Medicare Advantage Plans -- Is There A Huge Hidden Flaw?


Canada’s health-care wait times hit new record high, again
Long wait times have become the defining characteristic of Canadian health care

https://www.macleans.ca/society/health/canadas-health-care-wait-times-hit-new-record-high-again/

There have been times when Canada had to send folks to the US for service not offered in the Canadian health plan. Similar from a few other countries in this world also.

Tens of thousands of Canadians make the choice to pay out of their own pockets and come to the US every year for their healthcare, even though they are already paying for Canadian health care in their higher taxes. And the number is growing every year.

Even high ranking politicians in Canada come to the US when they need treatment they cannot get in Canada including some years ago the Prime Minster of Canada himself who snuck out of the country on a plane in the middle of the night to have surgery in the US that he could have had in Canada but preferred to have it here instead.

And Canada has a tiny population compared to the US. Imagine what would happen in a country with a population more than 6 times their size and the bureaucrat nightmare.

Think Veterans Administration. If they can't get it right for a few million people, how can they ever get it right for 326 million?

Needs are totally different and services must also be different. Single payer means the richest pay for most of it through their taxes.

With a single payer system EVERYONE who pays taxes pays for it. There is no such thing as "free" healthcare except if you don't pay taxes. Taxpayers pay. The problem in this country is that half the population pays NO taxes and is all for everyone else paying their healthcare bill. This is a serious problem. These people have no stake in the game. And it's not just about healthcare. They have no stake in the American game for ANYTHING. It's very easy to vote for goodies when the other guy is paying for it all.

Yes, this country is the most compassionate and generous in the world, and that's a good thing. But how can that continue if half the country doesn't have a stake in the fiscal game?
 

Far as I know we still live in a representative democracy. So who you vote for would agree with what you want.

In the US the Constitution says our representatives are supposed to push and vote for their people wants and needs.

Also the US is supposed to be Republic, which is a bit different than a Democracy. They two are very similar but with some small differences.

I will leave now and see if I can find those differences and post them here later.

OK, here I am now with the clarification I had promised.

Can a democracy also be a republic?


Frequently, politicians, and many ordinary Americans, refer to the United States as a democracy. Others find this aggravating because, unlike in a democracy where citizens vote directly on laws, in the United States, elected representatives do – and, therefore, the U.S. is a republic.
..................................................................

By our laws, they must be written by the Congress and not directly by vote of the people. More expansive and lengthy definitions are also available. Just search for democracy or republic and work with those responses.
 

What do you mean it was forced on you? Participation in Medicare is voluntary.

Actually, no, it really isn't. After a person reaches 65, there really is no insurance carrier that will cover you unless you have Medicare as your primary (at least here, there isn't). So, unless you want to go without healthcare coverage altogether (which is really dumb, IMO), you've pretty much gotta go with Medicare as a basic.
 

Canada’s health-care wait times hit new record high, again
Long wait times have become the defining characteristic of Canadian health care

https://www.macleans.ca/society/health/canadas-health-care-wait-times-hit-new-record-high-again/



Tens of thousands of Canadians make the choice to pay out of their own pockets and come to the US every year for their healthcare, even though they are already paying for Canadian health care in their higher taxes. And the number is growing every year.

Even high ranking politicians in Canada come to the US when they need treatment they cannot get in Canada including some years ago the Prime Minster of Canada himself who snuck out of the country on a plane in the middle of the night to have surgery in the US that he could have had in Canada but preferred to have it here instead.

And Canada has a tiny population compared to the US. Imagine what would happen in a country with a population more than 6 times their size and the bureaucrat nightmare.

Think Veterans Administration. If they can't get it right for a few million people, how can they ever get it right for 326 million?



With a single payer system EVERYONE who pays taxes pays for it. There is no such thing as "free" healthcare except if you don't pay taxes. Taxpayers pay. The problem in this country is that half the population pays NO taxes and is all for everyone else paying their healthcare bill. This is a serious problem. These people have no stake in the game. And it's not just about healthcare. They have no stake in the American game for ANYTHING. It's very easy to vote for goodies when the other guy is paying for it all.

