View Poll Results: Should parents be able to enroll their children under the age of 26?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    19 63.33%
  • No

    11 36.67%
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 89

Thread: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

  1. #61
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,630

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    I'm not sure where you get the opportunity/results distinction from anything I'm saying. Allowing parents to keep their kids on their insurance policy until 26 is an opportunity that everybody would equally share, right?
    WRONG. It is limitted to ONLY those that have children under 26, THAT CHOOSE TO DO SO, and costs ALL that have a "familiy" plan, since the insurance PERIOD for covering those children is ASSUMED to have increased by up to 1/3 so does its COST. That cost is NOT limitted to only those that CHOOSE the extension, but must be born by ALL to help the privleged few. This is NONSENSE as a mandate, let it be an ADDED COST option for the few that desire it. Do you REALLY think that a working 19 year old should help subsidize the parents of a non-working 25 year old? Get real!
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 06-30-12 at 02:37 PM.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  2. #62
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    WRONG. It is limitted to ONLY those that have chidren under 26, and costs ALL that have a "familiy" plan, since the insurance PERIOD for covereing those children is ASSUMED to have increased by up to 1/3 so does its COST. That cost is NOT limitted to only those that CHOOSE the exptention, but born by ALL to help the privlegeed few. This is NONSENSE as a mandate, let it be an ADDED COST option for the few that desire it. Get real!
    Er what? Why would it cost more to include a 24 year old on your plan than to include a 14 year old? 14 year olds generally have more medical expenses. And how would it raise the cost for anybody? The parents would be paying the family plan rate longer.
    Total tax rates- People living in poverty: 16.2%. The median American: 27%. Working people who make over $140k/year: 31%. The top 1%: 30%. Super rich investors: around 15%. Help the democrats retake the house.

  3. #63
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    WRONG. It is limitted to ONLY those that have children under 26, THAT CHOOSE TO DO SO, and costs ALL that have a "familiy" plan, since the insurance PERIOD for covering those children is ASSUMED to have increased by up to 1/3 so does its COST.
    That makes absolutely no sense. If you want to cover your child until age 26, you still have to pay the extra premium for the extra person.

    Do you REALLY think that a working 19 year old should help subsidize the parents of a non-working 25 year old? Get real!
    Except that isn't what's happening here. Yet another example of someone who hates the ACA despite not actually knowing what's in it.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  4. #64
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,630

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    That makes absolutely no sense. If you want to cover your child until age 26, you still have to pay the extra premium for the extra person.



    Except that isn't what's happening here. Yet another example of someone who hates the ACA despite not actually knowing what's in it.
    WRONG. I am sick of "experts" saying what the PPACA, really says, without supplying it; I can supply links asserting that coverage of dependent children up to age 26 is MANDATED, yet you imply that is somehow not true. The ONLY time that is an added cost to the parent is when the LAST covered child is (or all children are) over 19 and not yet 26 (otherwise it is "free" to that policy holder). Only if the parents could otherwise drop the child AND not simply allow the child to reimburse them for the difference would any extra cost be incurred.

    http://www.law.uh.edu/healthlaw/pers...%20Insured.pdf

    Insurance policies are for an individual, a married couple or a familiy, no per child rates apply, that I am aware of. Most, currently 90% of medical care insurance, is bought through the employer, as mine was. Extending the MANDATED coverage period for children to age 26 is NOT free (to the insurance provider), nor is it an OPTION, so all "family" plans must then assume about a 1/3 increase in EACH child's coverage period is quite possible, if not very likely. Show me where, in the PPACA, this EXTRA coverage is paid for ONLY by those actually using it (do NOT ask me to "disprove" your assertion). Crickets...
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 06-30-12 at 03:31 PM.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  5. #65
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:06 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,413

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    I'm not sure where you get the opportunity/results distinction from anything I'm saying. Allowing parents to keep their kids on their insurance policy until 26 is an opportunity that everybody would equally share, right?
    That's not a very strong counterpoint. That's like saying a wrongfully convicted person being executed is acceptable because most of the time they do get the right people, and everybody had the same opportunity to participate.

    Ok, that's not worded well, but I hope the point is still there.


    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I do support it, and not just because I am a 22 year old on my parents' insurance. From what I understand you can only be on their plan at 26 if you are enrolled in school. It gives a break to students who most likely can't afford an insurance payment while enrolled in school full time. I may be wrong on that criteria, but that's what I've heard. I've not done too much research into the extended coverage under parents' insurance.
    I'll admit I'm not sure on this point either, but if what you say is true, then I would accuse the administration of lying-by-omission when they sold HCR to the general public. It was always portrayed at allowing 26 or younger, period. Restrictions such as student status were never mentioned. This is a relatively popular aspect of the law, so I think they would have felt safe in lying-by-omission... if that is what they did do.


