Obamacare

[travelover]

Not being an early adopter, I'm just now reading the Time article on health care costs. I've gotta say that we are screwed until we can limit lobbying to congress. The ACA is juggling the firemen but no one is pursuring the arsonist.

 

[ERD50]

I've gotta say that we are screwed until we can limit lobbying to congress.

Or maybe we could elect a Congress that isn't so easily bribed?

If someone offers me obviously stolen goods, I just say "No" (and maybe alert the cops, depending on circumstances). I don't take the 'deal' and then blame the guy for offering them to me.

-ERD50

 

[MichaelB]

Getting off topic here folks...

 

[ERD50]

Getting off topic here folks...

Oooops! Sorry!

It's like dangling raw meat in front of a dog, I can't help myself ! I'll put that part of me back in my cage now, thanks for the gentle reminder


-ERD50

 

[gerrym51]

Hi guys,

i made a separate thread about signing up for healthcare using the massachusettes health connector which is the same as an Obamacare exchange.

some old and new insights based on me actually signing up for this coverage



gerry

 

[gerrym51]

I'm not good with links-but the 15 page Obamacare subsidy request form for subsidies for obamacare is on the web-link on Drudge

 

[bondi688]

Study: Claims costs that drive premiums will rise 32 percent in under health law - The Washington Post
"A new study (by the Society of Actuaries) finds that insurance companies will have to pay out an average of 32 percent more for medical claims on individual health policies under President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. What does that mean for you?
It could increase premiums for at least some Americans.
If you are uninsured, or you buy your policy directly from an insurance company, you should pay attention.
But if you have an employer plan, like most workers and their families, odds are you don’t have much to worry about."

It is a long and complicated study from the advanced math nerds,
http://cdn-files.soa.org/web/research-cost-aca-report.pdf
the impact apparently will depend on the state you live in and where you get health insurance coverage. If you have an employer plan, the impact may not be so great, but for most of those in ER, unless they are getting MediCare, they no longer have an employer, and have to look for and pay for their own health insurance policies. And according to the study, that group will see the largest increase in health insurance policy premiums.

 

[Richard8655]

Study: Claims costs that drive premiums will rise 32 percent in under health law - The Washington Post
"A new study (by the Society of Actuaries) finds that insurance companies will have to pay out an average of 32 percent more for medical claims on individual health policies under President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. What does that mean for you?
It could increase premiums for at least some Americans.
If you are uninsured, or you buy your policy directly from an insurance company, you should pay attention.
But if you have an employer plan, like most workers and their families, odds are you don’t have much to worry about."

It is a long and complicated study from the advanced math nerds,
http://cdn-files.soa.org/web/research-cost-aca-report.pdf
the impact apparently will depend on the state you live in and where you get health insurance coverage. If you have an employer plan, the impact may not be so great, but for most of those in ER, unless they are getting MediCare, no longer have an employer, and have to look for and pay for their own health insurance policies. And according to the study, that group will see the largest increase in health insurance policy premiums.

To me it means ACA is working as intended. Insurance companies will be required to allocate more of their profits toward actual medical care for the insured and less for extravagant executive salaries, bonuses, administrative overhead, and bureaucracy. If they plan to make up this rebalance by passing those costs onto the consumer in the form of higher premiums, I believe ACA will prevent that as well. A victory for American consumers, in my opinion.

 

[Animorph]

I'd be tickled pink to pay only 32% more than the currently unerwritten individual policies when I have to go shopping for HI in 2014. We may or may not have qualified for those low rates, but I'm 100% sure of getting insurance in 2014.

 

[bondi688]

Richard8655
I hope you are right, but I find all the different takes from every side in the battle confusing. It is hard to know who one should believe. Trying to find politically neutral parties in this fight to gauge their opinion on the subject.

 

[Richard8655]

Richard8655
I hope you are right, but I find all the different takes from every side in the battle confusing. It is hard to know who one should believe.

Agreed, bondi. We'll probably have to wait and see how this works out next year.

 

[Brat]

Here is my take: many in the individual market are not insured because of pre-existing conditions. The first couple years those folks will choose 'full meal deal' policies which will drive the costs of those policies up. In a year or two this will settle down, actuarially.

Keep in mind that the cost of treating the uninsured has been shifted to those who have insurance in the past. Now many of the uninsured will be able to buy insurance which should alleviate some economic burden on the rest of us.

 

[bUU]

To me it means ACA is working as intended. Insurance companies will be required to allocate more of their profits toward actual medical care for the insured and less for extravagant executive salaries, bonuses, administrative overhead, and bureaucracy.

Precisely. The aim shouldn't be to leave in place a system where some people can afford to be healthy and others cannot; there is an overwhelming cost to that, most of which cannot be measured by a dollar amount.

It is hard to know who one should believe.

For this issue, I hear relatively little actual lying going on. I think that's because both sides know that the issue is so important that everything they say will be fact-checked.

Trying to find politically neutral parties in this fight to gauge their opinion on the subject.

Moderates can often be found when people are arguing about incremental differences. This argument, as has been the case with several others recently, isn't an argument about incremental differences, but rather about diametrically-opposing, fundamental principles: Are we a society? or are we a collection of sovereign citizens? The legislation has to come down to splitting the difference in some way, but it isn't a matter of some kind of sliding scale between two mathematical models, but rather is simply horse-trading between two utterly incompatible views.

