Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

@NYl0bIP-14nhs and @NYl0bIP-14dhv, Guys , would you please take your biased political arguments elsewhere. Today we have the horrendous government takeover of roughly 1/6 of the nation's economy which is the abortion called the ACA to deal with, and that's a fact. If you have any solutions or tips for people stuck in the predicament in retirement like the OP, before Medicare kicks in, please post, if not, we don't care which party is responsible for destroying 1/6 of the economy and our healthcare system, the fact is that it's done and there's not much anyone's doing to fix it today.

@14dhv - Sigh ... I know it won't make any difference to you, but here are data on health care costs as you asked. This has some nice graphs but only goes through 2012 https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-history-of-health-care-spending-in-7-graphs/2012/01/09/gIQAFlCCmP_gallery.html. This goes through 2015 https://www.thebalance.com/causes-of-rising-healthcare-costs-4064878

As you would expect healthcare costs track healthcare premiums pretty well.

None of the sources I gave did any cherry picking, they were based on average costs of all plans of various types. And nowhere did I blame Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II or Obama or anyone else for the increase. I never mentioned politics at all. Not all problems in the world reduce to liberal vs conservative for goodness' sake.

14gye, It is obvious that your mind is made up, and you are totally convinced that President Bush, and anyone in his party(Republicans) are responsible for Obamacare, all of the rising health costs, the recent dramatic annual increases in health care and all health insurance/care cost increases, before, during and after the Obama administration. Note, none of your liberal sources mentioned health care costs themselves, only a few cherry picked premium cases. Thanks for your opinion and for providing us with tremendous insight into the level of truthfulness and sincerity of liberals and the democratic party and their underlying principles.

@14wol - Though greed and fraud certainly exist in the healthcare system, just like in any business, I don't think that they're a significant cause of the continuing large increases in healthcare costs. For that to be the case, greed and fraud would have to be increasing each year at such a rate that they would account for 50% or more of healthcare costs by now, and I don't see any evidence that that is happening. Looking at fraud, for example, one justification for the creation of HMOs in the 80s was to reduce unnecessary tests and procedures and eliminate fraud, since HMOs like Kaiser had control of every expenditure and there was no third-party to be billed. At first it did help, but eventually HMOs faced increasing costs as well. If fraud were a major factor, then HMOs like Kaiser should have been able to buck the trend and keep their costs from increasing, but that hasn't happened. As for greed, that's in the eye of the beholder. What seems like greed to a consumer is considered by a provider to be fair compensation for his effort and risks. As long as we run healthcare as a business, then we have to expect that providers will charge whatever the market will bear, that's just the nature of private enterprise. You wouldn't expect Chevron to keep it's prices low if another oil shortage develops. Changing that would require a massive change in the way we look at, deliver, and pay for healthcare in the US, and would come with it's own risks and problems.

Your right, 14bid. You covered things rather well with great historical perspective. I'm still struck with the question of "why" has healthcare costs skyrocketed out of control so rapidly? It's unbelievable to me that something like this has happened. I cannot shake the seemingly obvious reason is a combination of unbridled greed and fraud. It will take a lot of evidence to make me think otherwise.

@14flz - Chevron switches providers every few years, depending on who they think gives them the best deal. We've been self-administered, Blue Cross, United Healthcare, back to Blue Cross Anthem and some others I've probably forgotten. I remember when the HMO prices were quite cheap, and then suddenly they took off, sometime in the early 2000s I think (long before ACA). If you recall, both McCain and Obama ran on a platform of reigning in healthcare costs in 2008, they just had different ideas on the solution. The reason it was such an issue in the election was because premiums had been skyrocketing for many years, with no end in sight. The evidence suggests that the ACA actually helped reduce the rate of increase a bit, but the trend for at least 30 years has been for steep increases every few years.

@14gye, Chevron medical premiums went up less after Obamacare, particularly because we changed from United Healthcare to Anthem. Under Anthem, the high deductible plans were the more affordable plans. Premiums may have gone up less, in your view, but our coverage went down and maximum out of pocket expenses gone up. Something has to give, and it's usually the consumer (employee) who gets fvucked.

