The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 259
  1. #161
    Join Date
    Mar. 6, 2007
    Posts
    142

    Default

    So in the pre-Obamacare healthcare situation, how would one of limited means (i.e., not supported by their parents or a trust fund or the like) go about becoming something like a professional horse trainer, for example? Your typical aspiring trainer would take some very low or non-paying working student type positions, which almost certainly do not have health care benefits, and "pay your dues" and learn until you're good enough to get your own business. Even then I suspect it's hard for a lot of pros to afford health insurance. What are those poeple supposed to do? I think a lot of them give up and just get a desk job of some kind so they have benefits. That is the responsible thing to do, for sure, but do we want to live somewhere where so many choices are taken away due to health care costs, or the cost of school (another topic, yes)? To those working in the horse industry, what to do you for your health care?

    In talking to friends who live in Australia, New Zealand and the UK, they are so grateful that they don't have to worry about it like we do, and it does affect some major life decisions that they make.

    And to the person who said Obamacare is cheaper because we are paying for it, we are paying for it anyway, and it is more expensive when it's an ER visit or an ambulance ride.


    10 members found this post helpful.

  2. #162
    Join Date
    May. 21, 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by horsefaerie View Post
    hAlterhorse, ONCE AGAIN, I did not say she was asking for handouts.

    I thought education, including learning to read for comprehension, was free.

    A moot point since I "disgust her" for being a voice of reason.

    I didn't say that YOU said she was. But the poster who I QUOTED - who is not you - unless you and prairiewind2 are the same poster - did, along with several others. Maybe this is the case since you address me directly and then say "ONCE AGAIN" indicating you've already said this to me - and I don't see any posts from you (other than this one) since I started posting on this thread.

    When there is a quote from a specific poster included - generally the response provided is to the quoted post. Reading comprehension, as you said.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  3. #163
    Join Date
    Jul. 28, 2006
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by axl View Post
    Holy cow if I lived in Ontario my income tax last year would have been $1109 instead of $2871 and my health insurance $300 instead of $2269!!!!!!
    It can't be that cold there, right?
    lol, not quite axl. Those are your provincial (state) taxes. Now you have to add on your federal taxes. Here is our federal tax rate chart:

    http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.html

    But yes, there seems to be a possibility that even though I'm taxed in total at about 40-50%, I may be paying less in taxes than you may be, totalling your taxes/health insurance.

    eta: I just pulled up my 2010 returns. I paid $8,936.92 in 2010, in provincial/federal taxes.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #164
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2002
    Location
    Henrico, NC 36 30'50.49" N 77 50'17.47" W
    Posts
    5,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JenJ View Post
    OP may have made an error in judgment to work in a high risk industry without insurance because a freak accident resulting in 6 figure medical bills is conceivable.

    But on her specific facts, it may have been irrelevant if the deductible had been almost as much as the surgical cost. I am Canadian and I dont pretend to understand all of this but what happens in such a case? If one has insurance with a high deductible, does the insured pay the deductible up front to the hospital and then the insurer pays the rest? If so, OP still would not have gotten the care she needed in a timely manner.
    I can answer this because we have personal experience with it. My wife had breast cancer. Stage 1, very early caught, simple surgery, chemo and radiation, 7 years ago, total cost 32,000 after it was all over. Cancer free since. Our health insurance was costing us less than 200 a month with 10,000 deductible.

    We had to pay the 10,000 up front before they would even do blood work. Or rather, what was left of the 10,000 after we had paid for previous tests and Dr.'s visits up to that point. We even had to make a special trip to make the payment, so they could check that everything was clear before they proceeded.

    Every year after that, our monthly insurance premium went up to the point 7 years later was 1018 plus change each month. If we had ever missed a payment, they would have dropped us in a heartbeat. Now we are well off enough that we can weather about anything that happens to us medically, but we would be out on the streets in a few years. Fortunately, we are old enough that we would have some income from Social Security after those few years and medical care by Medicare-another program that half the country didn't want to "pay for" back when it was first being planned.

