Name:	lucky67 -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/22/2016 9:08:51 AM

Sears to close 78 stores this summer; Caterpillar sales slow dramatically--company slashes 2016-2017 sales/profit forecast; Intel to slash 12,000 + jobs--

news flash:1]more companies hiring temp workers so they can avoid obama care regulations; 2] Kanye West found alive in home; 3] still have fingers crossed WEST, Goldberg, sharpton, Mayher, will be turning in their passports when Trump is inaugurated

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/22/2016 12:26:14 PM

Not to disappoint you - but Sears has been hanging on by a thread for years.  Catapillar has also been struggling for quite a few years now, thanks to increased competition by overseas manufacturers like Kamatsu.  In my opinion, things started going down hill for Sears in the advent of bank credit cards.  Sears used to offer long term financing of durable goods and when bank credit cards came into being, they faced more competition from stores that could undersell them.  Additionally, they made a bad financial error in aquiring K-Mart. 

I can remember at least 12 years ago, a rep from Catapillar telling me that they were getting their butts kicked in the overseas market, due to Kamatsu and Hatachi (?) 

Sad that we lost Prince but kept the Kardashians, Kayne West was found still alive, and I think it will be a better country when all those who have said they will leave the country is Trump is elected, finally do a mass exodus.  Poor Canada...

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/22/2016 12:41:22 PM

P.S.  I think that employers are hiring temporary workers, not as much to just avoid Obamacare, but also because they don't have to offer any benefits at all, and don't have to give them 40 hours a week.  The idea is that you can give work to a group of people that have one skill set you need at this point, and them let them go and hire another skill set that you may need later. 

Funny, but I remember reading an article about 15 years ago, that predicted that people would all become "independent" contractors for their careers - responsible for their own health insurance, retirement planning, and moving from temporary job to temporary job.  The point of the article was that "this will happen, get ready for it" - keep your skills updated and be ready for it.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/22/2016 10:03:12 PM (updated 4/22/2016 10:29:32 PM)

Hound I heard an economist making a similar point just a few days ago.  More and more individuals will become private contractors providing their own health insurance and other benefits.  His assessment was that this is generally a good thing and simply part of the evolution of the capitalist system. He even pointed out that this trend not only is becoming standard for at least part of the services needed by many major companies, but have led to a huge increase in "work at home" jobs and entire new businesses such as Uber.

One of the best things that could happen to the country, it's economy, health care and the cost of healthcare would be if it became illegal for employers to provide health insurance and required that all citizens obtained health insurance even it a government subsidy was required to for them to afford.  I advocated this on many occasions during the ACA debate.

A major reason healthcare is so much more expensive in this country than the rest of the economically advanced nations is that our healthcare system is an insurance system rather than a health provision system.  With Microsoft and GE and Wells Fargo "providing" insurance to hundreds of thousand employees it becomes a bureaucratic hassle with very little incentive for savings or competition for coverage.  If every individual became a "customer" to the insurance companies they would find away to provide the service at a reasonable cost.  That is basically the Canadian system (yeah I know..."Socialized" medicine!!!) and could have been part of ACA if the insurance industry hadn't had so much input.  The Canadian Provinces provide universal insurance to each individual or family through insurance exchanges managed by the health ministry of the Province but contracting with private insurers who bid for the business.

Now as for Obama's economic legacy...if the eco nomy had performed exactly the same as it has over the last 8 years but President McCain or Romney had been in charge it would be referred to as the "New Economic Miracle" by most of this forum!

And, Caterpillar is doing well enough to have recently opened a new half billion dollar 1 million SF manufacturing facility on 250 acres to employ 1500 in Athens GA! Their sales are up in the US but down in the rest of the world where the economies lag.  Overall, the US economy is the best of any major nation in the world today.

Name:	HARRY -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 9:34:36 AM

The economy is much too complex for my simple mind but if the economist you heard has just now figured that out he must have been in a coma for a few years.