@14cbn - Chevron premium rates went up less after Obamacare than before. That's a fact which I know cause it was discussed frequently at my office when it happened. I remember in the late 90s and early 2000s when huge premiums spikes and higher deductibles each year where the norm.

In any case, employer health care premiums have increased less under Obamacare than under Bush. If you have any interest in seeing the actual data (which I doubt) check out

http://www.kff.org/health-costs/press-release/average-annual-workplace-family-health-premiums-rise-modest-3-to-18142-in-2016-more-workers-enroll-in-high-deductible-plans-with-savings-option-over-past-two-years/

Also http://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/slower-premium-growth-under-obama/ has a good summary.

Medical Insurance and medical costs rate increases were exacerbated in the years prior to the passing of Obamacare, as well as after and the rate increases were more than ever before, which was inevitable because of the party make-up of Congress - majority Democrat. The insurers and providers knew it was coming. That was widely publicized in all of the newspapers as well as medical journals & health related publications The ACA is owned by the Democratic Party and it is their baby. That is an indisputable fact. Many love the ACA and get great benefits, paid for by others, their fellow tax-payers who get much less or nothing. For those few, thank the democrats, and also, your neighbors who are subsidizing you.

There are those who will try to fake you out and quote rates which increased the same in certain cherry picked groups, or those which defied the averages. Makes no difference. Compare the rate increase of your policies before and after the ACA as well as cost for services. Only then will you begin to see the light. It's not very hard. Liberals would like you to believe otherwise, their strategy and entire ideology is based on falsehoods. Sort of like goods and services that can be provided "free of charge". No such thing. It's only a matter of who's paying.

@13wsa - Sure, medical insurance rates have been going up since the 80s in anticipation of Obama's election 20 years later. The rising cost of providing medical care due to new technologies, medicines, etc. had nothing to do with it.

This thread is about retiree health care, let's keep on topic please, thanks. Incidentally, what ever happened to the guys who claim that they are financially independent, and also that they are because they are dependent upon the government (for ACA subsidies) - a logical impossibility. I know, it's pretty pathetic, but that's the case for many. You work all those years and find yourself a parasite on the tax-payers. You also pay dearly your entire career for Medicare, but that's a different story, and for a different purpose and structured differently. The ACA is definitely broken and it has made insurance options for retirees younger than 65 very slim pickin's. I personally have no problem paying for my own, premium insurance, but the ACA has definitely driven the cost up. The cost were also increasing on employer based policies years before - in anticipation of the ACA, which was discussed frequently at my office when it happened. So don't come back with the baloney that insurance rates were going up regardless. You don't have your facts straight. Most of us who have been around awhile know better.

@13nlz - All your quote claims is that McVeigh was not part of some large right-wing conspiracy. It does not address whether he was right wing or left wing. As I already pointed out, if you read his own statements and letters, and know anything about his life it is clear that he was a right-wing terrorist. You have yet to present any evidence to the contrary that indicates that he was sympathetic to liberal causes.

WTF do any of the recent posts to this thread have to do with pre-65 retiree medical? Go fight your right-vs-left battles somewhere else, PLEASE!

@NYl0bIP-13wjk, I quoted a piece of text that I Googled, from the Internet, a commonly accepted and respected infopedia page online, easily found - I enclosed it in quotations, as is proper, not taking credit. Have you ever used Google? You can search for plenty of things that are not from left wing socialist (NAZ*I) sources like you do all day. I'm surprised that fascist liberals haven't learned to use the Internet yet, but know every form of hate speech imaginable.

BTW - You did not cite any sources of the opinions that you just stated in your post. No sources, yet you accuse someone else of same. ( you made a slew of accusations is all - he read this, that, or whatever, no proof, no sources)

Wow, and no, I don't need to EVER shut up for idiot free-speech objectors like you, the same types of Leftist anarchists who commonly object to freedom of speech at Berkeley. Common sense and truths are toxic to anti-free-speech liberals. It's a shame that the US constitution is not on your side when your party continuously tries to stifle free speech that you do not agree with!! So sad and Pathetic. Good night loser. BTW, you lost, don't you remember? Yes, start accepting that fact. I know That's been hard for you guys. Still crying about it, I see. Making up false narratives, lying , and repeating false leftist propaganda will not help you, but keep trying if you have no life and it makes you feel better.