Yes, this country is the most compassionate and generous in the world, and that's a good thing. But how can that continue if half the country doesn't have a stake in the fiscal game?

excellent post.


you see canada's system touted all the time . i lived in montreal decades ago and it reminded me of the old hip clinics we had .

we were in canada last year and i asked some people we met and they seemed okay with the system but i got the feeling they were only okay with it because this is all they knew and never experienced our system . it is like we used to tell my buddy he had the easiest job in the world . he married a virgin ha ha ha .
 
Just a question, not fiinger pointing. Twenty weeks for an appointment with a specialist seems a bit long so I have a question. I have found that for me to have a new specialist it takes about 3 or 4 week at the most. If going from a doctors office to the hospital it can be done the same day or within a day or two.

In my case in Colorado with surgery needed, I was placed in New Mexico hospital the very same day. With my problems with a seizure, I was taken by helicopter to a surgeon in Toledo. This took about an hour from my passing out in a CVS while trying to pick up medications.

It seems that for us in the US there is a critical level determined immediately by the doctors and that seems to create help immediately. All other needs are then prioritized accordingly.

So I get immediate help now and the rest may take a few days up to a few weeks.

Are your twenty weeks delays in Canada for everything or just for some very low items? And why? Do too many folks insist on being doctored? Is Canada short of doctors? Just wondering.
 
Much like that will happen in the US also. Single payer uses a group of controllers that decide what you need in the future, who will perform care, and who will receive the care and how much it will cost. Supply and demand are ignored and it will fail in the US as it is failing elsewhere. The more the governments try to control things the worse it gets.
 
Ryan on an advantage plan this could happen or you can be on Medicare and have a supplement and you will be covered as long Medicare approves of it
 
Never had a problem seeing a specialist my pcp wants me to see. Usually in a week at the most. I make it clear to him I will only see in network providers. I have plenty to choose from.
 
Hey I want in on that half that doesn't pay taxes. Of course maybe this is some of that fake news.

Canada’s health-care wait times hit new record high, again
Long wait times have become the defining characteristic of Canadian health care

https://www.macleans.ca/society/health/canadas-health-care-wait-times-hit-new-record-high-again/



Tens of thousands of Canadians make the choice to pay out of their own pockets and come to the US every year for their healthcare, even though they are already paying for Canadian health care in their higher taxes. And the number is growing every year.

Even high ranking politicians in Canada come to the US when they need treatment they cannot get in Canada including some years ago the Prime Minster of Canada himself who snuck out of the country on a plane in the middle of the night to have surgery in the US that he could have had in Canada but preferred to have it here instead.

And Canada has a tiny population compared to the US. Imagine what would happen in a country with a population more than 6 times their size and the bureaucrat nightmare.

Think Veterans Administration. If they can't get it right for a few million people, how can they ever get it right for 326 million?



With a single payer system EVERYONE who pays taxes pays for it. There is no such thing as "free" healthcare except if you don't pay taxes. Taxpayers pay. The problem in this country is that half the population pays NO taxes and is all for everyone else paying their healthcare bill. This is a serious problem. These people have no stake in the game. And it's not just about healthcare. They have no stake in the American game for ANYTHING. It's very easy to vote for goodies when the other guy is paying for it all.

Yes, this country is the most compassionate and generous in the world, and that's a good thing. But how can that continue if half the country doesn't have a stake in the fiscal game?
 
Never had a problem seeing a specialist my pcp wants me to see. Usually in a week at the most. I make it clear to him I will only see in network providers. I have plenty to choose from.

Me, too, Terry. And of course if the problem is urgent, you can get seen much more quickly. My sister, who has medical problems that can become very urgent very quickly, has been able to see specialists the same day a time or two. Our (my sister and I) experience in our Advantage plan has been that the more pressing the problem, the faster you get seen, which IMHO is the way it should be.
 
There certainly are a lot of myths being touted as fact in this thread about the Canadian healthcare system.

While there may be longer wait times in Canada for certain procedures, there are also lower overall costs for the care being provided. Yes Canada does prioritize the order in which one is treated based on the severity of their needs, but the US and every other country does as well. The longer wait times for patients in Canada are for elective surgeries, not for people in need of life saving procedures.

One fact I don't see anyone post here about the US healthcare system is that the US spends more than any other country on it's healthcare system yet is consistently ranked one of the lowest in overall healthcare quality. Canada ranks higher than the US in this category.

Sure the Canadian healthcare system has it's pitfalls just like the US system does, but the Canadian system is much easier to navigate and no one has to worry about whether or not they can afford the healthcare they need. Canada also has one of the highest life expectancies and lowest infant mortality rates in the world, they must be doing something right.