    Under Obamacare, since they can no longer factor pre-existing conditons, our monthly cost is 269 with the same 10,000 deductible.

    Some say they shouldn't be paying the difference for us.

    Romneycare, that he had the same people come up with that Obama got to prepare the original Obamacare package, worked because it has the mandate. Without the mandate, it is still an incomplete package. The mandate was filibustered out. Why do so few people understand this???? There can be no across the aisles anything, as long as either side has one answer for anything-No. Please check how much time is wasted by the current filibuster methods.

    When you force insurers to accept everyone, without forcing healthy people to buy insurance, you encourage people to go without insurance when they're healthy, and buy it as soon as they get sick. The pool of the insured gets sicker and sicker, premiums rise higher and higher, this in turn makes healthy people even more reluctant to buy insurance, and ultimately you end up with middle-class people unable to afford insurance at all. This, in fact, is what has happened in every state that has tried guaranteed issue without a mandate, which is why Mitt Romney enthusiastically included a mandate when he created a universal health-insurance system in Massachusetts.

    Those who say they don't want to pay extra for someone who gets sick must be really simple minded. Maybe had their intelligence dulled by listening to too much propaganda TV. Maybe they are absolutely sure that they will never get sick or injured to the point that an insurance company could keep going up on their premium to the point that either they couldn't pay it, or if they missed a payment they could be dropped. I don't understand how any person of average intelligence feels that was a good system. Not a single one of my smart friends, who are a lot smarter than I am, believe that the old system was anything but stupid.

    We are the only modern country in the world who has not figured this out. It's really disappointing, but the main problem in the world is average intelligence level, balanced against mainly greed.

    Let's get it done, behind us, and get on to other things. Vote the obstructionists out of office.
    Last edited by Tom King; Nov. 5, 2012 at 04:48 PM.


    17 members found this post helpful.

  5. #165
    Join Date
    Mar. 1, 2003
    Location
    Happily in Canada
    Posts
    4,719

    Default

    There was a pretty thorough discussion and comparison of Canadian income taxes versus health a few OT days ago.

    I recall we didn't come to any leap-at-you conclusions from that. Can't remember if we included consumption taxes (e.g. tax on gasoline & groceries) though I think that would make a pretty big difference. Of course, cost of living (depending on your region) also makes a big difference.

    Regardless, I am so happy to be a Canadian citizen with the health system we have (despite any flaws) every time I read one of these discussions on OT day.
    Blugal

    You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng


    2 members found this post helpful.

  6. #166
    Join Date
    Jan. 27, 2003
    Posts
    1,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FalseImpression View Post
    Me too... and I pay nowhere in the 50% bracket in taxes.
    I broke my ankle between Christmas and New Year in 2008. I signed in at the ER at 1 10 pm, was on the operating table at 3 pm... home by 8 pm. had follow up appointments with the ortho surgeon at the hospital several weeks, change of cast, etc. Total cost out of my pocket? $0. My insurance paid for my physio.

    I really don't understand what is so great about a country who can't take care of its citizens and would rather they go broke and suffer than share the "wealth". So sad and so selfish.

    Another Canadian here. I love our socialized health care system. It's not perfect, but I nor my family have never had a problem receiving the care we need. I don't pay income taxes at all (still in graduate school) and I love the fact I don't have to worry about holding down two jobs, while in school just to afford health care. Instead I devote my time to my research in biofuels.

    reading some of these replies I can't believe the lack of compassion!!! I have no problem with my taxes (once I start paying) going to cover "other" peoples health care. Those "other" people, are my best friends dad, my cousins best friend, my co workers mother, my neighbours. We're all part of the Canadian community and family. Where is your sense of community America??!?!


    8 members found this post helpful.