@13dwn - At least I tell you my sources. You just spout off nonsense without any data at all to back it up. Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true. Timothy M. was obsessed with "The Turner Diaries" (written by a racist neo-Nazi), guns, and his hatred for the U.S. government and the United Nations. He referred to CA as "The People's Socialist Republic of California", his farewell letter to his friend Steve Hodge contained the statement "Good vs. Evil. Free Men vs. Socialist Wannabe Slaves". Does this sounds like a leftist? If you're going to make bizarre claims you should be ready to back them up with something other than "I'm right because I say so" and "you're brainwashed because you believe what everybody else believes." Present some actual evidence and sources or just shut up.

"Following the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing Leonard Zeskind teamed with James Ridgeway, who writes about right-wing politics for various liberal and leftist serials, and they produced a conspiracy theory of their very own.

“ There is every reason to believe that the attack was a call for revolution by the far right wing of this country, organized through the widespread militia movement and carried out by one of the leaderless terror cells created by that movement.

It is probable that the three men being held in connection with the bombing—Timothy McVeigh, James Nichols and his brother Terry Nichols—are all members of that same militia cell.[5]

”

None of this proved true, and one of the most intensive investigations in FBI history has failed to link these three to any militia organization in any significant way whatsoever. In addition, James Nichols was not even a defendant in the case. The article also refers to the Posse Comitatus, a radical tax protest group of mythical proportions, as a precursor to the militias.

In 1996 Zeskind was also a contributor along with Chip Berlet and others to Conspiracies: Real Grievances, Paranoia, and Mass Movements, edited by Eric Ward and published by PeanutButter Publishing. The general thrust of their contributions was to attack conspiracy theories of the right while ignoring those of the left."

13txu, I believe the truth and your opinion is is simply that, your twisted left-wing opinion. It is natural for people who have been brainwashed into the typical liberal ideology, predominantly supported by the media, to fall in line with all of their false narratives. You are believing what you want to believe and reading only articles and news reports which reinforce your own leftist opinion. Naturally all of the sources you site will blame right-wingers for all of the terrorism and if it is not so obvious (Like McVeigh) they will effectively dictate to you all of the characteristics (Invent, i.e. falsify) that any particular individual falls in line with to illustrate that they are right wing. Indeed, they will make that individual "right wing" in your socialist eyes.

I have some disturbing news for you, little fella. The opposing side is doing the EXACT SAME THING.

And they are no less believable in your argument than the sources that you insist are so perfectly reliable, truthful, and honest to all.

No, McVeigh was not a right-winger in the farthest stretch of anyone's imagination who can think for themselves, but liberal and most media pundits would like you to believe so, as they will with most domestic terrorists.

But you just keep thinking that, little fella, after all, they desperately need your support, following, worship and dedication, to simply exist at all, for that is all they have that is real about the narrative that they are feeding you. - You actually believe it.

@13txu, your source of data at newamerica.org explains to me why you think and say the things you say. Intelligent you are not. Wise up.

@12qku - If you believe that Timothy McVeigh was a leftist then you either are willfully ignorant or have no idea what the term leftist means. I'm guessing for you anyone you don't like or does something bad is a leftist by definition. And you think Soros funds the antifa? Well maybe the Koch brothers fund them to make the left look bad. See, I can make up ridiculous conspiracy theories to support any position too. It's just that I'm intelligent enough not to believe them. As for the leftists being the violent ones, the data just doesn't support that at all. From 9/11 to July 2016, there were 94 people killed in jihadist terrorist attacks, 50 killed in far-right attacks, and 5 killed in far-left attacks in the U.S. See https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/what-threat-united-states-today/

Violence and fear has long been the principal tools of the alt-left.

