ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I'd like to see your source material for numbers one and two. See the links in later posts. There is historical information within the links. In addition, I have posted historical healthcare premium increase in multiple threads. I am sure a search under my name can bring it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Well, sure, in 2015, when everyone in the country who had not yet bought insurance was threatened with a rising fine. Lies, damn lies, and statistics. When you merely rearrange the numbers, and "reduce" your premium cost by demanding unaffordable deductibles, the proponent can claim "lower premiums" yet the person is still more burdened than ever financially. The truth is that it is unaffordable by almost all standards, for those who have to pay for it: "For the second year in a row, health insurance premiums for job-based family coverage rose a relatively modest 4 percent, reflecting slowed health spending. (SURE, BECAUSE IT IS A GOVERNMENT DEMAND WITH A PENALTY NOW. Pay or we will extract it!) Nonetheless, workers are likely to feel an increased pinch from health care costs: More than a third have annual deductibles of at least $1,000 this year before their insurance kicks in, while wages continue to grow far more slowly than health insurance costs. The average family plan premium topped $16,000 for the first time, with workers paying on average $4,565 toward that cost, not counting copays and deductibles, according to a survey of about 2,000 employers released Tuesday by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust. The average cost of a single employee’s insurance premiums rose 5 percent, to $5,884, with workers paying an average of $999, the survey found. Workers’ wages increased 1.8 percent on average, while general inflation rose 1.1 percent. The survey was done between January and May of this year. “The premium increase this year is very moderate, but the pain factor for health insurance cost has not disappeared,†said Drew Altman, president and CEO of the foundation. “Over time, what people pay for health care has dramatically eclipsed both their wages and inflation.†All provisions were in effect for 2015. And I addressed your false claims about deductibles (with data) in my post. I agree with the bolded. What I don't agree with is your false claims that the increases are worse than what we have seen in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TranquilMind Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 All provisions were in effect for 2015. And I addressed your false claims about deductibles (with data) in my post. I agree with the bolded. What I don't agree with is your false claims that the increases are worse than what we have seen in the past. Well, if you think THIS is an "answer", that's hilarious. I mean I literally laughed out loud. Your "data" says exactly what I said. The deductibles are rising. You: We can see the average 2015 and 2016 premiums and deductibles by tier. What stands out is yes, we have seen premium increases around in the low double digits, and deductibles at the lower tiers that are over $3000. At the higher coverages we do see deductibles more in line with private insurance averages. (STILL HIGH, BY THE WAY) .... You can read the link for yourself, but in summary, they found: "However, the patterns in these 10 states and DC, where more complete information is available, suggest that the premiums for the two lowest-cost silver plans – where the bulk of enrollees tend to migrate – are not necessarily increasing, and where they are increasing, the growth has generally been moderate." Um, yeah. that means they are increasing. Lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoPlaceLikeHome Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Rates were increasing. But now the coverage is worse, the deductibles and premiums are higher, and you get fined a whopping amount if you still can't afford to pay. The idea of fines originally came from the Heritage Foundation so IMHO we have them to thank. I am for universal healthcare such as medicare for all which would fix these problems. I also distinctly remember in my career over several decades in healthcare the CEO's of the hospitals where I worked spanning back to the 1980's telling us every year that the health insurance companies were raising the premiums every year by 20 to 50% and therefore we had to pay more every year with less and less coverage so this problem is not new and is to be expected as long as we have for profit health insurance companies in the mix. We need to take the "for profit" out of health insurance. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 http://kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2015-summary-of-findings/ https://www.healthpocket.com/healthcare-research/infostat/2016-obamacare-premiums-deductibles#.VvGwrHry3vs http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/analysis-of-2016-premium-changes-and-insurer-participation-in-the-affordable-care-acts-health-insurance-marketplaces/ Do you have any sources that aren't influenced by insurance companies? The Kaiser Family Foundation was funded by an endowment from the founder of Kaiser Permanente. Healthpocket is a commercial company who doesn't say where they get their money from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Do you have any sources that aren't influenced by insurance companies? The Kaiser Family Foundation was funded by an endowment from the founder of Kaiser Permanente. Healthpocket is a commercial company who doesn't say where they get their money from. KFF is a leader in health data. In you want a better source I am sure you can google for one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 The idea of fines originally came from the Heritage Foundation so IMHO we have them to thank. I am for universal healthcare such as medicare for all which would fix these problems. I also distinctly remember in my career over several decades in healthcare the CEO's of the hospitals where I worked spanning back to the 1980's telling us every year that the health insurance companies were raising the premiums every year by 20 to 50% and therefore we had to pay more every year with less and less coverage so this problem is not new and is to be expected as long as we have for profit health insurance companies in the mix. We need to take the "for profit" out of health insurance. +1 on all points. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 KFF is a leader in health data. In you want a better source I am sure you can google for one. It's likely a leader due to marketing. It's not up to me to prove what you said. It's up to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TranquilMind Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 The idea of fines originally came from the Heritage Foundation so IMHO we have them to thank. I am for universal healthcare such as medicare for all which would fix these problems. I also distinctly remember in my career over several decades in healthcare the CEO's of the hospitals where I worked spanning back to the 1980's telling us every year that the health insurance companies were raising the premiums every year by 20 to 50% and therefore we had to pay more every year with less and less coverage so this problem is not new and is to be expected as long as we have for profit health insurance companies in the mix. We need to take the "for profit" out of health insurance. We agree on that, but I will go farther. We need to remove insurance altogether. It is just a money-grabbing scam. Saw this online. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephanieZ Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 FWIW, we have the best private insurance plan available in our state. It's the "highest" plan they offer. $1800+ per month for our family. Every provider I've tried in our region participates, and I can go to ANY doctor ANYwhere. And, we have a fully funded HSA with over $5000 available in it, and "I have cash". . .. Nonetheless, we recently had 6 week wait for an initial mental health appointment (would have been 10 weeks if I hadn't made clear we'd take any cancellation at any time/day, which then we did get in after 6 weeks, with 24 hours notice of the new appointment time, and NO input on when it would be). I've heard much worse stories for trying to find a psychiatrist in MANY regions. (Some regions have few if ANY psychiatrists that accept insurance -- cash pay only.) I've spent hours trying to get an urgent CT appointment for my mom (which, when done, found a massive life threatening brain bleed.) Multiple times, including for Mom's CT, I've told people, "We have the best possible insurance. I have cash, and I will bring ANY amount in cash that you want, just give me a rough number, and I'll bring all the had green cash you want . . . I just want it now . . ." Nonetheless, we've waited, because the red tape is so lengthy. Sometimes, like with Mom's CT, a few hours screaming at MANY people have resulted in getting the care I wanted at least that same day. (Sure hope someone somewhere learned something from that, when they saw the CT and wanted to immediately take her to the ICU and bring in the neurosurgeons for the imminently life threatening brain bleed . . . which they had wanted to wait another 24 hours to image . . . ) So, anyway, my point is just that even with the best possible insurance and deep pocket, our current system does not always allow us to get what we want when we need it. I'm all for universal health insurance. Every system has its weak spots, but I'd much rather that a non-profit entity with the best-interests-of-all as their driving force be the gatekeepers than our current system where the gatekeepers are, by definition (as private for-profit corporations), in it for the profit. Period. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 It's likely a leader due to marketing. It's not up to me to prove what you said. It's up to you. No, it is a leader because they do the research and are open about their methodology. They also do the survey yearly using the same methodology allowing us to get a annual snapshot of what is happening. I provided sound data from a respected source If that is not good enough for you, then so be it. Just because you are unfamiliar with a topic and the data available doesn't mean I will be your Google monkey. If you are outright questioning whether health insurance premiums have been increasing dramatically over time, then there probably isn't much I can to to help you anyway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 We agree on that, but I will go farther. We need to remove insurance altogether. It is just a money-grabbing scam. Saw this online. While I agree that insurance is (at least how we handle it in the United States), a cumbersome model to deliver healthcare, I am still unclear as to what delivery method you prefer. You seem to be against a government administered program as well. Based on a previous comment it seems you think that a system where every individual pays all of their healthcare costs (which I have seen advocated on this board but not sure if it was by you), then I am a bit confused as to how you can argue deductibles make healthcare out of reach but also think everyone can purchase healthcare they need for cash. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Well anyways. They had a chance to do it right and they completely blew it. Which should surprise nobody. Which is why we don't trust our politicians to solve our personal problems. Whether other countries are similar is beside the point. This is our system, and we are stuck with it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Well anyways. They had a chance to do it right and they completely blew it. Which should surprise nobody. Which is why we don't trust our politicians to solve our personal problems. Whether other countries are similar is beside the point. This is our system, and we are stuck with it. I disagree on two points. 