How Affordable Is The Affordable Care Act?

November is important for more than just elections. It’s also kicked off open enrollment for health insurance policies sold through the Affordable Care Act’s federal and state exchanges. And as millions of patients across the country just found out, premiums and out-of-pocket costs for 2016 are increasing significantly—many by much more than expected.

That’s the conclusion of a new report from McKinsey & Company. The consulting firm found premiums for the lowest-cost plans across all tiers—bronze, silver, gold and platinum—will increase by a median of 10-13% in 2016. The lowest-priced silver plans, which account for fully 70% of the exchange market, will increase by 11%—four percentage points higher than 2015 plans.

more at http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspi...he-rise-but-dont-blame-insurers/#30bf7fc28d5e

Yeah, and we really, really, really ARE gonna find those WMDs!!!!!!

I think most people are gettin' a lil' tired of all-o'-those "conservative" psychic-predictions that never seem to come true.....you know.....like trickle-down and "Greeted like Liberators"!!
 
Yeah, and we really, really, really ARE gonna find those WMDs!!!!!!

I think most people are gettin' a lil' tired of all-o'-those "conservative" psychic-predictions that never seem to come true.....you know.....like trickle-down and "Greeted like Liberators"!!

or my favorite, 'if they'd made the assault weapons ban permanent, we'd have had no more of these mass shootings'. i like that prediction.
 
And the moron Obama bought it!
.....AFTER, Mittens Romney did the same.

That's how you keep "conservatives" from exterminating poor-people. We'll learn to live-with-that.


sleeping-in-hammock.gif
 
or my favorite, 'if they'd made the assault weapons ban permanent, we'd have had no more of these mass shootings'. i like that prediction.
I'm fairly-certain "conservatives" never suggested that......but, I would be interested in seeing your source (o' that quote).

You're on-the-clock!!!

RTAg6rETL.jpeg


<tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick><tick>....

GIT' TO IT!!!!!
 

.....AFTER, Mittens Romney did the same.

That's how you keep "conservatives" from exterminating poor-people. We'll learn to live-with-that.


sleeping-in-hammock.gif


You leftists should study federalism if you're going to continue bringing-up RomneyCare.

.....And, any of you right-wingers.....who are still marginally-coherent.....should probably bite-the-bullet & start inve$ting in white-flags.....
118.gif




*

witness-to-the-revolution-cover-side.jpg


http://www.clarabingham.com/books/witness-to-the-revolution/
 
Have substancial increases already this year and a very large drop in participation.
The plans are unattractive to anyone really with the high deductibles.
All its done is limit policy choices and drive up costs.
Time to put it out of its misery.
Sure....there are increases. They're typically lower than the historical rate increases. High deductibles are a foreign concept to many who had employer based plans, but not for the millions who have been stuck in the individual market for decades.

The truth is, healthcare isn't free. Most people thought it was, because they felt they had their benefits package coming to them like some sort of entitlement.

With max OOP costs now, the high deductible shouldn't be such an issue. It should serve to stop people from running to the doctor every time they get a runny nose.


Of course the ACA is going to suffer problems in the early years. Millions of people now have access to insurance, and are going to the doctor for issues they've dealt with for many years.

Republicans successfully killed the programs that were in place for cost sharing among insurers, so we'll see companies pulling out of the exchanges.


In the end, we'll get a public option, which will force insurers to either get with the program, or find another line of work.
 
so the end result is that obamacare followed the exact predicted results that most of us said it would......that of failing tens of millions of people, costing billions of dollars, and enriching the health insurance companies.
Um...no. You don't get to claim victory, after 60% of the country's governors worked tirelessly to kill the law. Projections were not based on data that included the politicizing of people's lives.
 
In the end, we'll get a public option, which will force insurers to either get with the program, or find another line of work.

BingoLogo.png


BILL MOYERS: Why is public insurance, a public option, so fiercely opposed by the industry?

WENDELL POTTER: The industry doesn't want to have any competitor. In fact, over the course of the last few years, has been shrinking the number of competitors through a lot of acquisitions and mergers. So first of all, they don't want any more competition, period. They certainly don't want it from a government plan that might be operating more efficiently than they are, that they operate.

The Medicare program that we have here is a government-run program that has administrative expenses that are like three percent or so.