  7. #167
    Join Date
    Jan. 27, 2003
    Posts
    1,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wendy View Post
    well, not really. I've experienced the canadian system, and frankly it sucks. Many people wait endless months to get the most basic of care- it's not unusual for someone in the canadian system to spend 12-16 months disabled and suffering waiting for their "elective" surgery- and what do the rich canadians do? they fly south to get treated.
    No one I have ever known or any people my friends know have ever had this experience with the Canadian health care system. People do not spend 12-16 months disabled here. Will they have to wait for knee sugergy? sure. but that didn't stop the person I knew from riding their horse. The surgery requirementmust not of been that urgent. No do they not spend "endless" months waiting for basic healthcare.


    8 members found this post helpful.

  8. #168
    Join Date
    Mar. 1, 2003
    Location
    Happily in Canada
    Posts
    4,719

    Default

    Originally Posted by wendy
    well, not really. I've experienced the canadian system, and frankly it sucks. Many people wait endless months to get the most basic of care- it's not unusual for someone in the canadian system to spend 12-16 months disabled and suffering waiting for their "elective" surgery- and what do the rich canadians do? they fly south to get treated.
    I don't know anyone who's flown to the States for care. I do however know of a Canadian who spends lots of time in the States, who came home to have earlier diagnostics and surgery on a knee. She could afford to pay one of our private clinics for it. Does that hurt me, the less-rich Canadian? I'm not entirely sure, but I think if someone can afford to have faster care and wants to pay for it, that just takes them out of the line the rest of us would be waiting in.

    The danger, as I see it, is of the best surgeons etc. wanting to work only in private practice. I don't want a two-tiered system like that. I'm not sure where (if?) there's a balance. It's probably a good thing, overall, to have the politicians and their families be in the exact same health system as everyone else.
    Blugal

    You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng


    1 members found this post helpful.

  9. #169
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2005
    Location
    Black & white cow country
    Posts
    728

    Default

    That's the thing about Obamacare...the way it is written is so botched up it is just going to make a bigger mess of our healthcare system. Either go with socialized medicine or don't...but don't go half-a$$ed and pretend like it's going to solve anything.

    I'm actually on the fence about socialized medicine. I can see where there is a great need for it and I can see how our current system really sucks and many people fall through the cracks, either due to lack of proper planning or whatever. But I also think our system could be greatly improved without resorting to government-run healthcare. Canada seems fully capable of having a government-run healthcare program, and if our government could do that I'd be more in favor of it. But our government screws up everything it touches, so no, I do not trust them with my health care.
    Happiness is the sweet smell of horses, leather, and hay.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  10. #170
    Join Date
    Mar. 3, 2010
    Posts
    1,421

    Default

    /\this.
    “Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.”
    ― Albert Einstein



  11. #171
    Join Date
    Dec. 11, 2006
    Location
    Cheesehead in Loudoun Co, VA
    Posts
    2,389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HighFlyinBey++ View Post
    To all those chastising the OP for her priorities, think about this: my almost-23 y/o son takes classes and works full-time. He is covered under my health insurance thanks to Obamacare. I have access to his checking account and can see his weekly payroll deposits. After he sets aside money for his rent, utilities and state-mandated car insurance, he is left with $35 per check. For everything: food, TP, his allergy-induced asthma medications...

    $35 per week.

    If it weren't for me & Obamacare, he would be in the OP's shoes.
    Sweet! My first "bad" post! I see your thumbs down and raise you one finger and one amazing young man.
    I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right
    Violence doesn't end violence. It extends it. Break the cycle.


    7 members found this post helpful.

  12. #172
    Join Date
    Jul. 20, 2007
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom King View Post
    I can answer this because we have personal experience with it. My wife had breast cancer. Stage 1, very early caught, simple surgery, chemo and radiation, 7 years ago, total cost 32,000 after it was all over. Cancer free since. Our health insurance was costing us less than 200 a month with 10,000 deductible.