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 11:37:48 AM

Bingo!   A huge part of the problem with our health care system is the presence of insurance companies who compete to make a larger profit margin, and that it is designed to be linked to employers thru the use of employee insurance pools up to now.  It never made sense to me that insurance companies couldn't create "pools" of individual subscribers rather than restricting their contracting to individual companies and their employee groups.    Obamacare makes that happen.....now health insurance doesn't have to be tied to a particular employer & job status, it can be portable... allowing workers to make decisions about their careers without fear of losing their coverage when they change jobs.   This makes the US workforce more mobile, and better able to adapt to changes in geographic employment patterns over time.  It was never a good idea that some people had to say 'I have a lousy job and could do better, but I don't dare try to change jobs because of what it might do to my family's health insurance coverage".   

Somehow,  capitalism and healthcare just don't fit together and work the same way as, say, capitalism and industrial production.   When automakers compete, creating more cars & more ways to buy them, the law of supply and demand makes the price of cars go down.   In healthcare, hospitals routinely sue each other to prevent the opening of other hospitals by citing that more hospital beds will make the cost of healthcare go UP... the reverse of what would be predicted by the Law of Supply and Demand.  

I never heard a car dealer say that if another dealership opened down the street, it would make them have to RAISE the price of cars!

As far as Obama's economic legacy goes.... the US automobile industry was saved from bankruptcy & is improving, the US banking & financial sector did not disintegrate because of the interventions of his administration,  & insured healthcare is now available to 11-15 million new subscribers.   Yes, the stock market is fairly stagnant... but the global economy isn't under the control of the US President.  Interesting to note that Obama would be blamed for the decline of Sears Roebuck & lackluster growth of Caterpillar, but not praised for $2 gasoline.... which has put a tremendous amount of money immediately back into the pockets of consumers every day.   Odd that no one is blaming him for that.   

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 11:53:30 AM

I too, have always wondered why they could not create insurance pools that weren't necessarily tied to your employment.  I don't really consider Obamacare to be a real "pool" but rather a menu of healthcare for individuals. My biggest problem with Obamacare is that the deductibles are staggeringly high, which effectlively only makes it insurance against catastrophical illness.  Several people I know have told me about their 3000-4000 dollar deductibles.  So it's not just enough to have affordable insurance premiums, but at the same time the deductibles have to be realistic enough to allow for preventive care as well.  Especially since I just read an article that says that 47% of Americans can not come up with $400 for an emergency, without letting other payments slip, or making a trip to the Payday loan store.  Apparently that is the "new" safety net for what is left of the middle class. 

Name:	HARRY -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 12:24:18 PM

@copperline, when was the last time car prices came down? Also comparing car lots to hospitals is a poor comparison. People have to use those hospital beds. They don't have to buy cars. Also rich and poor use the same hospital beds but don't drive the same kinds of cars.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Insurance Pools
Date:	4/23/2016 1:37:43 PM

In theory, insurance pools for health insurance would appear to be a viable solution to reducing insurance costs for members of the pool. 

As an example, let us establish a pool for Alabama Public Schools Employees. By establishing the pool, we are offering coverage to all the schools in AL and the large number of participnts will resduce the insurance premiums.

Rates are established and each school is offered the opporunity to enroll. The business manager of the school district will compare rates to their current plan. Only those disricts that can save money will join. Those that do not join typically have lower rates due to good claim experience.

Pools attract those who have higher claims and rates continue to rise in future years as schools with good claim experience would find they could obtain lower rates outside the pool. 

For a pool to work, all school districts would have to join the pool. Otherwise, the selecton against the insurance company would destroy the pool within a couple of years.

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 1:45:08 PM

All considered, it is a better safety net than what we had before but could still use some serious work.      A family without $400 to pay in deductibles will still have emergencies, only now the greater portion of that cost will be covered by insurance.   I have a higher deductible on my policy now, its true.   The trade off is that the health care system isn't struggling with a huge burden of unpaid medical care that has the effect of raising prices for healthcare across the board.    I think its important to bear in mind that the deductibles are set by the insurance companies, not by the government...   they have always been used for a couple of reasons:    1) to make customers carry a larger share of the cost of their healthcare, 2) to make customers think twice about using their insurance & diminishing utilization and 3) to enhance or protect the profit margins of the insurers.

