I mean controlling my income. That is not illegal. Hell, it is not even immoral. But thanks for your concern. If I ever need tax advice I know where to go.
You should pay attention to what the white dressed gang is extorting from you. For a hip replacement I read it costs 60k in the USA. It costs around 15k in the Netherlands and Belgium. No way there's an excuse possible for such a gap.
So wait you do not svck it to the rich. The more you tell us about the Dutch system, the less the liberals here will like it.
Nah, you get health care right away paying your normal premiums for it. On the side you pay off a loan. You're not a poor bastard when you voluntarily chose to not get insured in this system. You're a wannabe freeloader
We overpay for most of our procedures and we cannot cover about 15% of the population. We managed to decrease the second number in the last decade to about 11% IIRC, but that is probably going back up again. In all honesty, is not like the 85-89% of people that is covered will pay those $60k out of pocket, but logically it will find a way to your premiums, hence we pay about $10k per year instead of $6-7k. IOW, my reality, as an employee with proper coverage and a generous employer is extremely different from a counterpart with no insurance, or with a bare bones policy. Anecdotally, yesterday in the afternoon I visited a Goodwill store and grabbed some books for my 5 y.o. and while making line to pay, I talked with the lady in front of me, who I'd venture to say was within 5 years of my age (mid 40s to mid 50s); in the 10 or so minutes we were in the line, I learned she had a heart attack a few months back and that her deductible was $5k. If something like that happened to me, I'd probably have to pay like $250 to $500, if that much.
That is that fault of the for-profit insurance industry that is allowed by law to rip you off. You anger is understandable, but it is misplaced. This is what pisses me off about those who "shout at the clouds" (at the government), when it is the industry that is screwing you. The ACA was designed, in large part, to slow the profiteering of the insurance industry. Of course, it did not go far enough (in my opinion). The Republican mantra of de-regulation and "removing the shackles" will allow this to continue and increase exponentially. If you are "retired," why would you be in COBRA? One would think that the (virtually) mandatory, single payer health insurance system for retirees would be available to you. (I suspect I know the answer already) It is not "gaming the system" if the "system" has subsidies set up to help people who cannot afford to pay for the insurance receive assistance to pay for the insurance. If, on the other hand, you are trying to receive the subsidy when you are not eligible, that would be "gaming the system." In other words, being a "taker." In other words, being a "welfare queen." In other words, being a "republican." (see farmers, pharmaceutical companies, defense contractors running up their bills, the rich taking tax credits for their boats and planes, etc.) "ho risk pools work"-Now THOSE are dangerous and risky!!!!! (thanks, @VFish, that actually made me laugh this morning)
You want 8 layers of management at insurance companies to lose out? What else could they do with those MBAs?
xtomx, believe it or not, but some people are able to retire before 65... hence COBRA and no Medicare. Of course if I keep swimming in the ho risk pools I'll be going back to work soon enough.
Trumpcare of Dontcare is going to be far superior to existing plans. Just ask him. Almost free, covers pre existing cases. ......,Snort President Trump wrote a remarkable op-ed in USA Today on Wednesday, remarkable because one wouldn’t think it possible to pack so much dishonesty into such a small space, nor would one think a newspaper would willingly publish such a steaming pile of lies. As fact-checker Glenn Kessler wrote, “almost every sentence contained a misleading statement or a falsehood.”
Right now, your healthcare is tied to your work, for some dumb reason. If you want to retire early, well, have fun with that insurance. Or if you want to change jobs, or go freelance, or start a new business, or...
The Dutch have a for profit, they are not allowed to get ripped off. So the anger directed at the profit motive is also misplaced. Now it seems that some Dutch politicians do not like it, I am not sure if the law below passed. https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2017/01/dutch-mps-set-to-stop-health-insurers-paying-out-profits/
The fact that the government subsidizes employer sponsored health insurance is hardly an argument for a single payer system. And the reason health insurance is tied to employment dates back to liberal policies from the 40s. I agree we should decouple health insurance from employment.
Decoupling health insurance from employment is something that should happen, but politically it would be very difficult to do. It would be an easy way to attack the new plan, and complicated to defend, people are used to it and many voters do like their employee provided plan. Telling them to give it up for something that could be better will be a very hard sell.
You can deduct those expenses fishy: https://www.healthinsurance.org/faqs/can-i-deduct-my-exchange-premiums-when-i-file-taxes-next-year/ Geez, do we have to do everything for you? When will you start lifting yourself by your finstraps?
I'm in the same position. About to retire before 65 and will use COBRA to tide me over. I work at a high-tech company which means the risk pool is skewed very young. So the COBRA payments work out at about 40% of what the unsubsidised rate is on the ACA exchange. My partner is a little younger and self-employed, so when COBRA expires she'll need ACA insurance. Plan is to use Roth IRA withdrawals during that window before she is Medicare age, so as to keep our taxable income down, thus making her subsidy-eligible. Are we gaming the system? Almost certainly. But let's be realistic here - the system is so foobar it deserves to be gamed. And if Obamacare truly becomes Don'tCare, we'll become habitually resident in the UK for a while and take the "risk" of dealing with the dastardly socialist NHS's "death panels" Or something. In fact, we may do that regardless of the status of Don'tCare.
Not in America. A heavily regulated health insurance scheme could work, but would not be practicable under the current system.
The difference between your posts and that from the Aqua 2 inhabitant, is that you are being honest and understand that in almost any system there are loopholes and winners and losers. Your situation (and probably fishy's one) is hardly the making of Obamacare by itself, but he uses his good fortune (early retirement, comfortable income) to attack a system that pretty much does everything he accuses of not doing, while simultaneously ignoring how we arrived a situation and the - ahem- republican contributions to it.