Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
bearishgurl
ParticipantIn SoCal (in my price range but rising fast), I like the SGV, specifically, Diamond Bar, Walnut, Puente Hills and E/SE West Covina. I also think Baldwin Park is cute in a quaint sort of way (like Chula Vista or Concord) but more urban than the other cities I mentioned. I like this area because it is very well-planned and not overbuilt, and, more importantly, will never be overbuilt. I also like the generous, even very generous lot sizes and the large supply of one-story homes. The only drawback is the heat for 9 months per year, which can get oppressive.
Participant[quote=The-Shoveler]I would argue maybe only 10% of America really comes close (all factors considered and having traveled a fair bit of it), but anyway that is my opinion.[/quote]Boulder and surrounds is very, very nice … also very walkable. I stayed there for a few days last year and hiked the different trails at the bottom of the flatirons. But it’s gotten very pricey in the past decade plus. I can only afford a 1-2 bdrm condo there (North Boulder and not walkable to all the good stuff). But I am not willing to own or live in a condo. The RE prices there today are certainly on par with Pt Loma/PB in and some cases, LJ (in SD). Even the hotels there have nearly doubled in price from 2011 (the last time I stayed there) :=0
No, Boulder is not anywhere near “newish” like Temecula (although it has some new highways now). There has been a building moratorium in place there for several decades. Hence, its high RE prices and great quality of life.
Participant[quote=The-Shoveler]I would argue maybe only 10% of America really comes close (all factors considered and having traveled a fair bit of it), but anyway that is my opinion.[/quote]I’ve been to 17 states by road and an additional 4 states by air. But I have visited all of these locales multiple times … even dozens of times. I always go to the same places when I take an extended road trip :=)
Participant[quote=utcsox][quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]Okay, SK. Can we agree that “Medicaid” is not actually “insurance” and is instead a government-run entitlement program, initially put in place to serve the “poor?”
[/quote]
No, we can’t.[/quote]
I was laughing so hard when I read this.[/quote]What is your understanding of the intended purpose of Medicaid, utcsox?
Participant[quote=flyer]Personally, I think the real crazies in this election are those who actually believe any politician will make a difference in their lives–as time will inevitably tell–but it is fun to watch the show.[/quote]Well flyer, you can be assured that as a former “bureaucrat” myself, I harbor no illusions in this regard :=0
You’ve repeatedly brought up the “wealth gap” here as the biggest problem besetting our country.
Do you have any ideas on how it can be fixed … or at least lessened?
ParticipantI know. I know. It’s really easy for everybody to sit back, do nothing and act like a know-it-all while failing to back up their sound bytes and taking potshots at others who are trying to tell the truth.
Especially if they have no experience with these particular bureaucracies. I imagine its pretty difficult to put yourself in another’s shoes if your health insurance is provided for you by a third party or you are given sufficient choices to purchase it outside of a state or Federally run, bureaucratic “exchange.”
I DO realize that the truth is hard to hear at times.
Who knows? Maybe we’ll get lucky and this whole nightmare that is the ACA will eventually get dismantled. We’ll find out soon enough.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]I’m simply stating here that Medi-Cal expansion has adversely affected thousands of middle-income individuals in CA who signed up in good faith for a marketplace plan on the exchange and it continues to do so.[/quote]It’s adversely affected you, and the people you advise, or at least you claim it is, because you think you know what you’re doing, and you actually have no clue. Other than you, and those you claim you advise, I’ve seen no evidence of what you’re claiming.[/quote]
If could put aside your arrogance and could learn how to “google” for yourself, you wouldn’t be making all these insulting erroneous assumptions about me, SK. To dispel all of the ignorance floating around out there, I’ve taken the liberty of sorting through a large number of bookmarks I had related to these issues we’ve been discussing here that had been long stored in one folder (now in 3) and culled the most cogent and informative links this evening to get you started on your viewing and reading journey!