And as regards comparing the effects of competition on the health care industry and the automobile industry, I'll stand by what I said.   If the US population is growing, and more people are in need of healthcare... if more hospitals are built, more doctors trained... if more advances in medical technology make for greater efficiencies... then why would healthcare costs have been going up so dramatically?  UAB, St. Vincent's & Brookwood Hospitals just sued (and lost to) Trinity Medical in Birmingham to prevent them from moving & expanding Grandview Hospital in Birmingham... they were using the argument that this would adversely affect healthcare, and increase upward pressure on their cost of operation.    How could that be true if more consumer demand leads to more hospital beds and the cost controling effects of supply & demand?      With the existance of health insurance corporations, the law of supply & demand just doesn't affect the healthcare industry in the same way, and that completely undercuts the argument that pure capitalism can provide the basic economic structure needed for a decent national healthcare policy...while it would makeshealth insurance available to only a portion of the people... who are selected & cherry-picked by virtue of insurance policy restrictions.... that shrinking group of insured people always would be those with less need of coverage ... until, that is, they could be eliminated from the insurance roles by their pre-existing conditions, life time maximums, or selectively uninsured medical conditions.   

If your car breaks down, a car dealer sees that as an opportunity to sell you repair services & make a profit.     If you get sick, the first thing insurance companies do is try to find a way to avoid paying your claims.   It ain't the same business model by any stretch.  

One thing is for sure.   I'd rather not have insurance corporations responsible for writing our national healthcare polcies.   They don't do so with the best interests of consumers as their primary concern.  

Name:	JohnGalt -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 3:45:02 PM

Wasn't it Obama that said that low gas prices were the sign of a weak economy?

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 4:57:11 PM

No, I didn't know he said that at all.   It might be helpful to know exactly what was said and in what context.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 6:02:21 PM

Ditto. I don't remember Obama saying that but I admit I could be wrong (a novel idea and foreign to most of the posters hereon) but I do for sure remember all the usual suspects gave Obama complete blame and holy hell when it got to almost $4.00 per gallon sevaral years ago.  Those were the same folks, by the way, who made no similiar comments about W when it also reached that lofty peak during his years! 

Name:	au67 -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/23/2016 10:21:02 PM

I had the understanding from all you Democrats and drive-by media that Bush and Cheney were in control of gasoline prices and were the masterminds behind the weather machine that routed a hurricane directly into New Orleans.  They could wield their powers again at a moments notice, so be vigilant.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Reality is
Date:	4/23/2016 10:28:43 PM

that presidents, regardless of party,  have at best minimal influence on and / or control of the economy.  The president's authority to appoint the Fed Chair is by far his (her?) most powerful economic stick.  Now as for Dick Cheney in retirement...he thinks he is a lot smarter than he is and that he has a lot more influence than he does.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/25/2016 10:26:07 AM

Portabillity has NEVER been a problem.  If you had group coverage on one job and left for another job with group coverage you were immideately covered BY LAW.  No waiting and the waiting period for pre-existing conditions was waived.  So if you were being treated for illness or injury THERE WOULD BE NO INTERUPTION IN YOUR CARE.  Also, say you had a lay off and were out of work for seveal months before landing a new job and you have a chronic disease, say diabetes.  The diagnoses and treatment of the disease happened under another gruop plan then the waiting period for pre-existing conditions is wavived, BY LAW.  These laws were on the books for decades prior to Obamcare.  They were passed to protect consumers and business.  The waiting period was put in to stop someone who gets sick from getting a job with coverage, working long enough to get covered, getting treatment and/or surgery and uitting the job.  Yes this happened.  A lot.  In those days getting a job was much easier than today.

As for your cost comparison with cars, well that just shows ignorance on how the economy works.  If I make/sell cars I can entice folks with flashy new models and features to try and hit their "buy button".  This will allways create some business but cars also wear out over time requiring a new purchase.  I have never heard not one person say "hey, they got a new thinner hose with 10 megapixel camera at the hospital so I scheduled a colonoscopy."  

