Obamacare To Increase Individual Health Insurance Premiums By 64-146%

2»

Replies

  • dryfliedryflie Senior Member Posts: 1,442 Senior Member
    joekrz wrote: »
    Yes. My wife sells health insurance. A lot of people that are under 30, non-smokers, good health etc. are getting major medical insurance plans for $100-$125 a month and the plans also include preventive care. This being individual coverage. Not family.

    I'm sure there are cases where fees are low but deductibles high, PPO's instead of HMO's etc etc. I think you have to look at the insurance fee structure in it's entirety and not just at individual segments.

    BTW my wife's COBRA following my retirement was $400 a month. Good Corp plan however with reasonable deductibles.
    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” - John Kenneth Galbraith
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    My brothers cobra in HI for an individual is $300 / month. My cousin in California was the same. When I was in NY $400.

    As Dryflie kind of noted, you're comparing apples to oranges again. Under COBRA, you get what your company had and you pay what your company paid. A young kid can always save going into the private market since he's not subsidizing some old guy.
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 10,246 Senior Member
    dryflie wrote: »
    I'm sure there are cases where fees are low but deductibles high, PPO's instead of HMO's etc etc. I think you have to look at the insurance fee structure in it's entirety and not just at individual segments.

    BTW my wife's COBRA following my retirement was $400 a month. Good Corp plan however with reasonable deductibles.

    Standard deductible for the monthly premiums I mentioned is $5000.

    As Steve noted...You can't compare COBRA to the private market. That and insurance is much more expensive at or near retirement age.

    From ehealthinsurance website...

    Capture2_zps14af75b6.jpg

    Capture1_zps3146bb0b.jpg
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,418 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    As Dryflie kind of noted, you're comparing apples to oranges again. Under COBRA, you get what your company had and you pay what your company paid. A young kid can always save going into the private market since he's not subsidizing some old guy.

    I am not comparing. Just stating facts and what your company provides is what most people get. See post #8.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 10,048 Senior Member
    Being insured by United is better than no insurance at all, but not by much. They are the bottom of the barrel for both consumers and docs. Many practices in my area will not accept any of their plans.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    I am not comparing. Just stating facts and what your company provides is what most people get. See post #8.

    Well then, thanks for the info. If I ever need COBRA in Hawaii or California, I'll know what to expect to pay.
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 10,246 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    Being insured by United is better than no insurance at all, but not by much. They are the bottom of the barrel for both consumers and docs. Many practices in my area will not accept any of their plans.

    Like anything else, probably depends on experience and perspective.

    I've heard the same things said about Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

    We used to have Security Health where I work. Now we have WPS effective January of this year. We had WPS once before at work in the past. I hated them...it was like pulling teeth to get them to pay on claims half the time...never had that issue with security health. Only reason company changed was that WPS came in $3000 less then SH for comparable coverage.



    Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    I htink people are misunderstanding the nature of the reform going on here. Short term disruptions in the health financing market were pretty much assured by ANY attempt to modify the market. The question is not whether rates will go up THIS YEAR (BTW, my company insurer attempts to raise rates by about 30% at EVERY renewal which occurs every 2 years), but whether we can reduce rates over the long haul by bringing everyone into the market, rather than leaving 40 million people outside the market. It'st he usual problem in american politics, everyone wants instant gratification and when they don't get it, they blame the system rather than recognizing that change takes time.
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    Bringing everyone into the market has nothing to do with cost saving in the short or long haul. It only has to do with some notion - appropriate or misguided - about equity and fairness. Is it equitable for everyone to have insurance regardless of health status? Is it fair for older people to pay significantly more than younger?

    The cost savings portion could have been achieved without the mandate through the MLR requirements and the creation of the exchanges.

    When the health insurance industry moved to a strict capitation HMO model, there were initial savings - but then the cost of insurance accelerated like it always has. Possibly, this would have been the same result under Obamacare, except that any savings has been eaten by the addition of such things as pregnancy, mental health, substance abuse, and birth control coverages that one did not have to buy before.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,418 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    Well then, thanks for the info. If I ever need COBRA in Hawaii or California, I'll know what to expect to pay.

    Point is this is the insurance that real people have and this is what it costs. So stop telling me about $20/month insurance.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    joekrz wrote: »
    Standard deductible for the monthly premiums I mentioned is $5000.

    in other words your average 30 year old will only get to pay for insurance not actually use it
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    Steven wrote: »
    Bringing everyone into the market has nothing to do with cost saving in the short or long haul. It only has to do with some notion - appropriate or misguided - about equity and fairness. Is it equitable for everyone to have insurance regardless of health status? Is it fair for older people to pay significantly more than younger?

    I find that statement and those rehtorical questions absurd.

    The cost savings that ACA hopes to achieve has veyr much to do with bringing everyone to the market. The fact that was argued over and over again as one of the justifications for ACA is that those of us with insurance are currently subsidizing those without. Requiring coverage for all avoids free riders, reducing the extent to which folks like me have to subsidize those who choose to go uncovered. Health care prices should go down (or at least slow the rate of climb) if the hospital is no longer recouping the cost of treating the uninsured by overcharging the insured. When health care prices go down, premiums should go down or, again, at least see a slower rate of inflation. Second, by encouraging early stage care rather than emergent care of preventable conditions, total health care costs should be contained.

    Either you missed 15 years of debate or you are speaking a different language than I, but restraining both health care costs and premiums were definitely among the goals of the ACA.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,418 Senior Member
    We really should do more though to reduce the costs paid for hospital services. $1,000 for an aspirin is ridiculous.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    Point is this is the insurance that real people have and this is what it costs. So stop telling me about $20/month insurance.