Perhaps the following links (some of them posted by CC enrolled insurance agent-navigators) might help you better understand the scope of the many thorny problems with CC and other healthcare exchanges a bit more in-depth:
http://centerforhealthreporting.org/article/updating-your-income-could-lead-canceled-health-plan
http://insuremekevin.com/calhabg/mysterious-system-changes-covered-california-accounts/
http://centerforhealthreporting.org/article/does-covered-california-really-have-you-covered
File a complaint against Covered California and ACA health plans
https://sharylattkisson.com/obamacare-fail-stories/
Here are some enlightening as well as informational links re: the sad comedy of errors that is the Medi-Cal Merry-Go-Round:
http://www.cahba.com/advice/2015/01/getting_medi-cal_to_cancel_enr.html
http://medi-cal.healthreformquotes.com/faqs/medi-cal-trumps-subsidized-plans/
New federal poverty line could knock Covered California families into Medi-Cal
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2014/dec/12/covered-ca-medi-cal/
Medi-Cal continues to change Covered California consumer’s income
http://www.cahba.com/advice/2013/12/kids_dont_want_medi-cal.html
The basics of Medi-Cal and how it works with Covered California
http://www.dhcs.ca.gov/services/medi-cal/eligibility/Pages/Medi-CalFAQs2014a.aspx
SK, why don’t you take a look at the following links in your “spare time,” as they relate to Medicaid/Medi-Cal estate recovery. They will get you started on the wondrous journey to a full understanding of the huge incentives that state exchanges have (in states with expanded Medicaid) to cram as many people as possible as soon as possible into Medicaid/Medi-Cal, ESPecially those over 55 years old … this group is icing on the cake for state bureaucrats left in charge of Medi-Cal Estate Recovery and related collections.
Obamacare: The Final Payment–Raiding the Assets of Low-Income and Poor Americans
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Medi-Cal-works-as-invisible-loan-for-those-over-55-5677525.php
http://www.dhcs.ca.gov/services/Pages/TPLRD_ER_cont.aspx
http://www.fresnobee.com/news/business/personal-finance/article21202773.html
http://ww2.kqed.org/stateofhealth/2015/03/24/on-medi-cal-now-lose-your-house-later/
http://pennythots.com/2013/11/01/beware-obamacare-medicaid-warning-for-low-income-folks-55-and-over/
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/20/local/la-me-obamacare-cost-recovery-20140220
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/medicaid-bill-doesnt-go-away-die/
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Medi-Cal-works-as-invisible-loan-for-those-over-55-5677525.php
Folks, there is so much more to the Covered CA/Medi-Cal debacle, but I think the above is enough to digest . . . for now. Many of these agents’ experiences with their clients’ CC accounts mirror my own experiences. Of course, poor Joe and Suzy 6p signing up on the exchanges themselves for a healthplan have absolutely no clue what they’re getting into … that is, until their first experience with being “bumped” from their plan and/or stopped and restarted on their plan 1-2 months out … involuntarily, of course.
No one ever mentioned when the ACA was being “sold” to us that it could turn into practically a full-time job with multiple ticklers close at hand for the typical CC enrollee to make sure they are still covered week to week and month to month …. but it certainly can be.
Enjoy …. and take your time … I know it’s a lot to digest all at once. You too, carli. Watch, read and learn, LOL . . . :=0
ParticipantOkay, SK. Can we agree that “Medicaid” is not actually “insurance” and is instead a government-run entitlement program, initially put in place to serve the “poor?”
I’m simply stating here that Medi-Cal expansion has adversely affected thousands of middle-income individuals in CA who signed up in good faith for a marketplace plan on the exchange and it continues to do so.
In addition, Medi-Cal had no business being expanded when it didn’t even have enough providers to serve the ~2.7M CA residents who were on it pre-ACA (2013 and prior). As of this summer, there will apparently be nearly five times that many Medi-Cal enrollees while providers continue to drop like flies from the program AS WELL AS from the marketplace exchange plans which are NOT EPOs.
To the extent that the ACA has been “successful,” it was very likely the millions of Medicaid/Medi-Cal signups who have provided the “numbers” to make it so (the bulk of exchange enrollees in those states which adopted “expanded Medicaid”).
I have never implied anywhere that I feared Americans would lose jobs because of the ACA. If anything, the ACA has created thousands of just-over-minimum wage jobs in the (underserved) Lodi/Sac/Chico areas of CA in the form of CC telephone “representatives” and back office positions. That fact in and of itself doesn’t make these workers competent or even remotely aware of the nuances of how their “system” works or how to fix any of the multitude of real-life problems their “system” causes enrollees every single day. It only makes them “employed” … for now.