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/25/2016 11:09:57 AM

No, portability was a huge problem before the ACA.   If you left your employer & changed insurance companies, you were subject to the restrictions designed by the new insurer.  There was no protection & guarantee of continued coverage, you were completely on your own.    Your best best was to change jobs but not insurance companies (in Alabama, that was was more often the case because BC/BS has a 95% market share).  Even then, your new employers policy was unique and contained whatever restrictions written in to keep costs down & sell the contract to that company.

  In my case, after being a BC/BS customer for several decades, a routine test showed I had the gene for Hemochromotosis, which if left untreated could lead to liver cancer.     When I left my job, BC/BS rejected my new application citing the pre-existing condition even though there were no symptoms or liver problems at the time.  To BC/BS, the gene test was the same as an absolute prediction that I would have the illness in the future.... even though preventative treatment is ridiculously cheap & effective.   (all I have to do is donate blood once every 4 months, seriously.....)   Same for the other insurers like United Healtcare.      I appealed the BC/BS decision,  they continued to refuse coverage.   After the ACA, I was able to get BC/BS thru the federal  exchange because the new law prohibits the use of this tactic to deny coverage.

Much of my career was spent trying to work with insurance companies on behalf of people whose conditions were seen as an expensive cost-risk to insurers, so I think I  have a good bit of knowledge about how those companies built in de facto barriers to access healthcare and protect their profit margins.      A couple of favorites:   the adolescent boy who was denied coverage because the fine print of his dad's policy excluded brain injuries,  people who reached the life-time maximums of their insurance and effectively canceled at that point,   the hundreds (thousands?) of people who rushed into emergency rooms only to find out that their insurance didn't cover the particular hospital they were at, chronically ill people who were so depressed they were suicidal... but refused coverage because their policy didn't over a psychiatrist.   

And if you think health insurance has been logical, designed to help people get the best care they need, consistent across policies & applications, easily understood by policy holders and always has the customers best interests in mind.... well, we just disagree.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Obama economy legacy building
Date:	4/25/2016 11:35:09 AM

You are correct Copper.

I think I have posted this before but....Shortly after the Obamacare exchanges went into effect and even with all the initial royal screw ups, I overheard a discussion (argument?) between 2 customers in a Waffle House (love WH...you never know what is going to happen!)  One man was raving about how awful Obamacare was even though at that point no one had any idea whether it would be good or not.  The second man disagreed relunctantly.  He was not an Obama supporter, but he was self employed and for the first time in years he had full coverage insurance.  It was high deductable and expensive but at least he had it.  He had a melenoma over 30 years earlier and, even though there had been no hint of a recurrance, as a result had never been able to get any insurance that he could even come close to paying for and even what policies were available exempted any coverage for ANY cancer.

On balance Obamacare is a plus...a big plus for the Waffle House diner!

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	100% WRONG
Date:	4/25/2016 12:39:59 PM (updated 4/25/2016 12:42:00 PM)

When I posted this I noticed it went in reponse to myslef but was meant for Copper.....so I guess I use the new @Copperline.

Several times in my working career I changed jobs and always kept coverage without any problem save one time.  I changed from BC\BS to some other ( can't remember right now, United maybe ) and went straight in with no waiting or exclusions.  When I changed again and was back on BC/BS and they denied coverage for pre-exixting condition.  I appealled showing group coverage for the same diagnoses and the claim was paid promptly and never denied again

You may can win this argument with some folks, but not me.  I know the laws that were in place before ACA.  I have been a consumer of more health care in my lifetime unfortunately, than most.  I have had 19 MAJOR operations in my life time with maybe a dozen or so hospitalizations that didnt require surgery starting with Rhuematic (sp?) fever when I was 5.  So dont try to convince me the options I have stated weren't there.  They absoulutely were.  