Actually, the source of most violence at the protests and street riots are left-wingers. Just as they showed up recently to disrupt a peaceful Patriot prayer group rally with minority speakers at Berkeley. The left routinely use violence to promote their socialist causes and usually succeed in shifting blame to the right. The latest attempt to do that was obviously a failure. The black hooded leftist thugs from LA were just too obvious. There is also a suspicion that they were hired, which is not surprising, probably the Soros gang. Another left wing created false myth is that McVeigh was a right winger, which he was not. There has been more domestic terrorism committed by leftists than right-wingers throughout history.

"Anarchists Carrying ‘No Hate’ Shields Assault People At Berkeley ... the Patriot Prayer group"

Masked leftists. You can't make this up. These are your so-called compassionate leftists, people.

@Ynqd, you are going by Newsweek as your source? No wonder you say it's the right-wingers who are the likely terroriists and not some of those in the Muslim population. Wake up and start profiling if you want to know your likely enemy. Their religion and culture will never mix with ours. Maybe you will when the next 911 happens.

@Ypry, Good point and thanks for schooling the closet racist.

Yljg, That's not what the poster suggested, or alluded to in the widest stretch of the imagination, it was strictly about those so-called "sponges" who do not contribute, but just take and come here or are here already simply doing that. Race or religion was never mentioned at all. Feel free to express your views of racism, and hatred against certain cultures and/or interjecting racism into every common sense argument if that is always in your mind and way of thinking about everything.

I am beginning to think that today crying racism falls into the same category as Godwin's law.

In essence, you lose by forfeit of an intelligent counter. It's popular, trendy, and too easy.

"I am not against the ACA in general", just when health care is provided to the undeserving... you know those blacks, and the Hispanics, and the long haired, and the Catholics (breed like rabbits and eat their savior every Sunday), which needless to say includes all the Irish, and most of the god damn French (although not generally Catholic still a--holes mostly), and well all descendents of Europe mostly but not as much as those slanty eye Asian (bugger the whole lot), but for sure the worst lot of all are the kangaroo f---ing assies; why are the flooding over our wall for health care!

-Ysqo: the problem is my man I every thing you say is ya an't got no truthiness: "MOST TERRORISTS IN THE U.S. ARE RIGHT WING, NOT MUSLIM: REPORT"... http://www.newsweek.com/right-wing-extremism-islamist-terrorism-donald-trump-steve-bannon-628381

Yes you are correct, and I am not against the ACA in general, or a more fair program similar to the ACA. But of course I am dreaming. That program would not allow rich people to sponge who do not need the aid, as current subsidies do, and it also would not allow recent immigrants to come in and sponge(definitely not illegals), who have not contributed or not much, and it would not allow d---beats who are drug users, smokers etc., abuse the system to their advantage, at the expense of tax-payers and those who follow the rules. There would have to be some discrimination, and the PC crowd would cry like pathetic little babies as usual, of course they need their freebees that they are born entitled to, provided by others, don'tcha know? In addition, there are still many border-line hard-working Medicaid/ACA recipients who cannot be helped as the dope addicts and smokers crowd the ERS's, the self-inflicted losers. I am completely convinced that the system today is worse than pre-ACA. It's definitely more expensive, for all involved. - Except of course for a few parasites milking the system, hence the fan-base for what's left of the pathetic half-gutted ACA.

You said it all, Xked. "You are lucky to be employed". Half of us on this site are not. So don't opine about the ACA because one day you might wish it was available for you. No one has a gun to our heads saying we must have an ACA plan. We have that choice if we choose to purchase such a plan - if we qualify of course. If I could wave a magic wand, I'd opt to have a good paying job and employer-paid medical insurance.

Yes, good point, the topic is health insurance. What does an honest, hard working contributor to society do when he or she is not an "I've got mine (the ACA under false pretenses), you get yours', Obama liberal who all want to say F.U. to everyone else now that they have subsidized health care paid for by the tax-payers in society. They all now want to say F.U. to the people who are footing the bill for them including those with meager earnings. Typical democrat takers.

I am lucky to have employer-provided insurance and good low cost retiree insurance from my Contract company which is much better than the ACA platinum plan but that seems to be a rare thing these days.

