Obamacare 5 years later. Crow, anyone?

[paulhutch]

I'm on disability, I don't pay anything other than co pays on Dr. visits that are not part of my plan and co pays on some prescriptions.

I elected an HMO, did you chose a PPO? I don't even remember now if I was offered a PPO. I've no idea why your insurance is so expensive.

Because Medicare is a Federal/State split plan many (most?) states charge for Medicare and the amount is dictated by the plan the recipient chooses. My brother in Florida went for a cheap HMO plan while my sister in Massachusetts has a more expensive traditional style plan.

 

[jhunter1163]

Medicare's not free, never has been, but it's incredibly cheap for the benefits you get. You can get a decent supplemental plan for about $40 a month over the Part B premium of $105: for your $145 a month, you pay nothing for any Medicare covered service (and Medicare covers pretty much everything.) That's about one-tenth of what a comparable plan would cost a non-Medicare insured.

 

[RandFan]

Because Medicare is a Federal/State split plan many (most?) states charge for Medicare and the amount is dictated by the plan the recipient chooses. My brother in Florida went for a cheap HMO plan while my sister in Massachusetts has a more expensive traditional style plan.

Okay. Got it. Thank you. I think my insurance is as follows.

Medicare > Humana > Physicians Network.

MediCal (Medicaid) > L.A. Care > Bartz Altadana

(I have 4 insurance cards) Wouldn't a single payer plan be much simpler to administer?

 

[Border Reiver]

Okay. Got it. Thank you. I think my insurance is as follows.

Medicare > Humana > Physicians Network.

MediCal (Medicaid) > L.A. Care > Bartz Altadana

(I have 4 insurance cards) Wouldn't a single payer plan be much simpler to administer?

But then all those people would out of work.

 

[Elf Grinder 3000]

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-05-25/sticker-shock-for-some-obamacare-customers

So the proposed 2016 Obamacare rates have been filed in many states, and in many states, the numbers are eye-popping. Market leaders are requesting double-digit increases in a lot of places. Some of the biggest are really double-digit: 51 percent in New Mexico, 36 percent in Tennessee, 30 percent in Maryland, 25 percent in Oregon. The reason? They say that with a full year of claims data under their belt for the first time since Obamacare went into effect, they're finding the insurance pool was considerably older and sicker than expected.

Costs are increasing, policyholders will drop coverage and the risk underlying the pool of applicants will spiral out of control.

Obamacare won't last more than a couple of years until its repealed in 2016

 

[Border Reiver]

To be replaced by a national health care plan paid for by taxes.

 

[RandFan]

But then all those people would out of work.

Let 'em work on the death panels disposing of the bodies. I hear Soylent Green is hiring.

 

[ponderingturtle]

To be replaced by a national health care plan paid for by taxes.

Na, we will just stop caring about the poor even a little. Lazy bastards.

 

[jhunter1163]

I think the only feasible long-term option is single-payor. We already have the basic system in place; it's called "Medicare". Here's my proposal; Expand Medicare to everyone, double the payroll tax to around 3% to pay for it, and get those damnable health-insurance companies out of the business (or, at least, limit what they can sell, a la the "Medicare Advantage" plans they now sell). Premiums would be the same as they are now for adults; family premiums would be capped at, say, four times the adult rate (or kids could have lower premiums).

I've said in several other threads that I feel that single-payor is inevitable in the US, and I predicted it by 2020. I stand by that.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I think the only feasible long-term option is single-payor. We already have the basic system in place; it's called "Medicare". Here's my proposal; Expand Medicare to everyone, double the payroll tax to around 3% to pay for it, and get those damnable health-insurance companies out of the business (or, at least, limit what they can sell, a la the "Medicare Advantage" plans they now sell). Premiums would be the same as they are now for adults; family premiums would be capped at, say, four times the adult rate (or kids could have lower premiums).

I've said in several other threads that I feel that single-payor is inevitable in the US, and I predicted it by 2020. I stand by that.

Not going to happen. Look at the billions that will be spent to lobby against it, the for side has no hope.

 

[The Don]

I think the only feasible long-term option is single-payor. We already have the basic system in place; it's called "Medicare". Here's my proposal; Expand Medicare to everyone, double the payroll tax to around 3% to pay for it, and get those damnable health-insurance companies out of the business (or, at least, limit what they can sell, a la the "Medicare Advantage" plans they now sell). Premiums would be the same as they are now for adults; family premiums would be capped at, say, four times the adult rate (or kids could have lower premiums).

I've said in several other threads that I feel that single-payor is inevitable in the US, and I predicted it by 2020. I stand by that.