 

[pb4uski]

To me it means ACA is working as intended. Insurance companies will be required to allocate more of their profits toward actual medical care for the insured and less for extravagant executive salaries, bonuses, administrative overhead, and bureaucracy. If they plan to make up this rebalance by passing those costs onto the consumer in the form of higher premiums, I believe ACA will prevent that as well. A victory for American consumers, in my opinion.

The expected increase in claims cost is due to expansion of benefits and no underwriting. There has been a medical claims cost ratio restriction for over a year that limits the portion of premium that covers expenses and profit so the increase in the study has nothing to do with what you wrote. You probably should learn what you are talking about before getting on your soapbox.

 

[travelover]

Richard8655
I hope you are right, but I find all the different takes from every side in the battle confusing. It is hard to know who one should believe. Trying to find politically neutral parties in this fight to gauge their opinion on the subject.

Not to reopen an argument, nor to turn this political, but I think that the best advice for getting to the truth in any issue is to follow the money.

Who benefits from maintaining status quo, who benefits from change? Who is lobbying for what? What is the competition (rest of world) doing and why?

 

[bUU]

Not to reopen an argument, nor to turn this political, but I think that the best advice for getting to the truth in any issue is to follow the money.

However, isn't that playing into the hands of those who care about nothing other than (their own) money? If you let others set the agenda, then what is considered important will be a reflection of their priorities, not a consensus view of society's priorities.

 

[MichaelB]

Back of the envelop math on healthcare insurance policy cost.

Healthcare today costs, on average, $8k or so per person. Adding an additional 20% , the average policy would cost between $9 to $10k. The allowable range for age is 3x, so that could mean a policy for a whippersnapper is $5k and for an old phart is $15k.

People paying less that than should expect to see their policy costs increase over time. Some folks will be fortunate and have their policies subsidized by the employer. Good for them. Others currently have their policy costs subsidized by keeping less healthy people out of the insurance market. Their costs will be going up in January.

As we do away with medical underwriting much of the cost shifting and reallocation will go away. Hopefully, when everyone sees just how costly health care is, we can actually do something about it.

 

[bUU]

That's really the key: What is the money being spent on, not who is it being spent on. If there are costs that simply shouldn't be incurred, let's ban those expenses before we do anything else because that's surely something we all can agree on.

 

[grasshopper]

I always thought that high deductibles, would lead folks to a healthier life style, i.e. less costly health insurance. Now it looks like you don't have to care. Eat, smoke, drink, and be merry.

 

[george76]

I always thought that high deductibles, would lead folks to a healthier life style, i.e. less costly health insurance. Now it looks like you don't have to care. Eat, smoke, drink, and be merry.

You could say the same thing about just about every west European country that has universal health care. They don't have to care. They can eat, smoke, drink and be merry.

Yet, they spend less than us on healthcare, while at the same time they are healthier and live longer than us.

 

[Richard8655]

The expected increase in claims cost is due to expansion of benefits and no underwriting. There has been a medical claims cost ratio restriction for over a year that limits the portion of premium that covers expenses and profit so the increase in the study has nothing to do with what you wrote. You probably should learn what you are talking about before getting on your soapbox.

Your ignorance of the law is astounding. How sad for someone to comment here while lacking proper understanding. ACA has everything to do with controlling how profits are allocated. Suggest you read up on this.

Last time I checked, everyone is allowed to express their opinions and views here, so please don't denigrate with your soapbox comment. I hear people get grumpy as they get older...

 

[MichaelB]

We're among friends, so let's keep it friendly and respectful

 

[winger]

I"m certain that everyone that posts here is "on their soapbox".

 

[gerrym51]

You could say the same thing about just about every west European country that has universal health care. They don't have to care. They can eat, smoke, drink and be merry.

Yet, they spend less than us on healthcare, while at the same time they are healthier and live longer than us.

i am not an expert on healthcare but-most european countries have universal health care(run by government). if they say an MRI is 200 for example it's 200 dollars-they set the price. in the US the government does not set the price( although individual insurance plans negotiate a price).

because of this i don't think you can compare the costs.

 

[Texas Proud]

Back of the envelop math on healthcare insurance policy cost.

Healthcare today costs, on average, $8k or so per person. Adding an additional 20% , the average policy would cost between $9 to $10k. The allowable range for age is 3x, so that could mean a policy for a whippersnapper is $5k and for an old phart is $15k.

People paying less that than should expect to see their policy costs increase over time. Some folks will be fortunate and have their policies subsidized by the employer. Good for them. Others currently have their policy costs subsidized by keeping less healthy people out of the insurance market. Their costs will be going up in January.

As we do away with medical underwriting much of the cost shifting and reallocation will go away. Hopefully, when everyone sees just how costly health care is, we can actually do something about it.

Is it $8K per PERSON

Hmm, I see you say healthcare cost and not insurance cost... but still want to check what you are saying.. IOW, our company insurance cost about $4K for individual and a bit over $10K for a family... this is total costs paid to the insurance company...