Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

I read and listen to NPR, and agree, they have a liberal bias and admit it, and are mostly moderate but I find them more informative and less rhetoric than most, and just change the station when they get a left-wing wacko article being read or one of the snoflakes on.

I do agree with @luek's point though, there are also many healthcare programs/doctors trying to game the system as well. And also, the lady in the article was not in for a life-threatening condition, if I read it correctly. If you cannot pay for healthcare, and it's not a life-threatening condition, since when do you get in line and in front of everyone else(many with serious conditions) as if you can pay then say you can't when you get to the appointment? There are many avenues to take care of people who cannot pay, and it's not by making the appointment, showing up, then on the day saying, by the way, I'm broke. At my hospital it's the same, and they will send you to the finance office if that's what you do. Then they will put you on some payment plan, etc. But they will not just accept you without the deductible, etc. before they clear everything with the insurance company, that doesn't happen until later. Too many low-lifes in there who think everything is free just because it's healthcare. Also some people think that healthcare is easy to get over on. because they are so forgiving in many cases. Have you ever just not paid? They do relatively little except pester you for over a year. There's no penalty, nothing. Just keep sending you mail with the same bill. I think after 2 years or so maybe it will go to a collection agency. I suspect that person just figured she would never pay. Many people never do with very little consequences. I don't blame them for cracking down on d---beats. "If I need medical care, I should be able to get it without having to afford it up front." LOL. That IS pretty funny, I agree.

What a typical knucklehead liberal parrot without a clue, who can't think for himself and just regurgitates bile and talking points that he is indoctrinated with from online sources and the liberal media. It must be miserable to be a liberal and not have a mind of your own that you know how to use or be able to construct a rational thought of your own. He indicated that this post was from "Breitbart or some right-wing website" and that the poster did not even READ the article after someone posted this:

"Read this priceless quote from an NPR article:

"I'm so angry," Boxley said. "If I need medical care, I should be able to get it without having to afford it up front." The person was not in for an emergency or life-threatening condition.

Therein lies the problem. If you can't see this type of attitude destroying America, it's time for you to find another country to live in."

@luek - Not surprised. I expect that @lvwm didn't even read the article he quoted, he probably just read the out-of-context quote in a Breitbart article or some other right-wing propaganda website. Spinning stories and twisting facts is their stock in trade.

@lvwm I Googled the statement you posted about Ms. Boxley and found that story and read it. You selectively quoted a sentence out of the whole story to imply a point that she is of the type to take advantage of the system. She doesn't have the money to pay the deductibles up front. She is not trying to scam the system.

Did you miss the title of that article? - Doctors And Hospitals Tell Patients: Show Us The Money Before Treatment.

According to that article:

"Boxley and her 13-year-old son have health insurance through her job as an administrative assistant in Tulsa, Okla. But the plan has a deductible of $5,000 apiece, and Boxley's doctor said he won't do the surgery until she prepays her share of the cost."

"I'll make payments," Boxley said, although she acknowledged what she could pay monthly would be small. If that doesn't pan out, she figures she'll have to use student loan money she got for graduate school to cover what she owes."

Now, did you see the news about hospital and doctors in Dallas actually scamming the system? - http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/21-indicted-in-massive-dallas-hospital-conspiracy/361163398

Why don't you think about these scammers when you talk about health care cost? I have a feeling that these white-collar scammers cost us more than the implied "takers" in your previous post.

Read this priceless quote from an NPR article:

"I'm so angry," Boxley said. "If I need medical care, I should be able to get it without having to afford it up front." The person was not in for an emergency or life-threatening condition.

Therein lies the problem. If you can't see this type of attitude destroying America, it's time for you to find another country to live in.

@lhar - So by your logic, professions that help humanity should be paid the least and those that hurt society should be paid the most. This seems like that's kind of the opposite incentives that society would want and is a recipe for society slowly decaying as more people abandon professions that do good. I'd be considered a liberal by most on this board, and even I see that the free market should decide physicians' incomes, not your beliefs. Health is the one thing you have that can't replace, and I want the best and brightest people in that profession, not just mediocre do-gooders. In any case, only about of third of health care premiums go to physicians, so there are a lot of other costs involved.

