I meant in terms of a balance between patient coverage and taxpayer burden. Glad you get all this free health care at our expense

I’m not sure if that is accurate or not. I’m on medicare and I opted to not sign up for Advantage, I stayed with Medicare with a good supplemental.

I looked into the differences for quite some time before making a decision.

Advantage costs ‘less’ (monthly payment) at the present time than a supplemental, but whereas my supplemental has no co-pay, Advantage does.

The % deductible can change with Advantage, my supplemental has no deductible.

But as misfortunes occur that highlight differences, it happens that my brother who is very near my age went with Advantage. hardly no sooner than he was covered (his family), his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. She has pretty much completed treatments now and her deductible worked out to over $4000 over about a 6 month period. Had they had the supplemental I opted for, it would have been $0.

Whereas his Advantage monthly payment is about 60% of what my supplemental payment is, I figure that $4000 will take a long time to overcome. Not withstanding if she has to have more treatments, her costs will continue.

As the insurance companies that provide Advantage get experience with the costs, the co-pays can go up or down, the deductible can go up or down and the coverage benefits itself can go up or down.

So, I’d say the verdict is not in yet on whether Advantage is working well. I’m pretty sure it depends on whether a person has a lot of medical problems or not.

If someone else has some experiences, I’d like to hear about them.

Looking Past the Bait: Breaking Down the House Health Care Bill
The Woodward Report ^ | September 22, 2009 | Jack Curtis
Posted on 09/22/2009 2:10:53 PM PDT by thisisthetime

The Administration has used the financial collapse that government brought us very well: It gave Congress a “Stimulus” bill that provided more pork than Congress itself might have had the nerve to include while effectively repealing the Clinton/Gingrich reform of federal welfare; it budgeted spending in numbers only computers can handle and it took command of the major banks, a huge chunk of insurance and the U.S. auto industry; to that, it is preparing to add a takeover of the student loan business and wage control of banking and possibly others. Not bad for less than a year’s work!

And notice that only Reid is talking big about this – none of the other Dem. Senators who *Do* hope to be around for awhile are saying anything.

I don’t think Reid has the votes to do even this.

Harry Reid probably isn’t going to be re-elected to his seat in the Senate. He trails everyone running against him. He is basically history. If he figures he is out of a job next November, what is to prevent him from doing things like the Nuclear Option to avoid Senate rules and bypass cloture? What does he have to lose? There is no down side for him. He could pretend to be some champion of Lies, Injustice, and the Democrat Way, and “take one for the team”.

These Democrats can do a huge amount of damage to this country before they leave and I don’t trust them not to.

To quote a friend of mine:

“There are two kinds of Americans, those who remember Jimmy Carter and those who will find out.”

The following appears to be the source of Michael Barone’s “9.7% unemployment in Nov 2010″ number:

http://www.tnr.com/blogs/william-galston

william galston
Tuesday September 15, 2009
Unemployment Numbers May Put Democrats out of Work

Indeed, the most recent OMB projections show unemployment remaining above 7 percent until 2012, and above 5 percent through at least 2019.

If OMB’s projections are correct, unemployment will average 9.8 percent during 2010 and will likely stand above 9 percent on the day of the mid-term election.

The Democrats are dead and damned in Nov 2010, if these OMB economic projections run true.

I think we may see the House flip Republican and the Senate stay Democratic for the first time ever.

More than the elderly are being affected by Democratic domestic policies:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Job-killing-policies-could-doom-Democrat-hopes-8248980-59383787.html

Job-killing policies could doom Democrat hopes
By: Michael Barone
Senior Political Analyst
September 16, 2009

The Office of Management and Budget now projects unemployment at 9.7 percent, the same as last month, in the fourth quarter of 2010, when the off-year elections take place. Maybe the administration and congressional Democrats should consider job-creating rather than job-destroying policies right now.

and

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/1005/taxes-financial-aid-college-roughing-up-middle-class.html

When Work Doesn’t Pay For The Middle Class
Janet Novack and Stephane Fitch, 09.16.09, 06:00 PM EDT
Forbes Magazine dated October 05, 2009

Eighteen months after being laid off, Judith Lederman, a 50-year-old divorcee who lives in Scarsdale, N.Y., is ready to consider jobs paying half the $120,000 she earned as a publicity manager at Lord & Taylor. That’s mostly because she’s desperate, but it also makes sense when you consider how this country punishes work effort. While the first $60,000 of her income would be lightly taxed, the next $60,000 would be hit with what is in effect a 79% tax rate. Given a choice between a part-time or easy job paying $60,000 and a demanding, stress-ridden job paying $120,000, Lederman would be wise to take the former. In the tougher job she would be contributing twice as much to the economy. But she wouldn’t be doing herself much good. It would make more sense to take it easy and spend more time with her high school senior daughter, Casey.

How did a middle-class single mom wind up with a 79% marginal tax rate? At $120,000 she would pay $16,500 a year more in federal and state taxes, wouldn’t qualify for the five-year $12,000-a-year cut in her mortgage payments she’s applying for and would be eligible for $19,000 a year less in need-based college financial aid.

The Democrats are out to kill our economy, and they are succeeding.

And, why is Obama so against insujrance companies competing across state lines if he thinks competition is good?

The top of the reform should be allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines and tort reform. That’s just common sense.

People, the problem with government programs is that at a whim they can be taken away. Do not let this happen to ordinary American citizens, it is HORRIBLE TO BE IN THIS POSITION.