    We had to pay the 10,000 up front before they would even do blood work. Or rather, what was left of the 10,000 after we had paid for previous tests and Dr.'s visits up to that point. We even had to make a special trip to make the payment, so they could check that everything was clear before they proceeded.

    Every year after that, our monthly insurance premium went up to the point 7 years later was 1018 plus change each month. If we had ever missed a payment, they would have dropped us in a heartbeat. Now we are well off enough that we can weather about anything that happens to us medically, but we would be out on the streets in a few years. Fortunately, we are old enough that we would have some income from Social Security after those few years and medical care by Medicare-another program that half the country didn't want to "pay for" back when it was first being planned.

    Under Obamacare, since they can no longer factor pre-existing conditons, our monthly cost is 269 with the same 10,000 deductible.

    Some say they shouldn't be paying the difference for us.

    Romneycare, that he had the same people come up with that Obama got to prepare the original Obamacare package, worked because it has the mandate. Without the mandate, it is still an incomplete package. The mandate was filibustered out. Why do so few people understand this???? There can be no across the aisles anything, as long as either side has one answer for anything-No. Please check how much time is wasted by the current filibuster methods.

    When you force insurers to accept everyone, without forcing healthy people to buy insurance, you encourage people to go without insurance when they're healthy, and buy it as soon as they get sick. The pool of the insured gets sicker and sicker, premiums rise higher and higher, this in turn makes healthy people even more reluctant to buy insurance, and ultimately you end up with middle-class people unable to afford insurance at all. This, in fact, is what has happened in every state that has tried guaranteed issue without a mandate, which is why Mitt Romney enthusiastically included a mandate when he created a universal health-insurance system in Massachusetts.

    Those who say they don't want to pay extra for someone who gets sick must be really simple minded. Maybe had their intelligence dulled by listening to too much propaganda TV. Maybe they are absolutely sure that they will never get sick or injured to the point that an insurance company could keep going up on their premium to the point that either they couldn't pay it, or if they missed a payment they could be dropped. I don't understand how any person of average intelligence feels that was a good system. Not a single one of my smart friends, who are a lot smarter than I am, believe that the old system was anything but stupid.

    We are the only modern country in the world who has not figured this out. It's really disappointing, but the main problem in the world is average intelligence level, balanced against mainly greed.

    Let's get it done, behind us, and get on to other things. Vote the obstructionists out of office.
    thank you for this very sensible post!


    2 members found this post helpful.

  13. #173
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2007
    Location
    Burbank, California
    Posts
    721

    Default

    So, theoretically, the OP hasn't been paying health insurance for many years, and got out of the injury for...under $5000? Which will all be reimbursed by the car insurance?

    If a cheap policy (which probably only would have covered 1/2 the cost) is about $120/month for that age bracket, figure $1500/year. So you've been saving $1500 year for x years? By the numbers, you may have come out ahead, because you may have actually had to pay more for your policy.

    I've never heard of a doctor not taking someone on a cash pay basis, certainly for something that is under $10,000. The one year I got sick, I had a very high ($7500) deductible, so I ended up paying about $3k out of pocket. I just set up a payment plan and made payments until it was paid off.

    That's a horrible story, and I'm glad the OP was able to borrow the money, but in my limited California experience (ok, it isn't that limited, I'm in charge of my entire family's issues) I've never had any kind of procedure refused, insured or no.

    As far as the Canadian health system - I've just been diagnosed with an autoimmune disease and been connected up with lots of others with this, many in Canada. They have a very, very hard time getting in to see their specialists in any kind of timely manner (if you're having a problem with it, you need a doc + meds within about a week or you're in big trouble) and I'm hearing all kinds of stories. Anecdotal, for sure, but I'll repeat here what I said there:

    I'd rather the bankrupt and healthy than have free (well, paid for by an insane tax rate) healthcare and be waiting for treatment and sick. At a 50% tax rate, I wouldn't bother working - if you make $20, you only get to keep $10? What's the point? With student loans on that there would be nothing left. But that's an argument for another day


    2 members found this post helpful.

