest of your post. A lot of drivel to dance around the facts.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> Yes, and yes


There was only 1 question and your answer was NO.

Nothing you said refuted the facts that I presented.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

Did you understand about the %133 and the 4x poverty level thresholds?


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> Did you understand about the %133 and the 4x poverty level thresholds?


I understand the ACA very well. 

Again, do you have something to refute what I said or are you going to keep playing little games?


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

StevenJames said:


> I understand the ACA very well.
> 
> Again, do you have something to refute what I said or are you going to keep playing little games?


Ok kid,
You said that if someone that makes 100k per year, and finds themselves out of work, with no insurance, they will have to pay a tax that is so high that they will be impoverished.

Can you please, as an expert, quote us the amount of that tax?


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> Ok kid,
> You said that if someone that makes 100k per year, and finds themselves out of work, with no insurance, they will have to pay a tax that is so high that they will be impoverished.


 No, I didn't say that.

You're the guy who says he's a union contractor but then says he hires men from temp agencies, right? 

Do you EVER tell the truth?

When you're done answering that question, you can refute my statements that you seem to think are incorrect.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

StevenJames said:


> No, I didn't say that.
> 
> You're the guy who says he's a union contractor but then says he hires men from temp agencies, right?
> 
> ...


No, I don't hire from a temp agency, I use a payroll company. They are technically an employee leasing company but the guys are out of the hall.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> No, I don't hire from a temp agency, I use a payroll company. They are technically an employee leasing company but the guys are out of the hall.


Another change of story, great. And you still haven't refuted what I said, that you say is wrong...


----------



## J.Dunner (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> No, I don't hire from a temp agency, I use a payroll company. They are technically an employee leasing company but the guys are out of the hall.


:blink:
Could you explain this to me. This seems like a foreign concept to this yankee.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

StevenJames said:


> Another change of story, great. And you still haven't refuted what I said, that you say is wrong...


I have no interest in circle jerking with some clown looking for an argument. Look over the flow chart at the link I posted and get an education.

You are hung up on some detail that you can't seem to articulate and insist others do your homework.


----------



## knowshorts (Jan 9, 2009)

My insurance has gone up nearly 50% since all this started.

I have what is called a "catastrophic plan" with a $1k deductible. It is affordable but doesn't cover things that are not medically necessary. That means office visits and such. I found out cash is king. I wanted to get a full comprehensive physical. I had two choices. Hand over my insurance card or pay cash. If I handed over my insurance card, the insurance company would have been fully charged. Claim would have been denied and then I would have been responsible for the full charge. That's why I chose cash.

Doctor visit cost me $335. The time I personally spent with either the doctor or NP was over an hour. I think I got my monies worth. When I paid my bill at the front desk, I asked the chick at the front how much would the cost of been if it went through my insurance. She said around $1200. I then headed over to the lab for blood/urine withdrawal. 8 different tests. Cost me $308. Lab told me $2100 for insurance. I needed a prescription. Full insurance price was $118. Target cash price was $86. I paid $26 with a coupon. 

Insurance is way too expensive and it will just continue to go up. 

Now to the union side of this topic. I don't think union members are going to want to have more money out of their paychecks to pay for this increase.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> I have no interest in circle jerking with some clown looking for an argument. Look over the flow chart at the link I posted and get an education.
> 
> You are hung up on some detail that you can't seem to articulate and insist others do your homework.


You are the person who started this.

I made a statement, you said I was wrong but you never showed why.

Linking to some PDF does not prove your point. The statement I said stands as fact until you could actually figure out how to string 2 or 3 sentences together to prove why it isn't.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

StevenJames said:


> You are the person who started this.
> 
> I made a statement, you said I was wrong but you never showed why.
> 
> Linking to some PDF does not prove your point. The statement I said stands as fact until you could actually figure out how to string 2 or 3 sentences together to prove why it isn't.


So,
You couldn't be bothered opening the link?
Too bad.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

knowshorts said:


> My insurance has gone up nearly 50% since all this started.
> 
> I have what is called a "catastrophic plan" with a $1k deductible. It is affordable but doesn't cover things that are not medically necessary. That means office visits and such. I found out cash is king. I wanted to get a full comprehensive physical. I had two choices. Hand over my insurance card or pay cash. If I handed over my insurance card, the insurance company would have been fully charged. Claim would have been denied and then I would have been responsible for the full charge. That's why I chose cash.
> 
> ...


I have the NECA IBEW Insurance, some call it the Decatur Plan.
I have had the same insurance for 30 years. I haven't noticed it going up recently. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
Something interesting happened though, all of a sudden we have no cap and my kids are covered until they are 26.
It is a Blue Cross Blue Shield PPO.
I think it is about 750 to 800 per month based on 160 working hours.

Maybe a few hundred thousand people with a collective voice isn't as bad as Rush Limbaugh and Carl Rove make it out to be.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

J.Dunner said:


> :blink:
> Could you explain this to me. This seems like a foreign concept to this yankee.


The big issue here is the cost of workmanship comp. I can get a single digit rate using a payroll service as opposed to taking what's shoved up my keister buying it alone.
Again, collective purchase has power.
More money to cover perks for the guys.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

StevenJames said:


> It's not spin, it's the truth.
> 
> People who can't afford to pay for healthcare will have to pay a tax instead. That is 100% correct and factual. The people without jobs and income are now going to be taxed even more money to pay into the ACA. Both union and non-union alike..


Spin is saying "People who can't afford to pay for healthcare will have to pay a tax" when what is factual is "People who do not have insurance might have an additional tax."

One of those statements is truth and one is conjecture based on assumptions flavored with malice and prejudice.

