Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Popular Provision Of Obamacare Is Fueling Sticker Shock For Some Consumers - Kaiser Health News
When setting premiums for next year, insurers baked in bigger-than-usual adjustments, driven in large part by a game-changing rule: They can no longer reject people with medical problems.
Popular in consumer polls, the provision in the health law transforms the market for the estimated 14 million Americans who buy their own policies because they dont get coverage through their jobs. Barred from denying coverage, insurers also cant demand higher rates from unhealthy people and those deemed high risks because of conditions including obesity, high blood pressure or a previous cancer diagnosis.
But the provision also adds costs. To a larger degree than other requirements of the law, it is fueling the sticker shock now being voiced by some consumers about premiums for new policies, say industry experts.
In setting next years rates, insurers must factor in assumptions about who will sign up, high users or healthy people, said David Axene, a fellow of the Society of Actuaries. You can imagine who most of the health plans thought would be predominantly signing up.
Im kind of shocked, said Leo Lenaghan, who lives in the Chicago suburbs. The $336-a-month BlueCross Blue Shield policy for his wife and daughter, which had a $2,250 per person annual deductible, is being discontinued and the plan his insurer says is most similar to it in benefits will cost an additional $205 a month. It has a $3,000 per person deductible. I guess were just going to have to suck it up.
The less their policies covered previously, the more consumers premiums are likely to rise, experts say. While adding some benefits only costs pennies on the dollar, said Georgetown University research professor Sabrina Corlette, others are more expensive. A Maryland Health Care Commission report from last year, for example, said the states requirement that insurers include maternity coverage added about 4 percent to the cost of a premium.
The actuarial firm Milliman estimated that changes from the health law including the take-all-applicants provision - could be expected to result in about a 14 percent increase to the average premium in California. On top of that, general medical inflation from 2013 to 2014 would add another 9 percent. Of all the factors, the biggest cited by Milliman was the guaranteed coverage provision.
Fuck off dickhead.
How bout they pay for their own insurance instead of everyone else paying higher cost to cover them.
Get the hell out of MY country you idiot.
Um...that's the point of the individual mandate. If you can afford insurance, you now have to buy it. If you can't afford it, you will get assistance in the way of subsidies and medicare, especially if your governor isn't a fucking a moron and turned down the expansion, but it is a subsidy for insurance, not just having the taxpayer pay your emergency room bill.
Geaux would prefer to the poor to suck off the government, which hurts all of us, instead of being given a helping hand to a better life and quality of health.
Um...that's the point of the individual mandate. If you can afford insurance, you now have to buy it. If you can't afford it, you will get assistance in the way of subsidies and medicare, especially if your governor isn't a fucking a moron and turned down the expansion, but it is a subsidy for insurance, not just having the taxpayer pay your emergency room bill.
Geaux would prefer to the poor to suck off the government, which hurts all of us, instead of being given a helping hand to a better life and quality of health.
I was already paying for those without insurance to receive medical care. Now, I pay MORE (76%/$168/month/$2016/year) for them to have the same. Plus 62 year old women carrying maternity insurance.
Sounds legit...
Not!
Cost prohibitive for my family
-Geaux
Geaux would prefer to the poor to suck off the government, which hurts all of us, instead of being given a helping hand to a better life and quality of health.
I was already paying for those without insurance to receive medical care. Now, I pay MORE (76%/$168/month/$2016/year) for them to have the same. Plus 62 year old women carrying maternity insurance.
Sounds legit...
Not!
Cost prohibitive for my family
-Geaux
What is your subsidy? And don't lie.
Fuck off dickhead.
How bout they pay for their own insurance instead of everyone else paying higher cost to cover them.
Get the hell out of MY country you idiot.
Um...that's the point of the individual mandate. If you can afford insurance, you now have to buy it. If you can't afford it, you will get assistance in the way of subsidies and medicare, especially if your governor isn't a fucking a moron and turned down the expansion, but it is a subsidy for insurance, not just having the taxpayer pay your emergency room bill.
Remind me how many people didnt have insurance before all this started. How many won't after we're done?
My employer providied insurance Doubled for a Family plan. My monthly contribution will double starting Jan 1. Fuck you liberal cocksuckers and your goddam nightmare of a President.
Um...that's the point of the individual mandate. If you can afford insurance, you now have to buy it. If you can't afford it, you will get assistance in the way of subsidies and medicare, especially if your governor isn't a fucking a moron and turned down the expansion, but it is a subsidy for insurance, not just having the taxpayer pay your emergency room bill.
Remind me how many people didnt have insurance before all this started. How many won't after we're done?