As for your 'client' being refuse emergency care because the hospital wasn't in network is bovine shinola.  EVERYONE knows true emergency care is given in every emergency room in the country.  Your client may have considered it an emergency, but obviuosly the doctors didn't.  No insured, even out of network, would be turned away in a life and death situation, and you and everone else knows it.  That was one if the major rationales of the ACA, that hopsitals had to treat everyone that walked into the ER.  Maybe you "client" had been sick all week but decided to wait till the weekend and use the ER like so many do.  Nothing irks me more than being in an ER needing medical attention and there is someone in the next room that has been sick all week but goes to an ER rather than go to the doctors office.  So give us all the details of your 'cleint' getting turned away.  The whole truth, not your watered down BS.

Don't blame the system if you were an ill informed advocate and couldn't get results for your "client". It is the consumers responsibillity to know their policy.  It is not the companies problem if you don't.  They don't have to explain every option to consumers.  They give you a written policy.  Try reading it.

I know one retired insurance executive that frequents this forum.  He is called many names, none flatering, but aside from being a liberal he is an intelligent and thoughtful person ( I know contradictory statements there...lol). I am pretty sure he and I had a conversation about this in one our discusions.  I know we spoke about diabillity insurance and its rules and regs.  He also has a son that is a prominent doctor in and impoverished area who developed a better system of health maintenanace in the area based on "hot spots" the same as the LEO's in the area operate.

I repect you Copper because you post thoughtful and reasonable essays, mostly wrong IMHO, but you think things through and try to posit solutions to problems,  But on this issue you are DEAD WRONG.  I would say research it, but that didn't work for you when advocating for your "client" so I doubt it will work now.  Given time I will find some relevant info and post or send it to you.  Many folks knew of these solutions and that is why healthcare NEVER polled in the top ten issues Americans were worried about, but folks such as yourself listened to politcal rhetoric rather look at facts.

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	Not by a long shot
Date:	4/25/2016 5:51:56 PM

Calling my post "bovine shinola" and questioning whether I was competent to do my job with my patients doesn't sound like respect to me.  You are out of line, and out of your depth.

Yes, basic ER services were covered (mostly), but not necessarily the hospitalizations needed afterward.   For that, I have stayed all night at the ER many times trying to find an approved hospital bed for people who thought they were going to get all the care they needed when they saw the Emergency Room signs.   I have also sent many folks back into the street holding just a prescription they couldn't afford to fill and instructions to find a doctor who would accept so-called insurance policies....even when we all knew they needed to be hospitalized.

I'm glad you have been able to get the medical care you needed over the course of your life.  I'm glad you never found yourself caught in one of the many fissures in the healthcare system.   I'm glad you weren't one of the huge number of people who went broke paying for medical expenses they had every reason to think would be insured .....and made medical expenses the leading cause of bankruptcy in the US.

What I am particulary glad about is that you didn't lose your insurance because of all those medical problems.  Afterall, you are a completely undesireable consumer to any insurance company that you apply to.   Your medical expenses have far out-stripped all the premiums you could ever pay, leaving you completely dependent on the premiums paid by other people in your policy group.    Your description also suggests the strong liklihood of crippling & unusually expensive medical care needs in the future.  People like you are the reason insurance rates go up.     You are literally in the bulls-eye as a consumer that insurance companies would love to rid themselves of.    After all, you are just an expense item to them, and NEVER will be a source of profitable premiums.  

If we had not changed the rules thru the ACA, in the future a fellow like you could find that he was turned down for the next job simply because your medical problems could cause an increase in company premiums, and it would be cheaper to hire someone with a healthier history.    Don't think your medical history can be used against you?   Think you know enough to keep your health insurer from getting the upper hand?   You haven't played the game long enough, and for all you know your luck was about to run out.

Thanks to the ACA. you may not have to face life without insurance.    But if ACA was to be repealed, you could easily be dumped.  In fact, it would be in the best interests of your insurance company to do just that.    And the kicker is that the insurance company would simply say that keeping you out of the policy was in everyone's best interests. 

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Not by a long shot
Date:	4/25/2016 6:35:56 PM

You are absolutely right that I will never pay enough premiums to cover the medical expenses I have recieved.  Thats why insurance companies have pools.  You really have no idea what you are talking about otherwise. You keep trying to turn the conversation back to poor "indegent and low income folks dont have insurance".   They didn't then, they don't now.  Only difference is it is a different group in both catagories. 