  14. #174
    Join Date
    Jul. 20, 2007
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karosel View Post
    No one I have ever known or any people my friends know have ever had this experience with the Canadian health care system. People do not spend 12-16 months disabled here. Will they have to wait for knee sugergy? sure. but that didn't stop the person I knew from riding their horse. The surgery requirementmust not of been that urgent. No do they not spend "endless" months waiting for basic healthcare.
    yes, and a good friend of mine here just waited 14 months to get her knee surgery. Apparently, loss of mobility in a senior is not something that needs to be addressed immediately. Never mind, that loss of mobility is a leading cause of morbidity in the elderly. This healthy active senior could not get approval for a knee replacement for 14 months! In the mean time, she lost condition because she could not be as active as she had been. At this point, she might never get it back. They were waiting for it to be bad enough to warrant replacement..... I think not being able to walk qualifies.



  15. #175
    Join Date
    Dec. 11, 2006
    Location
    Cheesehead in Loudoun Co, VA
    Posts
    2,389

    Default

    I'd rather the bankrupt and healthy than have free (well, paid for by an insane tax rate) healthcare and be waiting for treatment and sick. At a 50% tax rate, I wouldn't bother working - if you make $20, you only get to keep $10? What's the point? With student loans on that there would be nothing left. But that's an argument for another day
    You cannot put student loans on a bankruptcy. You can't EVER get away from them. Even dead, they'll come after your family.

    Apparently, loss of mobility in a senior is not something that needs to be addressed immediately.
    My dad contacted a personal injury lawyer after his post-surgical complications took his hands. At first they were drooling over the potential case, but once the firm ran the numbers of how much it would cost them to get the proper depositions and such vs. what they decided my father's hands were worth, he was told "It's not worth our time." Who cares how much the hospital was at fault. Who cares that the man can't bathe himself or use the bathroom alone. Who cares that my parents must find the money to cover what their insurance doesn't even though it was by no means Dad's fault. Dad's independence was nothing more than $$$ to that firm. And he's not yet a "senior."
    I'm not arguing, I'm just explaining why I'm right
    Violence doesn't end violence. It extends it. Break the cycle.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  16. #176
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2007
    Location
    Burbank, California
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HighFlyinBey++ View Post
    You cannot put student loans on a bankruptcy. You can't EVER get away from them. Even dead, they'll come after your family.
    I didn't mean to insinuate that you could...I was talking about the medical bills making a person bankrupt. Also, at least in the US, your student loans go away after you die.

    From http://studentaid.ed.gov/repay-loans...eath-discharge :

    "If you, the borrower, die, then your federal student loans will be discharged. If you are a parent PLUS loan borrower, then the loan may be discharged if you die, or if the student on whose behalf you obtained the loan dies."

    ETA: Which is why, quite intentionally, I only pay the minimums on my student loans and don't have them as a very high "pay off" priority. They're all current, and I pay what I'm required to, but I don't let them worry me much. First is other debt, my house, and savings and all of those things. If I outlive my student loans, fine, if I don't - oh well.
    "Look, I'm trying not to test the durability of the arena with my face!" (Because only GM can do that.)


    1 members found this post helpful.

  17. #177
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2007
    Location
    Burbank, California
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HighFlyinBey++ View Post
    My dad contacted a personal injury lawyer after his post-surgical complications took his hands. At first they were drooling over the potential case, but once the firm ran the numbers of how much it would cost them to get the proper depositions and such vs. what they decided my father's hands were worth, he was told "It's not worth our time." Who cares how much the hospital was at fault. Who cares that the man can't bathe himself or use the bathroom alone. Who cares that my parents must find the money to cover what their insurance doesn't even though it was by no means Dad's fault. Dad's independence was nothing more than $$$ to that firm. And he's not yet a "senior."
    Well, all litigation has to be a cost-benefit analysis. If it would have cost more to file suit than what you would have won back in a successful trial, maybe that's the call they have to make. Attorneys have to pay bills too, and (although I don't do personal injury or medical malpractice) if the firm, which is a business, was going to lose money on the case...then they couldn't take it.