@luog, The medical profession is a noble one and most persons who choose this career, do it out of vocation to help humanity. It certainly requires great expense, learning and sacrifice to enter this career field. But, I will reiterate it should not be a lucrative one. You appear to support the idea that a doctor who may someday hold your life or death in heir hands, has the right to take your life savings just because he/she "learned and sacrificed" to enter this specific profession. The medical profession exists to save lives, not rob the patients of everything they own. As things are today, the cost of healthcare is insanely expensive.

@KoRx8YS-jxla , Who declares when any specific profession which is learned, sacrificed for, gone into debt for and lifetimes dedicated to becomes a "noble" one, and not a "lucrative" one, YOU? I don't think so. That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it. American also doesn't want or need a Euro-socialist style government run and dictated health care system. You are also welcome to move to one. Canada is close and a beautiful country. Please don't try to change ours, we are a land of capitalism and opportunity. I don't know if you noticed, but the people have spoken and the last leftist/communist leaning administration has been rejected completely.

@jwxg, Medical insurance is too expensive and that's that. I can't see any reason why premiums for anyone needs to be $1250 a month. That's criminal. The medical profession is supposed to be a noble one, not a lucrative enterprise. Sorry, but very few people are able to pay those kind of premiums for too long. Maybe the government solution to this entire mess is a single-payer universal system like in Canada and the U.K., only better.

So true, ibby. Often the younger folks take their healthcare for unimportant. Maybe it is when you're below 45 or 50. But once you top the 50-mark, all that changes and healthcare becomes something almost more precious than having a nice home, car or lots of money. Without your good health, life becomes a burden and not worth much living anymore. I hope the repeal and replacement of the ACA can solve many of the problems many of us under 65 are facing right now.

@KoRx8YS-idea Why don't we make sure that Medicare stays around by actively engaging the politicians? No reason to think that it will not be around. For those that have been working all these years and have paid into Medicare, it is not right that it will be going away.

@KoRx8YS-ipfc Sorry to hear that you are on Cobra. It would have nice if you are able to get Medicare (for all) and not have to worry about yourself and family when companies have to let go of people. We've paid taxes for good roads, schools, fire & police protections, but why don't we have good health protection? If anything, one's health is probably the most important thing that tax money should be helping.

-idea, I appreciate your feedback on the ACA. I am anticipating the need to take ACA medical when my subsidized cobra ends. Regular medical, including the Chevron retiree medical is too high for me to pay. I don't want to be paying the IRS a penalty for not having minimal insurance, so I may opt for an affordable ACA Plan that I don't have to use unless there's an emergency. Can you tell me what market you are in (Houston, Bakersfield, Covington, etc) and the name of the ACA Plan you are (or we're) on? I'd prefer to fall into a bad plan as you described. Thanks.

@idea, the Chevron Retiree Medical Plan is not guaranteed to stick around either. I sure hope it does stay, since I plan to wait another 6 years until I'm Medicare eligible. But, if you read the literature carefully that came out this past October, Chevron plants the possibility that it may disappear any year soon.

Stop with the BS, -hkwy and -hail. Everyone can see through your immature posts.

@hqym, Anyone outside of my friends who meet me in public would never guess I am a millionaire. I prefer it that way too, because I'm a reserved and frugal individual. I mentioned it in my previous post, but it doesn't mean I aimed to boast. No, I just mentioned it to make a point - being that I have money and can easily spend it, but don't relish squandering it. But, no worries. I know that likely flew over your head. ... :))

Gbfy: you are blowing smoke. The real truth is you are still laid off and about to lose your double wide. Get off this site, find a job and start paying your bills. We aren't buying your "I'm a millionaire" story, loser.

-gucz, The premium you pay in an ACA Plan all depends on your estimated household income. I did prepare myself very well many years ago for my retirement. I certainly didn't plan years ago or even in the last 5 years to see the obscene high price structure for healthcare. Luckily, I find myself in a position to game the system and "play poor" on paper. The ACA law was written with possible unforeseen opportunities (loopholes) for a few people like me to slip through and profit off the system. I'm a retired millionaire who worked hard and invested smart for this time in my life. Many on this site disparage my actions and call me a mooch or a thief. I know the real reason they say these things is because they themselves are no way prepared to retire the way I planned my financial well-being. While some may say they disparage me from a morale standpoint, I say back to them - No. There's nothing imorale about taking advantage of every legal opportunity this country affords to everyone to improve their lives. As for your opinion on the quality of healthcare between an ACA Plan and the Chevron Medical Plan, I'll say this - The ACA offers several plans ranging in price and quality. Everyone can pick something that suits them best. As for me, I have a Gold level ACA Plan for $68 a month. I've used the Plan twice in 2016 and I've found the care and quality exactly the same as what I enjoyed at Chevron, though for a fraction of the cost. If the cost was higher and only a little bit more expensive than the Chevron Retiree Plan, chances I would have opted for what I know best, the Chevron Plan. But that's not my case. A quality insurance plan for $68 is a no-brainer. That's why I have it and hope to keep it until I'm 65.