My topic was the claim that pre-existing conditions were never covered before the ACA.  I am absolute proof that those are not the facts.  As stated I am a much higher that average consumer of health care.  I have seen both extremes, covered and uncovered by insurance.  The uncovered was mostly when self employed with several surgeries behind me already. But even then it was a choice becasue policies were available, I just didn't want to live in the street.  The one time I was in dire straights without coverage I still managed to find the care I needed thanks to the generosity of folks in the medical profession.  Many of them give generously of their time and expertise.

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	Not by a long shot
Date:	4/25/2016 7:24:21 PM

I wish I had had your legal knowledge when BC/BS denied my application for coverage due to my pre-existing condition.   Sure would have been helpful to have you there to tell them it was illegal and that you knew the law to prove it.   Funny, medical speciality attorneys couldn't do that.   Glad to know you think you could.  

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Cobra?
Date:	4/25/2016 7:35:56 PM

I have no idea whether it is this way in AL, but in VA, there was something called COBRA that carried previously covered people who lost their job for 90 days after they left their jobs.  I can't remember all the details - whether the employer paid it, or if the employee bought it as an intereim policy.  I wonder if this is why Lifer didn't stop having coverage between jobs. 

It is true that the ER has to treat anyone that shows up, but if admittance is required they do not have to admit an uninsured person.  I remember there were reports of hospitals not accepting ER patients without insurance and diverting them to another hospital. 

I thought one of the key provisions of the ACA was that people could not be turned down for pre-existing conditions.  In the situation Lifer is describing, he was able to prove that an insurance company had covered him before with the same condition and it was not a new illness, and he were returning to the insurance he originally had.  From what I understand about what he is saying, they turned him down initially and he was able to win an appeal. 

Copperline is correct  - bankruptsy most often occur do to medical bills that went above and beyond their medical insurance.  Despite what people think, it is most mostly people who have lived above their means, but have tried to do that right thing only to be overwhelmed by medical bills after a major illness (I believe this becasue my BIL, was an attornery specializing in bankrupsty.  He said it was heartbreaking to watch people going through the worst thing in their lives.)

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Where is Goof-Google?
Date:	4/25/2016 9:40:18 PM (updated 4/25/2016 9:44:28 PM)

 Well I wrote a long reply, but it disappeared after I posted the links below, and I have no interest in rewriting it, so here are the two links, read up, get smarter about insurance before you post again....all of ya'll...

Cobra Link:  http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq-consumer-cobra.html

HIPAA:  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Insurance_Portability_and_Accountability_Act

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	Cobra?
Date:	4/25/2016 10:11:23 PM

COBRA was a provision under a federal law that a family or person could continue to be a member of their subscriber group for up to 18 months following termination of employment if the subscriber continued to pay their premium...and that premium was increased to include both the individual's previous monthly payment plus any amount that used to be paid by the (now) ex-employer.    After the end of 18 months, you could not continue in that group... whether you had found new coverage or not.    It was helpful to lots of people. but only for a year and a half max.

Lots of people thought 'preexisting conditions' weren't possible because they changed employers but not insurance companies.  BC/BS has has always had a 95% market share in Alabama, so many people never worked where anything but that company's policies were available.    Cigna, United Healthcare, Anthem, Humana... all of those were unknown here until relatively recently.    

In previous years, it was customary for Alabama BC/BS to not use their preexisting exclusion option on people who were changing from one BC/BS group to another BC/BS group.   Under those circumstances, it was not a benefit to the company to exclude either on grounds of pre existing illness or a waiting period...  because if you allowed the subscriber to get sicker while they are waiting for coverage, and they were going to be in one of your groups at some point anyway... they are going to be a larger expense in the long run if you didn't bring them in without lapses in treatment.      Subscribers may have concluded that BC/BS was just being generous and eager to please when they were told that no pre existing condition or waiting periods would be applied to their case.   

Not so if they had been previously covered by another insurance company though.   Not the case if you leave BC/BS and tried to get an other company's policy either.      In that case, pre-existing exclusions were common because they served to "refine" their subscriber base and bar people who would be 'high utilizers' of healthcare.