People who cannot afford insurance will most likely not have any additional taxes since they probably would be considered impoverished and not able to pay taxes.

New name, same old trolling.
Plonk.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

jrannis said:


> So,
> You couldn't be bothered opening the link?
> Too bad.


You are the person who started this.

I made a statement, you said I was wrong but you never showed why.

Linking to some PDF does not prove your point. *The statement I said stands as fact until you could actually figure out how to string 2 or 3 sentences together to prove why it isn't*.


----------



## knowshorts (Jan 9, 2009)

jrannis said:


> Maybe a few hundred thousand people with a collective voice isn't as bad as Rush Limbaugh and Carl Rove make it out to be.


I'm assuming you are referring to the adage that group health plans are cheaper. That is not necessarily the case. If you have a large family, then sure, it will be cheaper. But we are living in a time where unmarried people are the majority for the first time in the history of census records. 

I like the option to make that decision myself.

I can't speak for the rest of the country, but I can get a policy for under $200 a month. Most moms who work can get a good policy from work for themselves and child for under $300. That right there is $6k a year. The guys in LA are paying a minimum of $12768 per year out of pocket. Even if I spend 2 grand out of pocket every year, I still saved almost $5k.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

eejack said:


> Spin is saying "People who can't afford to pay for healthcare will have to pay a tax" when what is factual is "People who do not have insurance might have an additional tax."


 You can spin it any way that you want, but what I said is 100% true.

The people who are out of work and have no money have to now pay a tax that they can't afford. Thanks you ACA...


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

StevenJames said:


> You can spin it any way that you want, but what I said is 100% true.
> 
> The people who are out of work and have no money have to now pay a tax that they can't afford. Thanks you ACA...


No, what you wrote is a lie.

Refute it.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

eejack said:


> No, what you wrote is a lie.
> 
> Refute it.


Refute what I wrote? :blink: :laughing:


I don't know what's worse, all those out of work union members who are having a hard time paying their mortgage now having to pay another tax, or the apologists like yourself who will defend the tax simply because someone else told him to (brainwashing works, you are proof).


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

Like most government boondoggles we do not know the answer, congress and future presidents will monkey with this from now unil the next dark ages.

It is my opinion that the cost of union insurance has increased due to this bill, no one could bother to read.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

brian john said:


> Like most government boondoggles we do not know the answer, congress and future presidents will monkey with this from now unil the next dark ages.


While I agree with your sentiment, one thing that we are sure of is that the taxes I spoke of are in place and will be charged.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

StevenJames said:


> Refute what I wrote? :blink: :laughing:
> 
> 
> I don't know what's worse, all those out of work union members who are having a hard time paying their mortgage now having to pay another tax, or the apologists like yourself who will defend the tax simply because someone else told him to (brainwashing works, you are proof).


so since you cannot use facts you revert to insults.

Okay champ...you had an opportunity to act like an adult and admit you don't know what you are talking about, but you passed.

If you make less than the 133% of the poverty level ( 14.5K single, 30K family of four ) you get medicare.

If you make less than 400% of the poverty level (44K single, 88K family of four ) you are given a tax credit.

So the only way you are 'paying taxes' when you are unemployed and don't have insurance is when you are making 4 times the poverty level ( which is kind of tough when you are unemployed ).

Go back to whoever gave you this bunkus and tell them to give you lemmings some better material, 'cause what you got ain't working.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

eejack said:


> so since you cannot use facts you revert to insults.


 I used facts, something that you know nothing about. What I said was a fact, from the very first posts in this thread.

EVERYONE who doesn't have medical insurance will pay a tax. That is the way it is.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

StevenJames said:


> I used facts, something that you know nothing about. What I said was a fact, from the very first posts in this thread.
> 
> EVERYONE who doesn't have medical insurance will pay a tax. That is the way it is.


No. Entirely false. Already disproved in this thread by two different posts. 

Heck, have another link.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politi...reform-bill-101-Who-gets-subsidized-insurance

All entirely besides the point.

The OP is asking about union insurance - which we get whether we are working or not. I was out 22 months and never lost coverage. It is difficult, even in this crappy economy to lose your union medical coverage. Not impossible, but difficult.

And if you did, you would be below the poverty line because you are not working - in which case you would be subsidized - tax credit instead of a tax.

But that doesn't go lockstep with the swill you are dishing out so you just come in here, insult folks, lie and cajole.


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

eejack said:


> No. Entirely false.


 No, entirely true. EVERYONE will either have medical insurance or pay a tax.



> Already disproved in this thread by two different posts.


 Let me explain something to you, YOU typing some words on a computer does NOT constitute "proof". You have shownNO proof whatsoever, and you won't- because there is none to backup your claim...



> Heck, have another link.
> http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...ized-insurance


 That does not refute the fact that everyone who doesn't have medical insurance is subject to the tax.



> The OP is asking about union insurance - which we get whether we are working or not.


 That is untrue. Medical insurance runs out in most locals. What you said about it being difficult to loose your insurance is bull****. I know many guys in 164 and they do not cover for 22 months, that is a lie. You are a liar.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

StevenJames said:


> No, entirely true. EVERYONE will either have medical insurance or pay a tax.


Holy bat guano - you really are that stupid?


----------



## StevenJames (Apr 21, 2013)

eejack said:


> Holy bat guano - you really are that stupid?


I'm just honest and I don't parrot what the BA tells me to.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

StevenJames said:


> I'm just honest and I don't parrot what the BA tells me to.


No, you are not honest. You are just a troll. I looked at pretty much every other post you have made on this forum. Not a single useful post. Nothing electrical, nothing but contrary and argumentative right wing drivel, posted like a 12 year old child.

Begone.


----------