BILL MOYERS: Compared to the industry's--

WENDELL POTTER: They spend about 20 cents of every premium dollar on overhead, which is administrative expense or profit. So they don't want to compete against a more efficient competitor.


 
Last edited:
Obamacare has caused health insurance premiums to skyrocket. It has caused millions of Americans who liked their health plans to lose their health plans. It has caused doctor and hospital networks to narrow. Now the Wall Street Journal reports that the Obamacare exchanges in Alabama and Alaska will each have one—that's right, one—insurer offering plans. We're moving toward "single insurer" health care.

In short, Obamacare is wrecking the private health insurance market.

So what are Americans getting in return? Obamacare's proponents say the overhaul has greatly increased the number of people with health insurance coverage (albeit by less than three-quarters as much as it was supposed to have done by this time). What they tend to omit is the fact that most of the "newly insured"—about 60 percent—have merely been dumped into Medicaid. According to the Congressional Budget Office, Obamacare has added only 8 million people—just 2.5 percent of the U.S. population—to the private insurance rolls.

And at what cost? Well, the CBO says that the Obamacare subsidies for private insurance will cost $43 billion this year alone. That's an average of $5,375 per person for those who have been added to the private insurance rolls—or $21,500 per family of four. Meanwhile, the typical 36-year-old (or younger) who makes $36,000 a year (or more) gets $0 under Obamacare. Such everyday Americans instead get to help finance that $5,375-per-person cost for those who get private insurance under Obamacare, while facing far higher premiums and significantly narrower doctor networks themselves.

More at http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-cost-of-obamacare/article/2002427
 
Sure....there are increases. They're typically lower than the historical rate increases. High deductibles are a foreign concept to many who had employer based plans, but not for the millions who have been stuck in the individual market for decades.

The truth is, healthcare isn't free. Most people thought it was, because they felt they had their benefits package coming to them like some sort of entitlement.

With max OOP costs now, the high deductible shouldn't be such an issue. It should serve to stop people from running to the doctor every time they get a runny nose.


Of course the ACA is going to suffer problems in the early years. Millions of people now have access to insurance, and are going to the doctor for issues they've dealt with for many years.

Republicans successfully killed the programs that were in place for cost sharing among insurers, so we'll see companies pulling out of the exchanges.


In the end, we'll get a public option, which will force insurers to either get with the program, or find another line of work.

A public option would bshut down all insurers. Public option means government runs it. While we need to provide access to healthcare for everyone, I don't see why government should take away the insurance people who can afford it have. I'm not a socialist, just a progressive. I want to expand healthcare, not restrict it. Just like education and the safety net
 
Obamacare has caused health insurance premiums to skyrocket. It has caused millions of Americans who liked their health plans to lose their health plans. It has caused doctor and hospital networks to narrow. Now the Wall Street Journal reports that the Obamacare exchanges in Alabama and Alaska will each have one—that's right, one—insurer offering plans. We're moving toward "single insurer" health care.

In short, Obamacare is wrecking the private health insurance market.

So what are Americans getting in return? Obamacare's proponents say the overhaul has greatly increased the number of people with health insurance coverage (albeit by less than three-quarters as much as it was supposed to have done by this time). What they tend to omit is the fact that most of the "newly insured"—about 60 percent—have merely been dumped into Medicaid. According to the Congressional Budget Office, Obamacare has added only 8 million people—just 2.5 percent of the U.S. population—to the private insurance rolls.

And at what cost? Well, the CBO says that the Obamacare subsidies for private insurance will cost $43 billion this year alone. That's an average of $5,375 per person for those who have been added to the private insurance rolls—or $21,500 per family of four. Meanwhile, the typical 36-year-old (or younger) who makes $36,000 a year (or more) gets $0 under Obamacare. Such everyday Americans instead get to help finance that $5,375-per-person cost for those who get private insurance under Obamacare, while facing far higher premiums and significantly narrower doctor networks themselves.