    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    it will probably have to happen before that. rates have been rising at such a pace that they will make businesses uncompetitive. fewer and fewer jobs will offer coverage, and the coverage offered will be too expensive to buy, or it will be worthless. soon enough, those who foam at the mouth against the PPACA will begin to go bankrupt trying to help their kids, their parents, and themselves. in other words, the problem is going to have to get a lot worse before it gets better.

    1993 would have been the best time to change the system. 2010 was almost too late. we've passed the last chance of the easy way to learn. now we'll have to learn the hard way. the sad part is that those who saw it coming decades ago and fought to change it will suffer right alongside of those who fought for the status quo.
    This could be the law of unintended consequences. Larger corporations will probably still continue to offer health benefits. Smaller and marginally-sized companies may choose to cease offering benefits. Why go through that hassle and expense when the employee is now "required" to have it anyway?

    If the employee is lucky, maybe they'll get a 50c/hr raise to help pay for it.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  6. #66
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    That's not a very strong counterpoint. That's like saying a wrongfully convicted person being executed is acceptable because most of the time they do get the right people, and everybody had the same opportunity to participate.

    Ok, that's not worded well, but I hope the point is still there.
    I'm sorry, I don't follow. Can you explain more how you think my position equates to 'equality of results'?
    Total tax rates- People living in poverty: 16.2%. The median American: 27%. Working people who make over $140k/year: 31%. The top 1%: 30%. Super rich investors: around 15%. Help the democrats retake the house.

  7. #67
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,630

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Er what? Why would it cost more to include a 24 year old on your plan than to include a 14 year old? 14 year olds generally have more medical expenses. And how would it raise the cost for anybody? The parents would be paying the family plan rate longer.
    This is an apples to oranges comparison. It costs LESS in premiums (so it costs the insurance company MORE) for the "familiy" to keep their son Johnny, on daddy's policy than for Johnny to get his own policy, and simply make Johnny pay daddy back the difference. It also helps daddy reach his deducatable sooner adding in Johnny's medical expenses. So together, daddy and Johnny pay less for insurance than they normally would for 7 more years, yet Johnny and daddy will incur the SAME medical care costs either way, so that "savings" must be made up by OTHER policy holders.

    PS: My dad did this for myself and my two brothers on his auto policy, we paid HIM for our auto insurance, for FAR less that getting our own auto policies.
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 06-30-12 at 03:46 PM.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  8. #68
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,105

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    If the employee is lucky, maybe they'll get a 50c/hr raise to help pay for it.
    considering that there are multiple people in line for most jobs, i tend to doubt it. what are they going to do, quit and go somewhere else?

    brought to you by an America in which "unions had their time, but are no longer needed."

  9. #69
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    This is an apples to oranges comparison. It costs LESS in premiums (so it costs the insurance company MORE) for the "familiy" to keep their son Johnny, on daddy's policy than for Johnny to get his own policy, and simply make Johnny pay daddy back the difference. It also helps daddy reach his deducatable sooner adding in Johnny's medical expenses. So together, daddy and Johnny pay less for insurance than they normally would for 7 more years, yet Johnny and daddy will incur the SAME medical care costs either way, so that "savings" must be made up by OTHER policy holders.

    PS: My dad did this for myself and my two brothers on his auto policy, we paid HIM for our auto insurance, for FAR less that getting our own auto policies.
    So is it your contention that they are currently overcharging 18-26 year olds to subsidize the family plans? Or what?
    Total tax rates- People living in poverty: 16.2%. The median American: 27%. Working people who make over $140k/year: 31%. The top 1%: 30%. Super rich investors: around 15%. Help the democrats retake the house.

  10. #70
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Policies of the ACA: Young Adults on their Parents' Plan

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    This is an apples to oranges comparison. It costs LESS in premiums (so it costs the insurance company MORE) for the "familiy" to keep their son Johnny, on daddy's policy than for Johnny to get his own policy, and simply make Johnny pay daddy back the difference. It also helps daddy reach his deducatable sooner adding in Johnny's medical expenses. So together, daddy and Johnny pay less for insurance than they normally would for 7 more years, yet Johnny and daddy will incur the SAME medical care costs either way, so that "savings" must be made up by OTHER policy holders.
    What you say is true presuming Johnny choses to purchase HI after getting off his parent’s plan. As you know part of the ‘sales job’ for the bill is the fact that it is common for those 18-26 to go uninsured. This begs the question is it better to get something for them being covered by their parents plan OR getting nothing when they go uninsured? Of course the ACA doesn’t allow the latter option but I don’t think you are arguing FOR new law.

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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