As time went on, as in my case, BC/BS was beginning to use the pre-existing condition exclusion more freely to refine their suscriber lists.. even among previous policy holders.     You were particularly vulnerable if you were trying to go from any group policy to an individual policy or individual/family policy.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Cobra?
Date:	4/25/2016 10:25:10 PM

I checked in to COBRA when I retired from my previous company last year.  Might as well have turned over my retirement check to the insurance company.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Cobra?
Date:	4/25/2016 10:45:28 PM

I once paid $1800/mo after I left employment to start my own business....it ain't cheap.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Cobra?
Date:	4/25/2016 10:51:54 PM

Please stop posting incorrect krap, or outdated info....read the HIPAA link in my post below and get up to date.  Many employees of companies not based in AL do not have AL BC/BS.  I never had AL BC/BS.  Get your information from an accurate source.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Cobra?
Date:	4/25/2016 11:01:49 PM

I heard it was expensive.

BTW, we took the boat out for the first time this season and Smith's Marina is open.  Well, I assume so because they had one of the blow up gumby looking things that goes up and down, out front.  They do not have a website, so have no idea about their hours or exactly what is on the menu.  I only remember from an article last year that said it was a retired couple and they thought the lake needed an ice cream place. 

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Naughty Naughty Hound
Date:	4/26/2016 12:46:36 AM

I guess it is acceptable for you to hijack this thread by teling us you took your boat out. You need to be more responsible when you decide to accuse someone of the doing the same as you. I do hope you enjoyed the day on the water, I am rather envious.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Where is Goof-Google?
Date:	4/26/2016 7:13:43 AM

Thanks Wix. I couldn't recall the "certificate of creditable coverage". That was what I provided to obtain the coverage. I didn't Google it because I knew I was correct.

@Copperline, I don't know all the details of your case but I assure you there were provisions in place. The reason is because portability of coverage WAS an issue, but health insurance wasn't an issue to any but a very few. Seems to me your biggest problem was the most expensive thing in the world, a cheap lawyer!

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Where is Goof-Google?
Date:	4/26/2016 7:55:09 AM

Copper has been trying to tie his ancient history with insurance to how wonderful o-BAMMIEcare is.  He doesn't want to acknowledge changes that had been in place for years.  Dimokraps are used to low information people and he thought he could make his false statement, we would all believe it, vote for Hilda, and he would have a victory.  Common tactic.

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	we can settle this sensibly
Date:	4/26/2016 12:51:07 PM

Okay, you've both convinced me I have been going about this all wrong.   I apologize.

One of you should find and forward to me the legal citations that made pre-existing condition exclusions illegal before the ACA was put in place.  Cite either the case law that was on the books or get the names of the legal experts that back up your statement that it was against the law for insurers to do that.    And don't just forward a link to HIPPA guidelines, read them and tell me what you think they mean.    Thousands of lawyers have scoured HIPPA and make it their business to know that law.   What you are looking for isn't there.

When you do that, I'll forward this information to excellent attorneys & file lawsuits against the insurance companies.     Using the evidence & case law you have knowledge of, we can file against all major health insurers and sue them separately for damages.   If we want to be generous, we can file class action suits & share the awards with perhaps 10's of thousands of people whose lawyers were unable to locate your sources.   It won't cost anything, we could easily entice some of the most prominent attorneys in the country to take this one on a contingency fee basis.

This really is great news, and will mean we can help lots of people recover from the financial damages they suffered... and your part of the award for finding this previously undiscovered legal code could easily be in the milliions of dollars...who knows, total punative damages could be in the hundreds of millions for something this big & egregious.

Get back to me as soon as you can.   We should get to move on this before any legal experts realize they overlooked the option of filing suiting for a huge number of plaintiffs dating back many, many years.   Once this gets out,  someone else could beat us to the punch.

