Leroy wrote:Does anyone really be believe that the new plan will do better for me?
No, because apparently you have insurance through your employment. What the PPACA does is provide health insurance exchanges and subsidies for people who don't have employment.
If you lost your job you would get nothing, under the old system. You would never be able to get insurance because you have a pre-existing condition. You might have been able to afford that organ transplant if you mortgaged and borrowed yourself into bankruptcy. Or you might not have.
Freed Roger wrote:ACA Is a misplaced faulty compromise by Obama
Can't wish the Republican Party out of existence. Can't pass a bill more liberal than the one that folks like Landrieu and Ben Nelson and Lieberman were willing to vote for.
Someone told me that spouses who work for different companies cannot be covered under one benefit program but must use their respective employer's package.
Don't know if this is true and whether it's due to ACA. Can anyone confirm/debunk this?
Radbird wrote:Someone told me that spouses who work for different companies cannot be covered under one benefit program but must use their respective employer's package.
Don't know if this is true and whether it's due to ACA. Can anyone confirm/debunk this?
I highly doubt that. I don't see what the purpose would be.
Edit - Sounds like one of those things that gets twisted around as it gets passed by word of mouth. Apparently Univ of Virginia and UPS are dropping coverage for spouses who are eligible for coverage under their own employer. They're doing so based partly on what they think the ACA will cost them. If the spouse has no other health care and they aren't eligible through their own employer, they'll still be covered.
Radbird wrote:Someone told me that spouses who work for different companies cannot be covered under one benefit program but must use their respective employer's package.
Don't know if this is true and whether it's due to ACA. Can anyone confirm/debunk this?
Many companies (including mine) are refusing to provide insurance for spouses, assuming they are eligible for coverage under their own employer's plan. This started before the ACA, simply because companies (like mine) found a loophole to save themselves some money.
Radbird wrote:Someone told me that spouses who work for different companies cannot be covered under one benefit program but must use their respective employer's package.
Don't know if this is true and whether it's due to ACA. Can anyone confirm/debunk this?
Many companies (including mine) are refusing to provide insurance for spouses, assuming they are eligible for coverage under their own employer's plan. This started before the ACA, simply because companies (like mine) found a loophole to save themselves some money.
Mr. Planet's on mine for the first time although he's eligible for his own. I consider this a tremendous benefit and would understand why companies would discontinue the practice. Basically as a reward for offering your employees excellent health insurance, you end up insuring a disproportionate amount of people.
“Since the Affordable Care Act requires employers to provide affordable coverage, we believe your spouse should be covered by their own employer -- just as UPS has a responsibility to offer coverage to you, our employee,” UPS said in the memo. “Limiting plan eligibility is one way to manage ongoing health care costs.”