More at http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-cost-of-obamacare/article/2002427

Government ensuring everyone has access to healthcare is in the general welfare of the people. No one is excluded
 
A public option would bshut down all insurers. Public option means government runs it. While we need to provide access to healthcare for everyone, I don't see why government should take away the insurance people who can afford it have. I'm not a socialist, just a progressive. I want to expand healthcare, not restrict it. Just like education and the safety net

Socialist progressive Democrats want a "Single Payer" system, the government being the single payer, socialized medicine. Employees who now work for insurance companies will become unemployed or have to work for government costing taxpayers billions and causing those death spiral waiting list just like in our socialist Veterans Hospitals. Our national government can't even operate successfully the socialized Veteran's health care, and y'all socialist progressive Democrat idiots want the incompetent loonie government to run the same catastrophe for the entire nation, a nation with already a 20 trillion $ national debt.

The definition of insanity is only as far away from you as the closes socialist progressive Democrat!
 
14 Ways Obamacare Is Still A Disaster (That You Won’t Learn From Vox)

Here’s a round-up of the problems Obamacare has caused as the exchanges head into the second open-enrollment season November 15.

1. Premium Increases
Although President Obama promised that a family of four would save $2,500 in premium costs thanks to Obamacare, almost the exact opposite has proven true. The Kaiser Family Foundation shows that the average employer-based family policy that cost $13,770 in 2010 cost $16,834 in 2014, an increase of more than $3,000.

2. Exchange Subsidy Roller Coaster
While the Left hailed the new insurance companies entering the exchanges and the lower premium costs that would result, they forgot to mention that exchange subsidies could also decline. Since 83 percent of exchange consumers have subsidies, a lot of people could be in for hefty premium increases as their subsidies begin to decrease.

Although President Obama promised that a family of four would save $2,500 in premium costs thanks to Obamacare, almost the exact opposite has proven true.
The subsidy amount is determined by a formula based on the second lowest-cost silver plan on an exchange minus the amount of money an individual is required by law to put toward the insurance premiums, known as the “applicable percentage.” Let’s say that the second lowest-cost silver plan last year was $200 per month while an enrollee’s applicable percentage was $150 per month. The enrollee’s subsidy was $200 – $150 = $50 per month. This year, however, if a new company enters the exchange offering lower-cost insurance, and the second lowest-cost silver plan becomes $175 per month, the enrollee’s subsidy is now $175 – $150 = $25 a month. If the enrollee keeps the same plan (Obamacare automatically re-enrolls individuals in the plans they had in 2014), he would pay $300 more per year for it.

This is far from hypothetical. A preliminary analysis by the state of Colorado found that the new lower-cost silver plans could cause exchange consumers to see their premiums rise by an average of 77 percent next year if they keep their current plans.

3. Reducing the Quality of Insurance
The regulations governing Obamacare exchanges have reduced the quality of insurance plans. To cover the cost of the regulations and keep premiums even remotely reasonable, insurers had to increase people’s out-of-pocket costs and reduce provider networks. A National Center for Public Policy Research study found an average of 33 policies for a 27-year-old on the individual market in 2013 had both lower premiums and lower or equal out-of-pocket costs than the cheapest policy on the exchange. There were ten such policies for a 57-year-old couple. A Health Pocket study found that deductibles were, on average, 42 percent higher than plans that were on the individual market in 2013.

To cover the cost of the regulations and keep premiums even remotely reasonable, insurers had to increase people’s out-of-pocket costs and reduce provider networks.
The pejorative term “skinny network” came to describe the networks of physician hospitals and other providers available through exchange plans, and for good reason. An Associated Press survey found that only four of the top 19 cancer centers in the country said they “have access through each of the insurance companies in the state exchanges.” Dr. Scott Gottlieb of the American Enterprise Institute examined exchange policies in nine states and found that access to specialists was up to 65 percent lower than in comparable preferred provider organization (PPO) plans. A recent Avalere study found that, on average, only 32 percent of the top ten cardiologists, neurologists, and diagnostic radiologists in ten major cities were available through the three cheapest silver plans on the exchanges. The National Center study found that the average number of PPO plans on the exchange declined when compared to the individual market while the number of plans with more restrictive health maintenance organizations (HMO) increased considerably.

In short, people who lost their plans in 2013 and had to go on the exchanges were extremely likely to face both higher out-of-pocket costs and a harder time finding heath care providers who would take their insurance.

#’s 4 through 14 at http://thefederalist.com/2014/11/12...till-a-disaster-that-you-wont-learn-from-vox/
 
Back
Top