The Healthcare.gov website is horrible! — Page 16

I must've missed that Fox news report, Goth.

I mean a policy for a single person with no dependents.

My insurance still covers me for all major medical expenses that I could incur. I initially had a waiting period for hernias and a few other things, but that ended two months ago. No waiting periods now. As far as not meeting standards, there are coverages that I don't need (because I'm not a woman) that would prevent it from meeting ACA standards. They have to be written into all policies now, regardless of gender, age, etc. Those are not included in my plan.

Perhaps that's why it's so much cheaper. But it's MUCH cheaper ($150 per month cheaper) ... and that takes the "affordable" right out of the ACA.

---

Updated On: 12/23/13 at 10:38 AM

You are the most desperate, pathetic troll this site has ever seen, Goth.

Actually, the plan was and still is good. Cover everyone, with no exclusions and no waiting period. Of course that would mean that people who currently benefit from those exclusions would have to pay more and many of them don't want/can't afford to. But there is no other way to provide comprehensive coverage, so if that part is repealed then so is the comprehensive coverage part.

Updated On: 12/23/13 at 12:00 PM

Maybe you were on a parody website?

---

Well, some people will pay more and some will pay less.

best12bars, it wasn't designed to be affordable for the middle class.

Obama has allowed everyone and their brother to be exempt from the plan, so who foots the cost? Middle class people who are not part of a special interest group.

Please wake up to the fact that government run insurance can't work in the US. It's not economically possible.

---

That's because the fatal flaw is the government getting in bed with private insurance companies. When have they ever, EVER done the right thing?

---

According to Ex-Siny's logic, Besty, you should just be grateful that you have any coverage at all. So what that you have to pay more?! That is the burden and sacrifice you have been forced to take on so that others can afford coverage. How dare you think about your own healthcare and look out for yourself!

As the former director of the HHS exchange once said, referring to the ACA, "there are always winners and losers. Some will win and some will lose." Has Ex-Siny been sleeping with a White House staffer or something?

Liza, those "others" will one day be "us". Unless you know a secret to staying young and healthy forever.

Those numbers are absolutely 100 percent not true for me. And I went through the whole process.

EDIT: I will also add that I told you I could have gotten coverage for less than I'm paying now, but with outrageously high deductibles, annual out-of-pocket caps, and office copays. Still, they were not that low. And I would have to switch to HMO instead of PPO.

My current PPO deductible is $1,000. My annual out-of-pocket cap is $2,500. And my office visit copay is $40. And I pay $328 per month, which includes dental.

To get that same coverage via ACA, I would need to spend almost $500 per month. If I want to pay less, I will get a far worse plan with $10,000 caps, $6,000 deductibles, etc. No thanks. And even then, I couldn't get anywhere near those "maximum" premium numbers listed on that site.

EDIT (AGAIN): Adding more ...

Two years ago, I had hernia surgery. I got to pick my doctors (great doctors), and my total out-of-pocket expense, including follow-up visits was about $1,300. The actual operation cost over $10,000. Under one of these "affordable" plans, it would have been $6,000 for me to pay. That's with insurance. How on earth is that "affordable?" Until you've had something like that happen, these numbers don't mean much. "Deductibles," etc." Your wallet is very grateful when you see it actually in place and working. So yes, I could up my deductibles. If I were foolish.

---

Updated On: 12/23/13 at 12:56 PM

Because the rich 1% won't pay their fair share of taxes.

Again, WRONG!

---