This article is a good read on some of the myths about Canadian healthcare.

5 Myths About Canadian Health Care

The truth may surprise you about international health care

by Aaron E. Carroll, M.D., M.S., April 16, 2012 | Comments: 548





740-canada-flag-made-of-red-pills.imgcache.rev4a75167ab688488f11dfd4ef494cd4f2.web.620.398.jpg
Photo by RK Studio/Kevin Lanthier/Getty Images

Health care systems differ, and there can be many myths about their pros and cons.




En español| How does the U.S. health care system stack up against Canada’s? You’ve probably heard allegedly true horror stories about the Canadian system — like 340-day waits for knee replacement surgery, for example.
To separate fact from fiction, Aaron E. Carroll, M.D., the director of the Center for Health Policy and Professionalism Research in Indianapolis, identified the top myths about the two health care systems.



Myth #1: Canadians are flocking to the United States to get medical care.
How many times have you heard that Canadians, frustrated by long wait times and rationing where they live, come to the United States for medical care?

I don’t deny that some well-off people might come to the United States for medical care. If I needed a heart or lung transplant, there’s no place I’d rather have it done. But for the vast, vast majority of people, that’s not happening.

The most comprehensive study I’ve seen on this topic — it employed three different methodologies, all with solid rationales behind them — was published in the peer-reviewed journal Health Affairs.



Source: “Phantoms in the Snow: Canadians’ Use of Health Care Services in the United States,” Health Affairs, May 2002.



The authors of the study started by surveying 136 ambulatory care facilities near the U.S.-Canada border in Michigan, New York and Washington. It makes sense that Canadians crossing the border for care would favor places close by, right? It turns out, however, that about 80 percent of such facilities saw, on average, fewer than one Canadian per month; about 40 percent had seen none in the preceding year.

Then, the researchers looked at how many Canadians were discharged over a five-year period from acute-care hospitals in the same three states. They found that more than 80 percent of these hospital visits were for emergency or urgent care (that is, tourists who had to go to the emergency room). Only about 20 percent of the visits were for elective procedures or care.

Next, the authors of the study surveyed America’s 20 “best” hospitals — as identified by U.S. News & World Report — on the assumption that if Canadians were going to travel for health care, they would be more likely to go to the best-known and highest-quality facilities. Only one of the 11 hospitals that responded saw more than 60 Canadians in a year. And, again, that included both emergencies and elective care.

Finally, the study’s authors examined data from the 18,000 Canadians who participated in the National Population Health Survey. In the previous year, 90 of those 18,000 Canadians had received care in the United States; only 20 of them, however, reported going to the United States expressively for the purpose of obtaining care.




Myth #2: Doctors in Canada are flocking to the United States to practice.
Every time I talk about health care policy with physicians, one inevitably tells me of the doctor he or she knows who ran away from Canada to practice in the United States. Evidently, there’s a general perception that practicing medicine in the United States is much more satisfying than in Canada.





The Canadian Institute for Health Information has been tracking doctors’ destinations since 1992. Since then, 60 percent to 70 percent of the physicians who emigrate have headed south of the border. In the mid-1990s, the number of Canadian doctors leaving for the United States spiked at about 400 to 500 a year. But in recent years this number has declined, with only 169 physicians leaving for the States in 2003, 138 in 2004 and 122 both in 2005 and 2006. These numbers represent less than 0.5 percent of all doctors working in Canada.

So when emigration “spiked,” 400 to 500 doctors were leaving Canada for the United States. There are more than 800,000 physicians in the United States right now, so I’m skeptical that every doctor knows one of those émigrés.



In 2004, net emigration became net immigration. Let me say that again. More doctors were moving into Canada than were moving out.



Myth #3: Canada rations health care; that’s why hip replacements and cataract surgeries happen faster in the United States.

When people want to demonize Canada’s health care system — and other single-payer systems, for that matter — they always end up going after rationing, and often hip replacements in particular.
Take Republican Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri, for example. A couple of years ago he took to the House floor to tell his colleagues:

“I just hit 62, and I was just reading that in Canada [if] I got a bad hip I wouldn’t be able to get that hip replacement that [Rep. Dan Lungren] got, because I’m too old! I’m an old geezer now and it’s not worth a government bureaucrat to pay me to get my hip fixed.”