Oh, and btw, I have never blamed “Obama” for the failings of the ACA machinery on the ground. I lay the blame solely in the lap of the Dems in Congress who hurriedly pushed it through without understanding the ramifications of what exactly was in the (volumimous) law. The President simply rubber-stamped on March 23, 2010, what Congress had already passed, as you previously stated.
ParticipantOnce again, SK, you are still attempting to deflect the actual issues I brought up re: the inner workings of the ACA in CA, which obviously you have no experience with, being that you reside in AZ. You are doing this through your thinly-veiled insult diatribe towards me. It appears that you have been using outrageous insults in an attempt to get me to stop discussing what needs to be discussed about how the ACA actually “works” (or doesn’t work) in CA. I would not have expected that of you, of all Piggs. If I’m reading your posts of this morning correctly, you’re essentially stating that you knew all along that the ACA was expressly designed to place the masses on Medicaid whether they wanted to be there … or not. But your posts yesterday and prior omitted that dirty little secret by glossing over the facts. For example, last night, you posted only the figures you perceived were already enrolled in CC marketplace healthplans (1.7M, an erroneous figure). But you (conveniently) “failed” to come up with current Medi-Cal enrollee statistics, which are a much bigger piece of the ACA pie in CA. Many of the rest of your previous posts appeared to be an attempt to “sugar coat” the ACA in the eyes of the masses and you wouldn’t be the first one to do that.
No worries. I’m way beyond used to these shenanigans at this late date. I’ll be trying to help in any way I can to get SB-33 signed by Gov Brown and then we won’t be having this discussion anymore because the incentive for CC to keep repeatedly harassing CC enrollees about their incomes and the incentive of Medi-Cal workers to change CC enrollees’ (self-reported) income figures in CALHEERS will largely be gone … especially as it applies to the over-55 crowd.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl][quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
Ditto for the rest of the states.So this makes the ACA “successful” because it managed to get so many more people “covered” into “expanded” Medicaid/Medi-Cal :=0[/quote]
Yes, exactly. Not a dirty little secret. That was the goal. Get people access to health care. You really have a problem with that?[/quote]The ACA was “touted” by its supporters as “You can keep your healthplan” and, “you can keep your doctors.” Both of which were outright lies because those in-the-know excluded the fact that many carriers wouldn’t want to have anything to do with it, nor would all the best providers.
The ACA was presented to the masses as “healthplans you purchase,” NOT Medicaid! In CA, the expanded Medicaid program is nothing but a snare for the middle income, asset rich individual over the age of 55 who does NOT want to be on the (overburdened) Medicaid/Medi-Cal system … whether or not they have significant assets to lien. These people have been paying their own bills all of their lives and do NOT want to be on “forced public aid.” Especially a program shoved down their throats as “mandatory” to join but oh, we forgot to tell you that your $630 month “dues” will be deferred until after your death so no worries :=0
Many in this segment don’t need a high income and don’t wish to withdraw large sums from their retirement accounts as early as their late fifties and early sixties if their homes are paid off and they have monthly pension(s) coming in. Yet the Covered CA snare into Medi-Cal seems to be affecting those who have an AGI under about $33K (after writeoffs are taken). Many in this (now dicey) group are finding themselves duking it out with CC up to 4x year, continually “proving their incomes” to keep their coverage … until a few months down the road when they’ll be asked to prove it again.
This is my main beef with the “system” in CA. Add to that the general incompetence of CC staff and it is a recipe for disaster for those who paid their premiums on time and thought they were covered but actually are not and end up needing to access care during the times they were “bumped” from their plan.[/quote]
Because you thought the ACA was one thing, doesn’t mean that’s what it was designed to do. It was designed to get people coverage. It succeeded. If you only remember hearing “you can keep your plan and your doctor if you want to”, I suspect it’s because that’s a really convenient criticism of a black president, and you never actually heard those words until they were proven to be a mistake. If this sounds to you like I’m accusing you of being a racist, no apologies. It is what it is.
As I’ve said at least twice before, nobody is required to get Medicaid coverage. Nobody is required to disclose financial information. That’s all voluntary. And it’s not income after deductions. It’s modified adjusted gross income. That’s before deducting things like home mortgage interest, property taxes and charitable contributions.
Apparently, you and the people you’ve been advising on how to do it, have a horrible advisor who has no idea what they’re doing. If you did, you would never get wrapped up in the Medicaid issue.[/quote]
Of course, I/we already know all this. This rest of this is hogwash. And for the record, I voted for a (so-called) “black president” …. twice in the last decade. I was actually registered as a Dem from about 1987 to 2012 and am currently registered as an independent and currently leaning towards Cruz or Sanders, should either of them get the nomination.
