[Health Care Threads merged - please stop creating new threads]

[momeason]

I said nothing political. Your posts need to be deleted.

I was telling you what my insurance agent relayed to me. I can keep my plan and my rates go up 16%.

 

[ace2000]

I said nothing political. Your posts need to be deleted.

I was telling you what my insurance agent relayed to me. I can keep my plan and my rates go up 16%.

And then you chose to make the political comment that "it has nothing to do with ACA". Everything in the health insurance industry today is about the ACA and the upcoming changes.

 

[geekette]

And then you chose to make the political comment that "it has nothing to do with ACA". Everything in the health insurance industry today is about the ACA and the upcoming changes.

No. The business-as-usual rate hikes by health insurers was occurring long before ACA.

 

[Conan]

Talked to a BCBSNC rep today. We can now keep our current high deductible HSA plan for 2014 if we want. If you have not chosen your plan for 2014, you may want to wait. If you did already choose a new plan because your current plan was cancelled, I think you may be able to go back to your current plan. Here is the big BUT. According to the agent, there will be the normal average rate increase..probably about 16%.
What other costs go up an average of 16% per year? The insurance companies have been making record profits since 2002 and it continues. We would all hit the ceiling if our MFs went up 16% per year.
So if your insurance rates are going up this year, keep in mind that 16% of the rate increase is from your insurer. It has nothing to do with the ACA.

Would you mind posting what the 2014 premium is for the high-deductible plan and roughly what it covers, and what the premium would be for an ACA bronze plan (if the high deductible plan covers more than one person I guess the comparison is the combined ACA premium for the same people). Also since the tax rebate is different based on income, that would be the full-price ACA premium.

Thanks!

 

[ace2000]

No. The business-as-usual rate hikes by health insurers was occurring long before ACA.

Not sure what your point is, but you don't think making health insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions and covering dependents till age 26 will have no impact on current rates?

 

[presley]

California voted to go against Obama asking everyone to extend insurance for another year.

 

[Passepartout]

Not sure what your point is, but you don't think making health insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions and covering dependents till age 26 will have no impact on current rates?

The point is, that insurance rates have been going up at far above the rate of inflation for years. Check your own costs. Yes, it will cost more to cover those with pre-existing conditions, and the young who live at home, but it is designed to be offset by mandating that the young (and presumably healthy) will sign up and be insured- and pay-outs will be less.

The Insurance Industry is frothing at the mouth to get these millions of new customers. Why do you think you are seeing all the commercials on the TV from BCBS or United or Kaiser or any/all of the other insurers to get people to choose them. Trust me, it isn't out of the kindness of their hearts.

 

[ace2000]

The point is, that insurance rates have been going up at far above the rate of inflation for years. Check your own costs.

I agree. But, if you do the research, all medical costs have been increasing at a rapid rate. It's kind of naive placing all the blame on the insurance companies.

 

[geekette]

Not sure what your point is, but you don't think making health insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions and covering dependents till age 26 will have no impact on current rates?

Sure.

What was the rationale for the skyrocketing for the past decade since anyone already sick wasn't accepted and people making big claims got dumped?

 

[tschwa2]

Not sure what your point is, but you don't think making health insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions and covering dependents till age 26 will have no impact on current rates?

My company changed to covering children up to 26 several years ago. According to the insurance rep, age 18-26 dependents are among the healthiest people they cover so on a per person basis it often lowers the cost per person.

 

[geekette]

I agree. But, if you do the research, all medical costs have been increasing at a rapid rate. It's kind of naive placing all the blame on the insurance companies.

Also naive to place all the blame on ACA.

 

[ace2000]

My company changed to covering children up to 26 several years ago. According to the insurance rep, age 18-26 dependents are among the healthiest people they cover so on a per person basis it often lowers the cost per person.

Again, what's the point? Are you saying that adding this age group will have no impact on the health insurance rates? Not possible.

The new changes are fine. But you just can't say that those changes will have no impact on current rates. That's a false statement.

 

[Passepartout]

I agree. But, if you do the research, all medical costs have been increasing at a rapid rate. It's kind of naive placing all the blame on the insurance companies.

I don't think I am placing blame on the insurance companies. They are raising rates so that they can pay the ever increasing costs levied by the medical industry. And the medical industry raises rates in order to cover the uninsured who come into emergency rooms and doctors who order whole batteries of tests so that when they get sued for malpractice, they can show that they left no stone unturned to treat the patient. It's a vicious circle.

Now, if the general populace has insurance, they won't go to emergency rooms with a runny nose. If insurers pay a flat rate to treat an illness, and negotiates drug prices and encourages use of generic medicines instead of brand names, the rate of price increases can be reduced.

 

[ace2000]

Also naive to place all the blame on ACA.