-gscm & -gxwt, Yes indeed, 'you do what you pay for' is very true. Let me tell what I'm getting and what I'm not paying for. I'm getting one of those hard-to-get ACA Plans that have a monthly premium of $1252, but after "playing poor" on paper and you picking up the tab, I'm not paying that. I'm only paying $68. Which one of us three is the smart one? I assure it's not either one of you two sad sacks. It's my turn to LMAO!

Anyone ever hear "you get what you pay for"? Well that includes health care. If you pay for low cost insurance, best to hope you only have minor medical problems or you will learn the hard way about getting what you pay for. Just saying

Thanks, @fhmg. This is @fczx. I appreciate your advice and you are 100% correct. If things get too expensive before we reach 65, i will find a good High Deductible Plan with a reasonably low stop-loss amount.

@fzcx - At your age, I would make sure that you at least keep a high-deductible plan of some sort. As you get older, things start to wear out. My wife's knee replacement cost about $65,000 even with plan discounts (the original bills totaled over $100K). We only paid the stop-loss amount at $3000. She's about your age, is in good health and rarely sees a doctor. You can always make more money, but you only have one body.

@fmcl, you consider $1100 medical insurance premiums for 2 people in retirement to be reasonable? Are you nuts? That might be what's being quoted to folks but that amount is unacceptable to me. My spouse and I are 58 and 59 years old. We are in good health and very rarely have to see a doctor. Pissing away $1100 a month for insurance is unacceptable for me. I'd rather bank that money and pay out of pocket if I need to see a doctor. My current plan is "playing poor" and going with the ACA. If it's eliminated and the premiums go over $400, we will opt for no insurance until we are 65. Then I'll be knocking on Chevron's door at open enrollment time.

@ftfx You posted "Hopefully not the insurance system prior to the ACA that denies coverage when people needed the insurance. " Please explain that. If you were denied services that a provider promised, that sounds like a broken promise or contract by the company, sort of like "you can keep your doctor, or the average family will save $2700 annually" and you can sue and they should be held liable. I did not ever have that happen before and never have anyone in my family or anyone that I know. My spouse has a pre-existing condition. My state has a law which says that insurance cannot be denied to those with a pre-existing condition. It may be expensive but you can always get it. The pre-existing condition rule was to deter people from only obtaining insurance on the spot just when they got sick and then going without the rest of the time. Sounds fair to me to keep the scumbag bottom feeders from sponging off of people who work-hard, prepare and make the right decisions. It is unlikely that the rules from the ACA about pre-existing conditions will be changed if that is any consolation for you. You use the typical liberal buzz-words like global, etc. addressing health care. I have lived overseas for many years and experienced Euro-socialist style health care personally. It is not convenient and no where near as extensive as we are offered in the US. I do not like it, do not want it and pray that we don't get anything that horrid in the United States any time soon, or at least in my lifetime, what's left of it. Our choice of better healthcare if we work hard all of our lives to pay for that instead of useless material luxuries( fancy cars, homes, etc) is what makes America great. It is not an "inborn right" of any individual, contrary to some pathetic useless individual's beliefs and it requires the labor and sacrifice of others who merit proper reimbursement. Sure, there's fraud and abuse and companies need to be regulated. Unfortunately, It only got worse under the ACA. Everybody won but the patients with the ACA.

$1100 is reasonable for 2 people in retirement if the deductible is not too high and the max out of pocket not too high. Estimate $15k annually in retirement for healthcare. it will be considerably less if you are healthy and don't have any problems. If you don't work, those are the breaks. Cheap insurance is a company benefit, most people don't realize it, it's essentially part of your paycheck. If you did not retire too early, you should not have more than 5 to 10 years of that before Medicare and the prices go down. If you did, re-evaluate whether or not you can afford to FIRE.