This is a great opportunity to make you both really, really rich....and famous, too.     I'm looking forward to working on this with you, and let me take this opportunity to say thank you.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	What part of portabillity don't you understand?
Date:	4/26/2016 5:13:28 PM

Its literally in the name of the legislation. HIPPA- look it up or choose to remain ignorant and angry. Tip for the future, hire a better class of lawyer.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	What part of portabillity don't you understand?
Date:	4/26/2016 6:24:41 PM

For the record it is HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.  I have to take Protected Health Information (PHI) training for my present job and HIPAA is central to its requirements.

That being said, I don't have a dog in this hunt so will return to lurker status....

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	What part of portabillity don't you understand?
Date:	4/26/2016 6:40:10 PM

I wondered if this might be the case.   Lifer, you saw the word "portability" and jumped to the conclusion that this means no pre-existing condition exclusions.   It doesn't.   You have to read the rest of the words in those sentences........

Hodja is right, HIPPA primarily is about the privacy of medical records and restrictions on how they can be handled, transmitted & shared.   In this case, "portability" refers to the transfer of one's medical records from one treating physician to another, between insurance companies who could share your medical records in any way they wanted, and the strict rules around revealing private medical information without the expressed & written consent of the patient. 

My part in this is concluded...... until you get those legal citations & case law for us.....

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	What part of portabillity don't you understand?
Date:	4/26/2016 7:54:57 PM

Well I guess now you agree with me that I am just so dam special insurance companies in seeral colluded to make sure I didn't loose coverage. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	What part of portabillity don't you understand?
Date:	4/26/2016 10:41:55 PM (updated 4/26/2016 10:42:56 PM)

Either that or some insurance underwriter just made a big axx mistake in your case.  I can guarantee your from the recent experience of my daughter and son-in-law after his recent job change that your experience with pre-existing conditions is unique.  My daughter has a pre-existing condition and it is not covered for the first year under his new employer paid policy.  It is a condition that has not been a problem for over 13 years so they are willing to gamble.  She could have opted for Obamacare for her coverage but then his new insurance would not have covered my granddaughter (they will cover a wife and kids but not kids alone if there is a wife in the family)...the insurance industry in general and the health insurance industry in particular is a racket that makes it a point to find a way to not cover and to not pay!

Copperline know whereof he speaks.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	What part of portabillity don't you understand?
Date:	4/27/2016 7:39:41 AM

OK Archie, I dare you to have your daughter contact the old insurance and ask for a certificate of creditable coverage then present that to the new company. Or don't. I couldn't care less what you do.

It is just so nice to have so much confirmation that I am so special. I mean not only did they cover me but both companies got together and created this magical form letter, named it, and then accepted it (and the thousands in liability) just to make me happy cuz I'm so special. I totally get it.

Do you guys really think I make crap up to post. If so you are dumber than I think, and that's dense in your case Archie. I saw coppers.post and thought what story can I make up to mess with him.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	What part of you are wrong don't you understand?!
Date:	4/27/2016 1:43:04 PM (updated 4/27/2016 1:44:24 PM)

Do you think my daughter and son-in-law just fell off a turnip truck?  Her husband's new employer did ask through his former employer's insurance office and they said no!  Against the policy of the company!

BTW: I also couldn't care less what you do or what lies you tell!!!

Name:	copperline -	Reply
Subject:	What part of you are wrong don't you understand?!
Date:	4/27/2016 3:40:37 PM

OK, for the record.   A Certificate of Credible Coverage is the same as the proof of insurance form you keep in the glove box of your car.     It is not a letter guaranteeing insurability when you transfer from one insurance company to another.  

it's not that I think you are making things up.   Evidence just keeps mounting that you don't understand what you are talking about, but you do have an unshakeable belief that whatever you want to say has to be true (or you wouldn't have said it, right?).      I won't take it on as  my job to try to protect you from your own bad judgement.   You are lost in the tall weeds when it comes to health insurance and don't even know enough to suspect it.     

And you contradict yourself without realizing it.   Either you 'don't make this crap up' or you are 'making things up to mess with' somebody.   

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	What part of you are wrong don't you understand?!
Date:	4/27/2016 8:44:21 PM

Its called sarcasm.  As for your daughter I don't know about her and turnip trucks but I sure hope the apple fell far away from the tree.