Not going to happen. Look at the billions that will be spent to lobby against it, the for side has no hope.

I agree that if (when ?) it fails, it won't be because it's a bad idea or because it's too expensive but because there are far too many vested interests who are quite content with the status quo. The status quo being a medical industry which costs between 50% and 100% more than other developed countries' whilst not achieving any better outcomes on the whole and in many cases doing worse than theirs.

 

[Spindrift]

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-05-25/sticker-shock-for-some-obamacare-customers



Costs are increasing, policyholders will drop coverage and the risk underlying the pool of applicants will spiral out of control.

Obamacare won't last more than a couple of years until its repealed in 2016

Costs are increasing? Oh, that horrible Obamacare. If we could only get rid of Obamacare then we could go back to the way things were when costs only increased every year.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Costs are increasing? Oh, that horrible Obamacare. If we could only get rid of Obamacare then we could go back to the way things were when costs only increased every year.

As I've said in my position before. I wouldn't blame the law for causing this (it existed already). I just blame it for not properly accounting for it. The inflation still exists, and given how insanely high cost most medical treatments are as it is, any measurable increase just exasperates the problem. I don't see current proposals for UHC trying to address that, mostly expanding coverage, which no doubt does some good to a point but,.... ultimately issues will still crop up due to funding

 

[Spindrift]

As I've said in my position before. I wouldn't blame the law for causing this (it existed already). I just blame it for not properly accounting for it. The inflation still exists, and given how insanely high cost most medical treatments are as it is, any measurable increase just exasperates the problem. I don't see current proposals for UHC trying to address that, mostly expanding coverage, which no doubt does some good to a point but,.... ultimately issues will still crop up due to funding

Isn't a major part of health care costs the cost of the uninsured?

 

[RandFan]

I think we need some context.

• Before Obamacare, America had the most expensive and fastest rising costs of any industrialized nations.
• We had the worst outcomes overall.
• We also were the only ones without UHC

Can we rule out going back to the status quo?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Isn't a major part of health care costs the cost of the uninsured?

One way to look at it is that the premiums are already expensive. The other way to look at it is in the context of what you say here, in addition to that. The third perspective I have is from coverage I saw whilst in Ireland last year, aging population also leads to enhanced costs in conjunction with the high medical treatment base costs (Maybe someone here who's followed the issue recently can tell of the situation currently? Is that still under debate since September 2014?).

The main issue - the high base costs - are the common denominator, at any rate my point is that whether an existing issue is the fault of a new law is kinda moot. The new law either addresses it in some degree or another, or it doesn't. IMO there's a few common areas where I've seen issues in the current laws' provisions, and in certain cases of UHC.

I think we need some context.
<snip>
Can we rule out going back to the status quo?

No point, none morally, nor politically. Let's view it politically for a moment for giggles... Insurance companies are finalizing contracts and provisions to comply with the law after 4 years of preparation. Kill the law and make them start from scratch without a fallback measure. Political suicide. I don't like the law, but we can't be going back and forth on a whim unless we want to make chaos - somehow I doubt a rational thinking politician wants to do that... That's ignoring foremost the obvious direct - non-political - implications of another change. The law is already in place, so a complete repeal is not likely, although depending on how the SCOTUS rules crap can still hit the fan... ironically repealing the law this way could have unintended consequences

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Fuuuuuu- (Duplicate)

 

[ponderingturtle]

As I've said in my position before. I wouldn't blame the law for causing this (it existed already). I just blame it for not properly accounting for it. The inflation still exists, and given how insanely high cost most medical treatments are as it is, any measurable increase just exasperates the problem. I don't see current proposals for UHC trying to address that, mostly expanding coverage, which no doubt does some good to a point but,.... ultimately issues will still crop up due to funding

That is because any plan that tried to deal with that was a total no go with regard to political realities. There was simply to much money against it being passed for congress to force that kind of socialist regulation down America's throat.

So they did what was possible and try to fix the moral instead of economic problems of the existing system.

 

[Elf Grinder 3000]

I think we need some context.

• Before Obamacare, America had the most expensive and fastest rising costs of any industrialized nations.
• We had the worst outcomes overall.
• We also were the only ones without UHC

Can we rule out going back to the status quo?

Obamacare is increasing the costs faster than they would go up otherwise

Its similiar to what happened in New York State, which had community ratings meaning everyone got the same rate. Great idea right! Wrong!

The healthy people get ripped off in this scenario, so guess who dropped their coverage? Yup all the healthy people left and the pool was left with the sick, costs skyrocketed and now NY State doesn't really insure anyone.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Obamacare is increasing the costs faster than they would go up otherwise

Feel free to show evidence to support this assertion.