I do believe there was something like 46 million without insurance. That number doesn't include the under-insured which was estimated to be around 84 million.
Now with the ACA...
My employer providied insurance Doubled for a Family plan. My monthly contribution will double starting Jan 1. Fuck you liberal cocksuckers and your goddam nightmare of a President.
The Employer mandate isn't in effect yet you idiot. You are blaming the wrong bad actor.
you see how they now put a number 3% of "potential losers"
wasn't the Unaffordable care act suppose to make it so ALL the people were winners?
how does that make you losers?
they laugh at you
My employer providied insurance Doubled for a Family plan. My monthly contribution will double starting Jan 1. Fuck you liberal cocksuckers and your goddam nightmare of a President.
The Employer mandate isn't in effect yet you idiot. You are blaming the wrong bad actor.
Employer provided insurances come from the same companies that provide individual insurances. Did you ever think that they would have to spread the new risk to ALL policies they offer, even the employer subsidized ones? Do you think the employers will eat ALL the increases caused by this?
Are you really that naive, that dense, or just so embroiled in all the lies that you just HAVE to keep propegating them?
you see how they now put a number 3% of "potential losers"
wasn't the Unaffordable care act suppose to make it so ALL the people were winners?
how does that make you losers?
they laugh at you
“We’ve decided as a society that we don’t want people to have insurance plans that expose them to more than six thousand dollars in out-of-pocket expenses,” Gruber said. Obama obviously should have known that his blanket statement about “keeping what you have” could not apply to this class of policyholders.
Gruber summarized his stats: ninety-seven per cent of Americans are either left alone or are clear winners, while three per cent are arguably losers. “We have to as a society be able to accept that,” he said. “Don’t get me wrong, that’s a shame, but no law in the history of America makes everyone better off.”
OBAMACARE’S THREE PER CENT
My employer providied insurance Doubled for a Family plan. My monthly contribution will double starting Jan 1. Fuck you liberal cocksuckers and your goddam nightmare of a President.
The Employer mandate isn't in effect yet you idiot. You are blaming the wrong bad actor.
The Employer mandate isn't in effect yet you idiot. You are blaming the wrong bad actor.
Employer provided insurances come from the same companies that provide individual insurances. Did you ever think that they would have to spread the new risk to ALL policies they offer, even the employer subsidized ones? Do you think the employers will eat ALL the increases caused by this?
Are you really that naive, that dense, or just so embroiled in all the lies that you just HAVE to keep propegating them?
Right...insurance companies have always had our best interests at heart and we shouldn't blame them for this at all. Ironic that you are calling me the naive one.
Well of course. The healthy have to pay more to cover the unhealthy.
Wonder what happens when all those young people they are depending on opt for the penalty??
I also wonder just who the hell the ACA is affordable for??
you see how they now put a number 3% of "potential losers"
wasn't the Unaffordable care act suppose to make it so ALL the people were winners?
how does that make you losers?
they laugh at you
Weve decided as a society that we dont want people to have insurance plans that expose them to more than six thousand dollars in out-of-pocket expenses, Gruber said. Obama obviously should have known that his blanket statement about keeping what you have could not apply to this class of policyholders.
Gruber summarized his stats: ninety-seven per cent of Americans are either left alone or are clear winners, while three per cent are arguably losers. We have to as a society be able to accept that, he said. Dont get me wrong, thats a shame, but no law in the history of America makes everyone better off.
OBAMACARES THREE PER CENT
Remind me how many people didnt have insurance before all this started. How many won't after we're done?
I do believe there was something like 46 million without insurance. That number doesn't include the under-insured which was estimated to be around 84 million.
Now with the ACA...
Considering those numbers are from people who told us the website would work, anyone who wanted thier plan could keep thier plan, and everyone would benefit from this because costs would be lowered, why should we believe 80% of people covered by employer insurances will be unaffected?
Lies upon lies, spawning more lies, and you expect us to swallow even more of them?
Who's drinking the kool-aid now?
Show us that with the subsidies the citizen is paying more for better insurance.
'Most' don't get subsidies
-Geaux
I do believe there was something like 46 million without insurance. That number doesn't include the under-insured which was estimated to be around 84 million.
Now with the ACA...
Considering those numbers are from people who told us the website would work, anyone who wanted thier plan could keep thier plan, and everyone would benefit from this because costs would be lowered, why should we believe 80% of people covered by employer insurances will be unaffected?
Lies upon lies, spawning more lies, and you expect us to swallow even more of them?
Who's drinking the kool-aid now?
Which of those categories do you fall into?