Eyrr. So which plan did you find best ? My thought is the hdhp plan is best. Lower cost than ppo but the difference in premium makes up for the higher deductible. HDHP basic is not as attractive as the reduction in premium does not offset the deductible. This is from a catastrophe perspective. Are these plans all available for pre 65s ? Need to decide from tomorrow so interested in all opinions. Will also do my own due diligence but all data pints welcome. I haven't called hr2 yet so is $1100 for hdhp reasonable (90 points). Thx.

@KoRx8YS-eyrr I guess the ACA didn't work really well for you, but what do you propose we change it to? Hopefully not the insurance system prior to the ACA that denies coverage when people needed the insurance. There's got to be a better way. As you said "In real life when you get sick it is ANYTHING but affordable." in the current system. How about single payer for all - like Medicare? Or look around the world to see what works and adopt those best practices. I am getting close to retiring and I don't want to have to deal with the complexities of getting medical services that may set my financial situation back. Imagine if you need medical care and you went to the in-network hospital but later to find out that the doctor(s) that worked on you were not part of your insurance network and getting a huge bill from the doctors. This was reported recently in the news. I think the ACA is moving the right direction. It needs to be improved on.

Would you guys who want to discuss TIPS and low risk interest plays start your own thread? This one is about medical insurance.

I've been having pretty good luck with ishares DVY as part of the low-risk couch potato portion of my portfolio since retiring. I get a pretty consistent 3.28% dividend, taxed pretty low depending on the bracket, don't know all the figures on that. Of course that type of thing is not for everyone and everyone is not comfortable managing their own investments. It's not invincible to crashes but since it's an ETF you can dump it all at any time and just cash out. YMMV.

@epif, you sound disingenuous to me. Just saying.... If I were to give you a small benefit of the doubt, I'd have to tell you it's your own fault for selecting an ACA medical plan that didn't serve you. Either you selected one too quickly based on the premium without considering the deductible and copayments, or you simply are not telling the readers the truth. If you're here to propagate fear and lies, you serve no one including your productive time. I live in Houston and have an excellent ACA medical plan. I've used it twice this year and it has worked very well for me. No surprises and no excessive costs. I already reenrolled in the same ACA plan for 2017. Next time you venture into important decisions in life, take more than 5 minutes before choosing. Do your homework first.

I have had insurance through the ACA exchange until next year when I will be switching over to CVX retiree insurance. I have had nothing but higher costs and poor service with the ACA system. I am sick and tired of it. At the end of the day I ended up paying more out of pocket because of the higher costs on what I consider routine services and prescriptions. I did the math. Don't be fooled by the low premiums. You will save money if you don't need to use it. Sure. great. I will be so happy when I leave that chapter of my life behind me. I am too old to be getting scammed into low premiums only to have sky-high bills for routine labs. I would avoid the ACA at all costs, is my recommendation, if you can afford it at all. I would be willing to give up something else for decent health insurance. You health is more important than anything else. You will either pay now or pay later. your choice.

@KoRx8YS-ezbe , No one promised you 2 to 3% with no risk, smart-A$$. But you can easily obtain that with very little risk. You should know how, after your diatribe of financial adviser wannabe gibberish, or are you just a poser or cut-and paster who knows nothing?

I repeat - "TIPS are pretty much bond funds, available from Schwab, Fidelity, Vanguard, etc. in many flavors and forms in both Mutual fund and ETF . TIPS - Treasury Inflation Protected Securities. "

i.e. Schwab US TIPS ETF™ SCHP , 99.97% bonds

Now - go ahead and pick that apart by claiming that I am wrong because of some subtle detail. or that particular fund is not doing great lately. Not the point. I don't use Schwab.

AGAIN - I'm not doing your investment research for you or making any recommendations. That's for you to do, you seem to be able to find things on the internet. Keep it up, you will get there.

2 to 3% is easy to obtain and I am getting more than that handily in the "safe" investment portion of my AA. And I have cash getting 1.05%. No problem. Many people consider their ultra-safe investments, even low risk bonds and other low risk vehicles, fixed guaranteed return 401k funds, as part of their "cash", in a manner of speaking, in retirement circles, although I wouldn't, but I get the point. Don't pick it apart. It's subjective, like an opinion. Feel free to disagree, but it's not "wrong" because you don't like the words they use.

@eafj, the ACA is not a crap shoot if you can get it. Sure it may not be around for much longer, but if you can qualify, it is a better alternate cost-wise than the Chevron Medical Plan. There are several plans to choose from, so there will be one that compares close or equal to the Chevron Plan. Put the beer down and stop posting your crappy opinions.