KKK and neo-natzy groups are liberals and all the main stream media reports nothing but fake news ... not worth continuing this conversation.

-Xleh, I see you only spout vague examples from over several decades with no actual sources or examples for your false tales. There are far more left wing hate groups and figures causing much more violence, riots and violent protests with loss of lives and property than the right wing extremists, (who I do not condone BTW,) could ever catch up with, but don't let facts get in the way of your altered reality.

A few more facts for you - the K.K.K = Democrat based, founded and endorsed. ( want to rewrite history?)

The National Socialist workers Party(N-A-Z-I) from pre WWII Germany = leftists. (Want to rewrite history?

Much more damage, destruction and deaths of innocents have been executed by left wing extremists throughout history than the right wing nut jobs could ever dream of, (and nutjobs they are!)

Protests recently in the US causing damage and deaths = majority left wingers

Murders and slaying = mostly left wingers(Gabby G, Steve S., etc.)

Protests with major damage - California, BLM, Ohio killings, Ferguson = left wing or immigrants let in by democrats.

BTW - McVeigh was no right winger but don't let facts get in the way of your false narrative.

And there were more violent leftist protestors at Trump rallies than at any Democrat engagement. The violence was completely done by violent leftists, unless you of course, choose to brainwash yourself with certain news sources who are only there to confirm your own false preconceptions, no need to name them.

"It seems like they are most likely to be victims of ... protester violence". Well let's fact check that ... random linching based in race (KKK), blows up a federal building (right wing nut), runs over a group of protesters with a car (right wing nut), encourages supporters to punch out protesters (Trump).... and on and on.

What's with all the stupid terms that you guys use when you are insulting people online anonymously like cowards?(Trump-this, Obama-that) Would you say these things to a person's face? I think not. You would end up in a dumpster in many cases. Rule of thumb; stop and think of what you would say if in an elevator face to face to the person. If you can't say it there, don't post it online. Just a tip.

-Xucx: Perfect example of Trumpolite road rage... overdue for your meds again?

Xxeb, Yes, thanks for revealing yourself as the liberal hypocrite that you are, with the dishonest post following the legacy of your mentors, pathological liars Hillary and Obama where you pretend to be fair and religious in the BS lies that you posted below: "I find generously from folks on both the left and right (and equal numbers of hypocrites and low lifes in each camp). God bless you also, may her grace lift you in your happiness."

It's nice to expose the truth first hand about liberal democrat parasitic atheists who are vengeful, insulting, envious, dishonest, are determined to steal from others rather than pay their way and are destined to burn in hell. You will also use the name of someone else's deity in vain as if they can't see through your pseudo-elite liberal narcissism. God bless yourself, prick. you need more help than anyone here can provide.

"can spot a liberal hypocrite a mile away"... I feel the same about Trumpolites ... but then I guess anonymous chat sites are not good venues to get folks to switch their preconceptions... in either direction ;-).

@NYl0bIP-Wnrt, Thanks so much for the well-wishes and anonymous success story (if you call it that) that there's no way to prove, and also the insults that you included in true liberal democrat fashion. An easy way to tell a liberal is they always insult anyone who doesn't agree with them, just so you know.

I did not vote for Trump, but can spot a liberal hypocrite a mile away.

Did anybody answer the OP's original question?

OP you have the right idea, but your current cost and company contribution are not relevant. The retiree plans are generally more expensive because they cover an older population with higher costs. I believe that the company contribution is also less. The best thing to do is to go to the benefits web site and find the function to model a life event. It used to be a bit difficult to find but if you call the benefits hotline they can help you find it.

If you decide not to opt into the retiree plan you may not be able to opt in again until you are eligible for Medicare. Up until a couple of years ago you could opt in or out every year at open enrollment. This is no longer the case. Your opportunities to opt back in are limited to a very small number of situations.

I'm not a free-loader, Wfrl, but please explain what a Trumpolite means to you. If you're calling me something, it's best you tell me what type of person that is first.

-Wyup: But it is other people who are the free loaders....you are a classic Trumpolite.