Sigh.
This has been debunked so often, it’s tiring. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, for example, concluded: “At least 63 percent of hip replacements performed in Canada last year [2008] ... were on patients age 65 or older.” And more than 1,500 of those, it turned out, were on patients over 85.

The bottom line: Canada doesn’t deny hip replacements to older people.
But there’s more.
Know who gets most of the hip replacements in the United States? Older people.

Know who pays for care for older people in the United States? Medicare.

Know what Medicare is? A single-payer system.



Myth #4: Canada has long wait times because it has a single-payer system.
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.

Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.

Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course.





In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.

Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.

Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.



Myth #5: Canada rations health care; the United States doesn’t.
This one’s a little bit tricky. The truth is, Canada may “ration” by making people wait for some things, but here in the United States we also “ration” — by cost.

An 11-country survey carried out in 2010 by the Commonwealth Fund, a Washington-based health policy foundation, found that adults in the United States are by far the most likely to go without care because of cost. In fact, 42 percent of the Americans surveyed did not express confidence that they would be able to afford health care if seriously ill.



Source: “How Health Insurance Design Affects Access to Care and Costs, by Income, in Eleven Countries,” Health Affairs, November 2010.



Further, about a third of the Americans surveyed reported that, in the preceding year, they didn’t go to the doctor when sick, didn’t get recommended care when needed, didn’t fill a prescription or skipped doses of medications because of cost.

Finally, about one in five of the Americans surveyed had struggled to pay or were unable to pay their medical bills in the preceding year. That was more than twice the percentage found in any of the other 10 countries.


And remember: We’re spending way more on health care than any other country, and for all that money we’re getting at best middling results.
So feel free to have a discussion about the relative merits of the U.S. and Canadian health care systems. Just stick to the facts.
Aaron E. Carroll frequently blogs about this topic for The Incidental Economist and is the coauthor of Don’t Swallow Your Gum: Myths, Half-Truths, and Outright Lies About Your Body and Health.

https://www.aarp.org/politics-socie...ns/info-03-2012/myths-canada-health-care.html
 
JimW, I agree with you. I've been on a local Medicare Advantage plan for the last seven years, and I've been delighted with the care both I and my sister (on the same plan) have received. Neither one of us has ever experienced what the nay-sayers refer to as "rationing" of health care, nor have we waited inordinate times for care. or been turned down for needed care. My sister has had to have all kinds of specialized care (she has heart, circulatory, and pulmonary problems) and there's never been a delay or a hassle. I think a lot of the hand wringing many people do about single payer or (shudder) socialized health care is the result of people believing all the myths and propaganda against single payer.

Under Medicare and my Advantage plan, I get a helluva lot better and faster health care than many of my friends and acquaintances who are still working and are paying a fortune for insurance with huge deductibles and co-insurance payments.
 
JimW, I agree with you. I've been on a local Medicare Advantage plan for the last seven years, and I've been delighted with the care both I and my sister (on the same plan) have received. Neither one of us has ever experienced what the nay-sayers refer to as "rationing" of health care, nor have we waited inordinate times for care. or been turned down for needed care. My sister has had to have all kinds of specialized care (she has heart, circulatory, and pulmonary problems) and there's never been a delay or a hassle. I think a lot of the hand wringing many people do about single payer or (shudder) socialized health care is the result of people believing all the myths and propaganda against single payer.

Under Medicare and my Advantage plan, I get a helluva lot better and faster health care than many of my friends and acquaintances who are still working and are paying a fortune for insurance with huge deductibles and co-insurance payments.
Sounds like my experience with my Humana Medicare Advantage Plan@
 
Same here. We just had our Advantage plan stressed with its first major health test, and it worked out far, far better than we ever dreamed it would be. Experience was absolutely great with the care and low costs we experienced.
 
Same here. We just had our Advantage plan stressed with its first major health test, and it worked out far, far better than we ever dreamed it would be. Experience was absolutely great with the care and low costs we experienced.
If I may ask, what was your medical experience ??
 
Wife suddenly starting hemorrhaging internally. Hospitalization, ambulance, CT scan, 4 specialists, 20 care givers over three days; 1 day in ICU, 2 days recovering in a private room. She is now fine after they figured out what it was; total out of pocket expense: $708.00

This is just me, but personally, I can't imagine having to pay $200-$500 per month for a medigap plan to get the same treatment- all just to save a $45 co-pay. But I'm not rich, so we do what we have to do to live on our income.
 
Wife suddenly starting hemorrhaging internally. Hospitalization, ambulance, CT scan, 4 specialists, 20 care givers over three days; 1 day in ICU, 2 days recovering in a private room. She is now fine after they figured out what it was; total out of pocket expense: $708.00

This is just me, but personally, I can't imagine having to pay $200-$500 per month for a medigap plan to get the same treatment- all just to save a $45 co-pay. But I'm not rich, so we do what we have to do to live on our income.
I cannot afford one either so I will stick with Humana Medicare PPO Advantage plan.
 
JimW, I agree with you. I've been on a local Medicare Advantage plan for the last seven years, and I've been delighted with the care both I and my sister (on the same plan) have received. Neither one of us has ever experienced what the nay-sayers refer to as "rationing" of health care, nor have we waited inordinate times for care. or been turned down for needed care. My sister has had to have all kinds of specialized care (she has heart, circulatory, and pulmonary problems) and there's never been a delay or a hassle. I think a lot of the hand wringing many people do about single payer or (shudder) socialized health care is the result of people believing all the myths and propaganda against single payer.

Under Medicare and my Advantage plan, I get a helluva lot better and faster health care than many of my friends and acquaintances who are still working and are paying a fortune for insurance with huge deductibles and co-insurance payments.

Thanks for sharing your experiences Butterfly. In my opinion there is nothing worse than being ill or injured and having to weigh your health and well being with how much getting care will cost and whether you can afford it or not. Right now I am 15 weeks post op from a major foot and lower leg operation. I am having troubles with my calf muscle which was cut as part of the operation to relieve the tension in my leg. My Dr wants me to have another MRI done on my leg but it will cost me another $250 on top of the over $6K my wife and I have paid in total out of pocket expenses this year for the both of us. The MRI is scheduled for tomorrow, but I am debating whether or not to have it done due to the extra cost. My thinking is maybe the problem will heal itself in time. But then again what if it doesn't? Then I'll be out a few more weeks of being laid up and have to have the MRI done anyway. In this case I would love to be enrolled in a universal healthcare plan that would allow me to focus on getting better, rather than worrying if I can afford to get better.

For whatever reason, anything tagged with the "socialism" label in the US gets a bad rap by a good number of people no matter what it is. When the truth is a good chunk of our society runs on "socialistic" gov't funded programs that do far more good than bad, and more often than not the same people that trash anything to do with socialism are taking advantage of these programs whether they realize it or not. The entire US public education system is a socialistic program and so is medicare. So if you went to public school, received any gov't grants for college or are on medicare you're taking advantage of a socialistic program.

My wife is Canadian, her and her family always had and still do have good experiences with the Canadian healthcare system. When my wife moved here to be with me she couldn't get over the amount of red tape involved with getting proper healthcare, having to worry how much everything will cost and how screwed up the billing system is.
 
I cannot afford one either so I will stick with Humana Medicare PPO Advantage plan.

Unless you are 90 years old and/or have a really bad agent, it's very rare that a supplement will cost $200 but let's use that as the benchmark.

The $200 monthly will pay all for major illnesses to be covered for little or no out of pocket. So for example, cancer surgery and chemo will have virtually no out of pocket costs. The PPO will likely cost you $6,700 and if treatment spans over a year (meaning starts in Dec and continues past Jan) you'd be out $13,400. Can you afford that?

I'm not knocking Medicare Advantage but there are always two sides to the equation. (Something Bernie Sanders and his supporters don't realize).

The other issue with MA, especially those who love their HMO, is access to care. While many networks have quality doctors and hospitals, what if the best place for treatment is out of the area? I'm thinking Cedars, the Mayo Clinic, New York, etc.? With an HMO you are at the mercy of the medical group with whom you have contracted.

Again, Medicare Advantage has it's place and most people are indeed happy paying little or nothing for their coverage (keep in mind that Medicare pays $900/mo typically for these plans so they really aren't free). But insurance is not for what you have now - it's for what can happen.

I've enrolled probably 500-1,000 people in Medicare Advantage plans, mainly HMO. And rarely do I get a complaint. Fortunately I can afford the $140 it costs for a supplement and Rx plan. Should my wife need care I want her to get it from the best, not the doctor contracted with an HMO that we must see.

All this being said, I truly hope nobody has to receive anything but the best care regardless of plan.

Rick
 
The MA plan I have is affiliated somehow with M D Anderson; we actually have one of their satellite cancer treatment facilities here. If need be you can actually go to the MD Anderson down in Houston(?), but much of what they do there they do here, also. My niece was treated at the MD Anderson facility here Even if I weren't "at the mercy" of the group here, I would be at the mercy of my finances, which simply would not allow me to travel and have an extended stay at a hotel or apartment out of state while I was undergoing treatment. My out of pocket limit for 2019 is about $3,000. My MA plan also has a good drug plan.

I think it is probably a roll of the dice which plan is better for any particular person. I'll stick with my MA plan. The doctors in the plan are the doctors I would choose to go to anyway, and almost all the physicians in Albuquerque accept the plan (they also accept others, of course).
 
The MA plan I have is affiliated somehow with M D Anderson; we actually have one of their satellite cancer treatment facilities here. If need be you can actually go to the MD Anderson down in Houston(?), but much of what they do there they do here, also. My niece was treated at the MD Anderson facility here Even if I weren't "at the mercy" of the group here, I would be at the mercy of my finances, which simply would not allow me to travel and have an extended stay at a hotel or apartment out of state while I was undergoing treatment. My out of pocket limit for 2019 is about $3,000. My MA plan also has a good drug plan.

I think it is probably a roll of the dice which plan is better for any particular person. I'll stick with my MA plan. The doctors in the plan are the doctors I would choose to go to anyway, and almost all the physicians in Albuquerque accept the plan (they also accept others, of course).
Butterfly, MD Anderson has several low cost places a patient can stay here with one connected to the hospital itself. I know because a close friend of mine's husband is under going treatment and they are staying at one of them. they are unable to afford a hotel here in Houston. They may have options there also.
 
Hi terry123,

Knowing you have a brain aneurysm before it ruptured might not have made any difference to/for you. Course, I don't know. Maybe it could have been coiled or fixed.

I have known I have 2 brain aneurysms for a couple of decades now. I have had one minor bleed because of one of then, ugh, the headache was horrific. Or, as some doctors speculated, I had a third small brain aneurysm that burst. Doesn't matter.

But, my aneurysms cannot be operated on or coiled. They are small. One is on the communication artery too deep to even consider doing anything about. It only shows up if my blood pressure gets too high. The other one is on the right carotid artery near the nerves that control my sight. I joke when it goes I go with it.

This aneurysm has a "neck" and is blamed for a variety of TIA's and two small strokes that I have had over the years.

My third aneurysm is on the iliac artery in my abdomen.

I frequently wish I didn't know about them.

I hope you continue to get better.
 
Unless you are 90 years old and/or have a really bad agent, it's very rare that a supplement will cost $200 but let's use that as the benchmark.

The $200 monthly will pay all for major illnesses to be covered for little or no out of pocket. So for example, cancer surgery and chemo will have virtually no out of pocket costs. The PPO will likely cost you $6,700 and if treatment spans over a year (meaning starts in Dec and continues past Jan) you'd be out $13,400. Can you afford that?

I'm not knocking Medicare Advantage but there are always two sides to the equation. (Something Bernie Sanders and his supporters don't realize).

The other issue with MA, especially those who love their HMO, is access to care. While many networks have quality doctors and hospitals, what if the best place for treatment is out of the area? I'm thinking Cedars, the Mayo Clinic, New York, etc.? With an HMO you are at the mercy of the medical group with whom you have contracted.

Again, Medicare Advantage has it's place and most people are indeed happy paying little or nothing for their coverage (keep in mind that Medicare pays $900/mo typically for these plans so they really aren't free). But insurance is not for what you have now - it's for what can happen.

I've enrolled probably 500-1,000 people in Medicare Advantage plans, mainly HMO. And rarely do I get a complaint. Fortunately I can afford the $140 it costs for a supplement and Rx plan. Should my wife need care I want her to get it from the best, not the doctor contracted with an HMO that we must see.

All this being said, I truly hope nobody has to receive anything but the best care regardless of plan.

Rick


here in new york an f-plan runs almost 300 a month .location is a big factor as well as whether an age based state or community based. we use a high deduct. f-plan for 91 a month .. but 1/2 goes for our gym which is paid for now by silver sneakers ,so it is a great deal for us
 


Back
Top