    Now, that is a terrible injustice, and there are other ways. Complaints to the medical board, hospital, claims on their general insurance, pro-bono agencies that may be willing to take such a case on for free...where a legitimate case of injury exists it should never go without pursuit. Also, that's just 1 firm's opinion. Some firms would probably be willing to at least start the suit for a flat fee, and see where it went from there. Also, I bet there is some binding arbitration clause in that paperwork somewhere - and arbitration is way faster than litigation. Might be to your advantage to look for other avenues. With the law, there is always a way!
    "Look, I'm trying not to test the durability of the arena with my face!" (Because only GM can do that.)



  18. #178
    Join Date
    Jul. 28, 2006
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fun Size View Post
    I'd rather the bankrupt and healthy than have free (well, paid for by an insane tax rate) healthcare and be waiting for treatment and sick. At a 50% tax rate, I wouldn't bother working - if you make $20, you only get to keep $10? What's the point? With student loans on that there would be nothing left. But that's an argument for another day
    I suppose that's one way of looking at it. Driving home from work tonight, I realized I also forgot to mention that in addition to my own personal taxes, I pay also pay corporate tax (I own my own business). I took a quick look at my dh's returns, and in 2010, he paid $23,000 in taxes.

    Why do we do it? Well - I have a great house, 2 cars, a horse and a pony, kid shows on the A circuit, 2 dogs (wouldn't mind adding a cat), we are currently visiting different universities for her for next year (which we will pay for, so she'll have no student loans), shopping for a 3rd car for the kid, AND I have the satisfaction in knowing that my neighbors, even if they make less than we do, have the ability to receive basic health care should they need.

    I sincerely believe that basic health care for all, just like education for all, benefits the entire society.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  19. #179
    Join Date
    Feb. 16, 2010
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    801

    Default

    Maybe things are drastically different state to state, but I didn't have comprehensive insurance for years. It didn't make financial sense. It was cheaper to pay out of pocket to see the doctor on the few occasions I needed to go. I just bought a $45 a month catastrophic health insurance policy to cover emergency surgeries and diseases. It was very affordable. Do insurance companies in states outside of Florida not offer these plans? I also put $50 a month into a Health Savings Account.

    Nobody else should be responsible for your living or health expenses. Being an adult isn't that hard. Why is someone who wants to keep what they earn considered more greedy than those who expect a handout for everything from health care to food to utilities to housing?

    We all make.choices and suffer the consequences good or bad.
    To thoriginal.poster, you should look into a catastrophic plan. And put a little.money aside each month for an ergency fund. Maybe find an ambulance chase lawyer to discuss your individual story with.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  20. #180
    Join Date
    Feb. 4, 2006
    Posts
    2,954

    Default

    I love people's inability to read.

    I have hired an attorney and did so two weeks into this debacle, because I wasn't getting the care I needed. AN ATTORNEY HAS BEEN HIRED. Not sure how to make that more clear.


    1 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. broken wrist
    By charismaryllis in forum Equestrians with Disabilities
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Apr. 22, 2012, 05:47 PM
  2. broken wrist--healing, riding and experiences?
    By ayrabz in forum Off Course
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Mar. 26, 2012, 09:45 AM
  3. What to do? Broken Wrist
    By ridingmomof3 in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Feb. 8, 2011, 02:17 AM
  4. Getting back in the saddle after broken wrist
    By tothepointe in forum Equestrians with Disabilities
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Dec. 5, 2010, 08:54 PM
  5. broken wrist
    By MH.indy in forum Eventing
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Mar. 9, 2009, 11:29 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •