The Derp
Gold Member
- Apr 12, 2017
- 9,620
- 661
- 205
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #101
First, unlike Adler and Ginsburg's approach, Brookings 2014 study used actual data and found that “enrollment-weighted premiums in the individual health insurance market increased by 24.4 percent beyond what they would have had they simply followed…trends.” Second, S&P Global Institute found that average individual market medical costs increased substantially between 2013 and 2015, up an estimated 69%. Third, 2014 insurer data shows that premiums for individual market Qualified Health Plans (QHPs), ACA-compliant plans certified to be sold on exchanges, were much higher than premiums for individual market non-QHPs, mostly plans in existence before 2014 that did not comply with the ACA. Relative to non-QHPs, insurers collected more than $1,000 per enrollee in higher premiums and more than $2,300 in higher premium revenue per enrollee in 2014 after accounting for large premium subsidy programs for their QHPs.
So as usual, you have to redefine narrow parameters in order for your garbage argument to make sense.
Why is it that nothing you say turns out to be true, and every source you use is outdated? Because you're a fraud.