@emxv - Inflation-protected bond funds are not the same thing as TIPS. TIPS are sold by Uncle Sam, and are "cash-like", in that you can always get your original principal back if you hold them to maturity. They are sold at auction and but recent interest rates for 5 and 10-year bonds have been .125%, which means you get .125% plus inflation. Inflation in 2015 was .75% for a total yield that year of less than 1%, which is not quite what a good savings account would have gotten you. And of course, unless you want to sell the bond (at a possible loss), your money is stuck for 5 or more years. TIPS are not really an alternative to a savings account, but they are useful for investors worried about rising inflation.

Bond funds are a different beast. I don't consider bond funds to be "cash-like" because their value is sensitive to interest rate changes. Yes, they are generally a lot less volatile than stock funds, but they can lose value, and not just as a result of deflation. I own some VTIP (Vanguard Short-Term Inflation-Protected ETF), which, like most inflation-protected bond funds, is still below it's 2012 high. Bond funds are certainly an important part of one's portfolio, especially in retirement, but for financial planning purposes, they are in a completely different category than cash.

Putting short-term money in high-yield savings accounts (currently about 1%) is actually quite sensible. So I repeat, if you can find a way to make 2 to 3% with no risk and no time restrictions, I'm all ears.

Eafj- that's exactly where I'm coming from although I probably put it over a bit more delicately 😊

@etor - Seems to me that if you find another job with insurance and drop the Chevron Medical, then subsequently leave that job and lose that coverage, you should be able to re-sign up for CVX coverage (as long as you do it within the 31-day limit). Losing group coverage from another employer is an enrollment milestone that allows you enroll. I don't see any restriction that says you can't do it if you've ever enrolled in CVX Pre-65 Retirement medical. In fact, it seems to me you could signup and drop CVX retirement coverage as many times as you want, as long as you always re-enroll within 31 days of losing your other group coverage. Maybe I'm missing some fine print somewhere.

Exrv - thanks, I will look into that. I'm 55 now and will draw the annuity in three years. Although not working now I will have 70k income next year (unavoidable) making Obamacare at least equivalent to the high deductible CVX plan. So at most I will have 2 yrs opportunity on Obamacare subsidies saving maybe 20 grand. Then I will retire properly and enjoy life. Fortunately I can cover this and just feel more comfortable on the CVX plan. I do appreciate all the feedback on this site. Although it's a forum it does get you to think about and investigate alternatives that others have considered. I should consider myself fortunate to be in a financial position where I can make different decisions that may not be workable for others. Good luck to all.

@ecbs, since you are 58 years old and ready to start drawing a US/UK pension that is paid annually, as an annuity I presume, you may want to consult a tax specialist before year end. I'm not sure if it's possible, under US or U.K. tax law, but since your income will be from a retirement pension, maybe it could be entirely or partially redirected into a tax-deferred IRA until you become 65. If a creative tax strategy can be set up to defer some or all of that retirement income, you could possibly lower your taxable income to qualify for an Obamacare subsidy and get some affordable medical insurance for the next year or two at least.

Erie. Good points. However, if you can afford to retire and any future job is for gravy and keeping busy then the retiree option will be a good option. Any future salary would more than cover the difference in premiums. I am in that category and will commence drawing about 80k-100k in retirement in 3 years ( age 58). That will make Obamacare prohibitive anyway (if it exists) and more expensive than retiree coverage. And then I'd have to wait until 65 before I could get back onto CVX. There's clearly no generic solution for everyone ! (I have a U.K./US pension which is based on final salary, paid annually. Total lump sum is not an option, so all the reduce income to increase subsidies with Obamacare do not really apply).

@etor, that would be your only choice; to keep the more expensive Chevron Medical. That's why anyone who plans to look for a new job and cannot afford to retire right away, should forego Chevron Medical until the last enrollment opportunity, at age 65. It would be a shame on anyone who blows it and later in life can't get into the Chevron Medical Plan when they need it most and when it's easiest to afford. Look for a catastrophic medical insurance plan or Obamacare or just opt to live without medical insurance for a few years. Seems to me that getting a full time job with anyone, more for the employer medical coverage than the pay could be a Plan B for many older folks.

Dyll- if you enroll in CVX retiree plan and then get another job you don't have to relinquish the CVX coverage. You just don't take the new employer coverage. Will be a more costly approach but will save the CVX plan for post 65. That's my take.