    There's the comparison again (and it's $100). The fact is there are something like 14 million Americans that have nothing like COBRA.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,418 Senior Member
    No they have employer coverage that costs just as much when you include the portion paid by the employer. The majority of Americans do not have "Rainmaker" coverage.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    Comic, you're making the same mistake over and over again.

    There are 14 million Americans in the individual market. It is split evenly between IMM and STM.

    You are comparing what some people get to what others get. The point the Forbes author made was that if somebody today is paying A in the individual major medical market, then he's going to be paying more than A once his insurance expires. To say that a Bronze plan with a 60AV is less than COBRA, and thus people are saving money is bulls-t. I thought we all agreed to this.
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 10,246 Senior Member
    monkeydoes wrote: »
    in other words your average 30 year old will only get to pay for insurance not actually use it

    Same could be said for home insurance or auto insurance. I've been paying for home insurance for 17 plus years and never had to use it.

    I'm not sure what your point is.
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    joekrz wrote: »
    Same could be said for home insurance or auto insurance. I've been paying for home insurance for 17 plus years and never had to use it.

    I'm not sure what your point is.

    when they turn 50 the insurance companies can cut them off (under the way the repealers would have it) and pocket 20 years of premiums

    alls well in the world and since you can't stop all people from getting sick we should do nothing
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    James,

    Uninsured care is a miniscule portion of health care spending. Sure, we've been told about free riders, but that's really nothing more than a canard. Estimates are that the non-insured spend about $45 billion on health services per year - of which about 1/3 is compensated for out of pocket. About half of the remaining $30 billion is estimated to be recovered through higher costs of medical services - so that's about $15 billion.

    Why is spending by free riders so low? Most of them are the very healthy.
    Why is so much compensated for out of pocket? Because hospitals and docs are aggressive in collections.

    Americans - not the government but Americans - spend about $2 trillion annually on health care services. $15 billion is less than 1% of the amount We The People spend per year.

    The "free rider problem" was basically created so Republicans like Massachusetts Romney could suck in some Republican support. But the numbers simply don't hold water
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,418 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    Comic, you're making the same mistake over and over again.

    There are 14 million Americans in the individual market. It is split evenly between IMM and STM.

    You are comparing what some people get to what others get. The point the Forbes author made was that if somebody today is paying A in the individual major medical market, then he's going to be paying more than A once his insurance expires. To say that a Bronze plan with a 60AV is less than COBRA, and thus people are saving money is bulls-t. I thought we all agreed to this.


    If we agreed to this then why do you keep telling us about all those people on crap cut rate insurance?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    If we agreed to this then why do you keep telling us about all those people on crap cut rate insurance?

    That's Monkey.

    Apples to Apples, rates are going up. They have to because the essential benefit package is bigger in most states. One can argue you're paying more and getting more, but the counter is you may be paying more for things you don't need.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,418 Senior Member
    Yeah but can that not be argued regarding insurance period. Think about it is insurance, you are paying for something you hope you never use.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    You're getting confused with things you hope to never use -e.g. a cancer ward - versus things you may know you'll never need to use.

    I'm 50. I'm not about to start becoming an alcoholic/addict. Unlikely I'm going to get pregnant too.

    Per your COBRA. Remember COBRA is your previous small group plan. Probably has an actuarial value north of 80%. The Bronze plan you would be comparing it to (like California) has a 60% actuarial value. It would be more honest to compare small group or COBRA to a Gold plan.

    A Silver Plan - not a Gold plan - for a 45 year old single person in California would cost $332 per month according to the Covered California website. Silver has a 70AV.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,418 Senior Member
    I'm 50. I'm not about to start becoming an alcoholic/addict. Unlikely I'm going to get pregnant too.

    You could become addicted to pain medicine and I don't know about your wife. But you could get a trophy wife or a GF pregnant. ;)

    How much do you really think that adds to your premium?

    Per your COBRA. Remember COBRA is your previous small group plan. Probably has an actuarial value north of 80%. The Bronze plan you would be comparing it to (like California) has a 60% actuarial value. It would be more honest to compare small group or COBRA to a Gold plan.

    I am not comparing it to a bronze plan you are. I am saying you have to compare a gold plan to a gold plan then tell me it is going to go up 146%.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 0
    I'm 50. I'm not about to start becoming an alcoholic/addict. Unlikely I'm going to get pregnant too.

    You could become addicted to pain medicine and I don't know about your wife. But you could get a trophy wife or a GF pregnant. ;)

    How much do you really think that adds to your premium?

    Per your COBRA. Remember COBRA is your previous small group plan. Probably has an actuarial value north of 80%. The Bronze plan you would be comparing it to (like California) has a 60% actuarial value. It would be more honest to compare small group or COBRA to a Gold plan.

    I am not comparing it to a bronze plan you are. I am saying you have to compare a gold plan to a gold plan then tell me it is going to go up 146%.

    I'm not knocking anybody up and I don't have the genes for drug or alcohol addiction. That's just not happening.
    As to the comparisons, the state of California compared small group plans to Bronze plans, not I.

    As I pointed out in post 21, the Forbes author was likely being disingenous with his comparisons but at least he was comparing a low-end plan to the new low-end plan. Additionally, while rates may not be going up per se, I'm definitely worse off if I have to buy something I don't need or want and pay full-freight for it. That's an unambiguous negative.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,418 Senior Member
    See post #8
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.