Wednesday, May 25, 2011

May Miscellany

1. Back to the subject of health care, I was appalled to read this Politifact article wherein it turns out that Newt Gingrich was correct in pointing out that a substantial number of folks making at least $75,000 a year (21% of all Americans with no health insurance) nonetheless do not have health coverage. Notwithstanding the families like the Dubinskys who cannot get health insurance (or, at least, cannot get it easily), that still leaves a whole lotta folks who don't see health coverage as a primary budget need. What planet are they on?

2. I've got a post in this week's Carnival of Personal Finance, hosted by My Personal Finance Journey. Lots of good reading, and a glimpse into some hotel rooms where Grace will NOT be staying any time soon!

3. It's Memorial Day week-end coming up, so the likelihood of me making another post before next week is not high. I hope everyone enjoys the holiday.


Sharon said...

Have a great weekend, Grace! :)!

The Borrower said...

I just wanted to say, I think that the statistics that claim folks don't want to make healthcare a priority are skewed. We are in this group and buy our own insurance for our family of 6. Our insurance covers NOTHING. It is basically available for catastrophic things, which they find reasons not to cover costs. So, basically when I was asked my income and do I have insurance in a poll, that I think went in conjunction with this - I said no. Because I pay for it, but receive absolutely NO benefits.

Florence said...

Borrower, Just think how nice it will be for seniors to receive vouchers to pay into insurance companies and then receive benefits similar to yours. Not.

Grace. said...

Florence, I completely agree with you, though I think The Borrower was reacting more to the proposition that people making more than $75,000 annually were deliberately NOT buying health insurance (which is how I read that statistic, though the Dubinskys and now, The Borrower would beg to differ). My comments are directed at anyone in that fiscal group who is making a deliberate decision NOT to be insured.

Anonymous said...

People who make $75,000...people individual making that much might be considered affluent, possibly without kids, without debt (how many of us do not have any debt really), so hourly that is slightly over $36an hour before taxes...even at $525 a month for health insurance (the best plan available in my state) seems doable....however $75,000 for two people in a household, possibly with kids, well that screams middle class to me. Don't you think?

Grace. said...

Anon--I agree that $75,000 a year is definitely middle class, but it's a substantial amount of money for any but the largest of families--certainly enough to cover some level of health insurance even at the currently rediculous prices. If one can't get coverage--I understand that. But to be able to get coverage and not do it? I have a harder time with that. I consider health insurance to be a priority expenditure even if I do think it costs too much.

Anonymous said...

Other people have different priorities for their money and if buying health care isn't one of them, how can we judge them? Nothing is ever black and white. What is a priority for you may not be a priority for someone else, and before you say you don't want to have a government system to supplement health insurance for people, well there are tons of government programs that help people, public housing programs, social security, childcare, etc...why not healthcare? What's the big issue with not having some kind of national plan? I personally think it is a slap against the middle class. The poor don't pay taxes, the rich don't pay enough and the middle class foot the bill...and if that is going to happen, at least let the taxes go to healthcare as a service...just my thought on the subject. :)

Grace. said...

I don't mind the government having 'requirements,' particularly for things that greatly impact ME--such as requiring auto insurance as a condition of owning a vehicle. Or health insurance. But I do get your point--and where to draw the lines gets fuzzy. I'm fine with the government requiring and/or providing health insurance, but it gets stickier if the government wants to contol one's eathing habits or weight or lifestyle issues like smoking.

Anonymous said...

Agreed, the line is fuzzy. As much as I do not want someone to tell me what to eat, I'm sure there are others that do not want to hear how many children to have. :)

MasterPo said...

MasterPo agrees with you about #1.

People just don't see it as a "need", that "someone" will pay for them.

With that said, MasterPo went to the regular last week mainly to get a minor RX refilled. If the doc spent 6 minutes with MasterPo, MasterPo would be surprised.

Today MasterPo received the co-pay bill and was shocked at what the doc charged the insurance company for that visit!!!

MasterPo is definately in the wrong business.

MasterPo said...

Borrower - What's wrong with just covering "catastophic things"?

Where is it written that your annual checkup (for example) should be paid by insurance instead of yourself?

Imagine if your car insurance worked the same way.

Why doesn't your car insurance pay for oil changes? New tires and wiper blades? A tune up each year?

Now imagine how much your car insurance would be if it did pay for those things!!

JBO said...

I don't have any problem with ridding ourselves of a nationalized health care IF we start tomorrow with those on Medicare/ Medicaid. The REALITY is that my mother, who can afford to self insure, along with every other senior I know- sits back and cries that universal health will kill the country- while she goes in for another surgery.

She is 80. My nephew is 30 and has gone bankrupt for medical issues that are fully covered by Medicare.
If we start with the people who are on it now- the cry would be a lashing and congress would be disbanded.

Master Po - do you plan on Medicare? Do you have an elderly parent who currently is on Medicare?

Grace, if you don't like that the government can tell you not to smoke- then look at private health insurance who currently charges twice for smokers. the time is coming for obesity and birth control as well.

BTW- I am covered until 65 with a great health care. After that I am worried---since I am not yet 55. Paul Ryan thinks that $8,000 a year should cover it. That hardly covers mom's meds.

MasterPo said...

JBO - Why are you worried? If your 80 y/o granny can "afford" to pay for her own health insurance (yea, right!) you can too!

If an insurance company wants to charge you more for smoking or being overweight or whatever you have a great power: Go some place else! Yes, MasterPo knows it isn't that easy but it is an option. But when the gov tells you to do this or that under penalty of taxation, fines or even imprisonment what do you do? Leave the country?! (probably would be made illegal too)