It looks like “you people” in AZ overwhelmingly voted for Trump and Clinton in your primary …. sorry if that fact disturbs your delicate sensibilities. Go figure :=0
ParticipantAs usual, non-answers, deflection of the issues that “nobody wants to talk about” and more insults from people who do not know anything about me.
carli, I asked you, according to your “expertise,” which, based on your posts, I believe you have, when are the major carriers coming back to the CA individual market to offer plans in all of the metal levels on the open market? Inquiring minds want to know.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
Ditto for the rest of the states.So this makes the ACA “successful” because it managed to get so many more people “covered” into “expanded” Medicaid/Medi-Cal :=0[/quote]
Yes, exactly. Not a dirty little secret. That was the goal. Get people access to health care. You really have a problem with that?[/quote]The ACA was “touted” by its supporters as “You can keep your healthplan” and, “you can keep your doctors.” Both of which were outright lies because those in-the-know excluded the fact that many carriers wouldn’t want to have anything to do with it, nor would all the best providers.
The ACA was presented to the masses as “healthplans you purchase,” NOT Medicaid! In CA, the expanded Medicaid program is nothing but a snare for the middle income, asset rich individual over the age of 55 who does NOT want to be on the (overburdened) Medicaid/Medi-Cal system … whether or not they have significant assets to lien. These people have been paying their own bills all of their lives and do NOT want to be on “forced public aid.” Especially a program shoved down their throats as “mandatory” to join but oh, we forgot to tell you that your $630 month “dues” will be deferred until after your death so no worries :=0
Many in this segment don’t need a high income and don’t wish to withdraw large sums from their retirement accounts as early as their late fifties and early sixties if their homes are paid off and they have monthly pension(s) coming in. Yet the Covered CA snare into Medi-Cal seems to be affecting those who have an AGI under about $33K (after writeoffs are taken). Many in this (now dicey) group are finding themselves duking it out with CC up to 4x year, continually “proving their incomes” to keep their coverage … until a few months down the road when they’ll be asked to prove it again.
This is my main beef with the “system” in CA. Add to that the general incompetence of CC staff and it is a recipe for disaster for those who paid their premiums on time and thought they were covered but actually are not and end up needing to access care during the times they were “bumped” from their plan.
Participantcarli, perhaps with your “expertise” in the field, here, can you tell us when those six carriers who defected CA at the end of 2013 will again begin offering a full panopoly of health plans to the (off-exchange) individual market of “Region 19” (SD County, CA)? I’m all ears.
Participant[quote=livinincali][quote=joec]In CA, I think United Healthcare has the smallest share of customers out of all the exchange insurance companies…
If they left, maybe they lose 1% of customers? It could also be a cost cutting move since they aren’t really playing in the state anyways…
That said, I think Blue Shield made the most in 2014 from a latimes article I read…so some companies were able to make money, of course, Blue Shield and Blue Cross/Anthem are bad IMO.[/quote]
There’s been other defections. Blue Cross left New Mexico this year and they had half of the enrolled population. There’s no longer any PPO plans in the Houston area. There’s less offerings in the Platinum and Gold plans. I think it’s too early to say how things shake out but it wouldn’t surprise me if you end up with one provider/plan choices in some markets, and possibly no provider at all. Or options so limited than they are kinda worthless.
Right now you have the most experienced insurance companies operating in the space, if they leave because they can’t make enough money, then you might be left with no providers or inexperienced providers that fail anyways. It’s certainly the biggest risk for the the law. It’s more of a risk than the republicans winning the white house.[/quote]Yes, livinincali, this happened in OK as well. BCBS (the largest PPO in the state) narrowed their network on the exchange plans to the extent that in many suburban, semi-rural and rural areas, there are no in-network primary care providers at all and the ones that are listed as “in-network” are overburdened. Of course, they don’t mind taking their planholders premiums every month but they have little to nothing to offer them in return in the way of non-emergency services.
Of course, the Healthecare.gov exchange initially offered a few “fly-by-night” carriers (again, with very narrow networks) which are no longer operating and smaller carriers to choose from but those plans weren’t PPOs.
-
AuthorPosts