1.) There was no chance to "do it right". I can't say more without diving headfirst into the politics pool. 2.) They did not completely blow it. While not perfect, not allowing coverage to be denied to those with preexisting conditions was a great step forward. The results on coverage for others varies greatly by state, but is not a total disaster by any stretch of the imagination. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ausmumof3 Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 I know this has gone so far from the initial discussion but after my initial reaction I think this is a great idea. I do think "demand" is the wrong approach - suggest and highlight the advantages and low cost or even fundraise to supply would have been better. I think if just a very basic pad was supplied in a format where people couldn't walk away with a bag full that would be best. That way the need is covered without huge expense or the impression that people wants are being pandered too. Most people will buy their own products of personal preference so the cost won't be huge but those who really can't afford them can get what they need without shame and if someone forgets there's a backup. I carry stuff ninety nine percent of the time because I'm not at all regular but I've still been caught out occasionally where I've forgotten to restock or been away from my purse for some reason. It's not a huge deal or a huge cost to supply a backup supply. If it turned out that everyone was using it exclusively it might be but I doubt that would happen. As far as those saying adult diapers etc well - actually - why not? They wouldn't be a high demand article anyway, those who do need them probably are those who may be needing help and accomodations, and again it wouldn't have to be a fancy brand just a very basic article available to cover emergencies for those whose life is a little bit harder than everything else. As a society we provide accommodations that are far more expensive than these to those with more complicated needs. Lifts and ramps for example, accessible toilets etc. In the long term, if it helps someone through a rough patch so they end up a qualified doctor instead of dropping out its going the benefit everyone. Definitely much more than sports teams etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoPlaceLikeHome Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Well anyways. They had a chance to do it right and they completely blew it. Which should surprise nobody. Which is why we don't trust our politicians to solve our personal problems. Whether other countries are similar is beside the point. This is our system, and we are stuck with it. Well the Congress has been controlled by one party the past 4 years or so and they could have easily passed medicare for all or at the very least a public healthcare insurance option for all of the ACA markets and the President would have signed it. But they did not and IMHO we cannot go back to the way it was before the ACA because it was much worse with the insurance companies able to drop your coverage at any time or able to refuse you coverage. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 A targeted approach to fix the gaps that existed would have done more good with less cost. But that is water under the bridge. Our political machine was not intended for this sort of "reform." Our Constitution is a great big "less is more" statement. A lot of the problems in the pre-ACA system were due to the involvement of government in the insurance industry. Anyway we're never going to come to agreement on this. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 AOur Constitution is a great big "less is more" statement. A lot of the problems in the pre-ACA system were due to the involvement of government in the insurance industry. Such as? In particular, please address why high premiums and lack of coverage was specifically due to government involvement. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 I really don't want to get into it with you, CR, and this is an old stale debate. I will say that it was the government via the tax system that set up health insurance as a deductible employee benefit, giving insurance companies much more power than they would otherwise have had. The tax deduction and eventual manufactured expectations propped up the insurance rates. In addition, the government began to require various policy inclusions and disallow certain types of free negotiation. This too led to higher rates along with less choice. And it also jacked up the cost of healthcare services, including those for which "insurance" was not actually needed. COBRA was supposed to be a big benefit, but actually it was horribly botched. People who couldn't afford it paid the money because they often had (or thought they had) no other choice, and then in the end they got kicked off the insurance anyway. The government should have just provided stop-gap insurance for people between jobs. Better yet, the government shouldn't have connected health insurance to one's employer in the first place. Most people were covered for most big things in pre-ACA days, but for those who may not have been, it would make sense for the government to directly provide catastrophic event insurance, rather than try to force it into a system that is ill-designed for that. Now this is my last comment on the topic of politicized health care. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 I really don't want to get into it with you, CR, and this is an old stale debate. I will say that it was the government via the tax system that set up health insurance as a deductible employee benefit, giving insurance companies much more power than they would otherwise have had. The tax deduction and eventual manufactured expectations propped up the insurance rates. In addition, the government began to require various policy inclusions and disallow certain types of free negotiation. This too led to higher rates along with less choice. And it also jacked up the cost of healthcare services, including those for which "insurance" was not actually needed. COBRA was supposed to be a big benefit, but actually it was horribly botched. People who couldn't afford it paid the money because they often had (or thought they had) no other choice, and then in the end they got kicked off the insurance anyway. The government should have just provided stop-gap insurance for people between jobs. Better yet, the government shouldn't have connected health insurance to one's employer in the first place. Most people were covered for most big things in pre-ACA days, but for those who may not have been, it would make sense for the government to directly provide catastrophic event insurance, rather than try to force it into a system that is ill-designed for that. Now this is my last comment on the topic of politicized health care. Initially there was not a tax deduction for providing health insurance, and I believe it is a stretch to blame the later tax deduction for rates going up when there are more obvious culprits. Very little was mandated to be covered prior to the ACA, and again, I am straining to see the large increases over two decades being responsible even partly for those rates increasing. (I can't figure out what the first bolded means so I won't even bother to address it.) COBRA was what it was - and it was very valuable for those with preexisting conditions as not having a gap in coverage often allowed them to get their condition cover under a new employer-sponsored plan. And while I agree stop-gap coverage would have been better, I fail to see how COBRA increased health insurance premiums. Regarding the bolded, I agree "most" had coverage but in fairness, a significant number did not, and many of those without coverage needed more than catastrophic coverage. In addition, one reason health insurance companies started covering things like routine check ups was because they learned preventative care was more cost effective than waiting to cover more expensive care later. While catastrophic care would be better than nothing, it is not an efficient means of insurance for a large population group, and to be frank, no way in heck it would have gotten passed even if suggested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechWife Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 (edited) No, it is a leader because they do the research and are open about their methodology. They also do the survey yearly using the same methodology allowing us to get a annual snapshot of what is happening. I provided sound data from a respected source If that is not good enough for you, then so be it. Just because you are unfamiliar with a topic and the data available doesn't mean I will be your Google monkey. If you are outright questioning whether health insurance premiums have been increasing dramatically over time, then there probably isn't much I can to to help you anyway. :lol: :lol: :lol: I assure you I am not "unfamiliar" with the topic, nor am I "unfamiliar" with the data. I have a professional background in healthcare administration. I have helped several friends as well as people on this board navigate the world of private insurance and Medicare benefits. I manage the business end of my parents' healthcare needs (they are many, being that they are in their mid-80's). I have no such question about insurance premiums. I never said I did, not sure where you got that idea. In fact, I don't think I've said one word about insurance premiums in this thread (but I'm not going to go back and look, you can do that for yourself if you'd like to). Edited March 23, 2016 by TechWife 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reefgazer Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 (edited) Not only that, but when I think of one particular person I know, the lack of affordability was immediate - like, the month after the persons ACA mandated policy kicked in. One month she could afford to hit the doctor for something serious, and the next month, she couldn't because premiums ate up what little spare money she had. Under the ACA she went for six months with an infection that got worse and worse until she had to go to the ER for it because she knew they would treat her and at that moment, she could get away without her paying copays or a deductible. At least when she had her catastrophic plan, she could afford to pay the deductible and copay with the money she didn't pay in exorbitant premiums. Rates were increasing. But now the coverage is worse, the deductibles and premiums are higher, and you get fined a whopping amount if you still can't afford to pay. Edited March 23, 2016 by reefgazer 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TranquilMind Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Not only that, but when I think of one particular person I know, the lack of affordability was immediate - like, the month after the persons ACA mandated policy kicked in. One month she could afford to hit the doctor for something serious, and the next month, she couldn't because premiums ate up what little spare money she had. Under the ACA she went for six months with an infection that got worse and worse until she had to go to the ER for it because she knew they would treat her and at that moment, she could get away without her paying copays or a deductible. At least when she had her catastrophic plan, she could afford to pay the deductible and copay with the money she didn't pay in exorbitant premiums. This. I saw this too. I'm sorry. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.