I agree ...

 

[momeason]

I did not say that the new rates have nothing to do with the ACA. I said my insurance agent, [political comment deleted], said that there would be a 16% rate increase. He said it was the normal, average yearly rate increase.

So my supposition is that about 16% of any rate increase would have happened with or without the law. If your increase is higher than that, then the difference could be attributed to the law. I think that is a reasonable supposition after the statements made by my BCBS agent. Please let others decide this for themselves without going into attack mode.

Even if I have to pay more, I am happy about the law. My husband and I have minor pre-existing conditions that caused us to be turned down on the individual market in 2011. I am very glad that is behind us and all the others with pre-existing conditions who must buy on the individual market probably feel the same.

I have been trying to show people my real experience to help those who may not have time to research. Many of these posts are the opposite of helpful knowledge.

 

[Conan]

In case you missed my note above, would you mind posting the 2014 premiums for the coverage you're being quoted versus what you would pay (before tax credits) for an ACA Bronze plan?

[These healthcare-related threads get so noisy!]

 

[PigsDad]

The insurance companies have been making record profits since 2002 and it continues.

Along with most companies. What's your point?

So if your insurance rates are going up this year, keep in mind that 16% of the rate increase is from your insurer. It has nothing to do with the ACA.

Fact: the average profit margin at the large insurance companies is in the 3-4% range.

Their profit margins are not increasing 16% a year, so the price increase is due to medical costs going up, not the insurance companies. Anyone halfway competent in math could figure this out for themselves, but unfortunately we are bombarded with flashy headlines.

Kurt

 

[Passepartout]

[Never mind.]

 

[presley]

My insurance rates have been going up regularly for the last 10 years. We have never used enough of it to even come close to breaking even.

While the rates have climbed, the last 2 years, our insurance vowed to not profit more than 2%. So, when they do make more than 2%, we get a small refund check. Clearly, we have been subsidizing the sick for as long as we have had insurance.

 

[momeason]

For Conan

I live in NC. I do not qualify for any subsidy. My state does not have its own exchange and BCBSNC is the only company offering individual coverage next year.

I am 55 and my husband is 62..age is a factor.

Our 2013 plan is called Blue Options HSA. It has a $10,000 deductible and a $10,000 max out of pocket. The $10,000 is per group. There is no split of $5,000 per person. This is an advantage plan with a large network.

Currently, we pay $681.45 for the 2 of us. that is with the auto pay option discount.
Next year is estimated to be $785..rates are not posted yet.( Adding 16%)

The closest new Bronze plan is the Advantage 5500. The deductible is $5500 per person, $11,000 group. Out of pocket maximum is $11,000. Our current plan is in the Advantage series which gives you the largest network of providers. I do not want a value plan because the network would be limited.
The 2014 rate for this plan is $1033/mo for the 2 of us.

Neither one of these plans have a copay. We pay for all doctor visits unless we meet the deductible. At that point, we would pay 0 for the rest of the year. We pay negotiated rates and use pre-tax dollars for all medical expenses.
Because we pay for our insurance,no employer, we also get to deduct the insurance costs from our taxes.

If you want more info, PM me and I will be glad to give you my phone number. I have done lots of research and I am able to see all the NC plans on healthcare.gov. I will be glad to answer any questions.

 

[ace2000]

So if your insurance rates are going up this year, keep in mind that 16% of the rate increase is from your insurer. It has nothing to do with the ACA.

I did not say that the new rates have nothing to do with the ACA.

Sorry, that is exactly what you said.

And then you purposely chose to shift all the blame for the increase to the insurance companies. What's the point of your post? To divert blame somewhere else?

 

[VacationForever]

For Conan

I live in NC. I do not qualify for any subsidy. My state does not have its own exchange and BCBSNC is the only company offering individual coverage next year.

I am 55 and my husband is 62..age is a factor.

Our 2013 plan is called Blue Options HSA. It has a $10,000 deductible and a $10,000 max out of pocket. The $10,000 is per group. There is no split of $5,000 per person. This is an advantage plan with a large network.

Currently, we pay $681.45 for the 2 of us. that is with the auto pay option discount.
Next year is estimated to be $785..rates are not posted yet.( Adding 16%)

The closest new Bronze plan is the Advantage 5500. The deductible is $5500 per person, $11,000 group. Out of pocket maximum is $11,000. Our current plan is in the Advantage series which gives you the largest network of providers. I do not want a value plan because the network would be limited.
The 2014 rate for this plan is $1033/mo for the 2 of us.

Neither one of these plans have a copay. We pay for all doctor visits unless we meet the deductible. At that point, we would pay 0 for the rest of the year. We pay negotiated rates and use pre-tax dollars for all medical expenses.
Because we pay for our insurance,no employer, we also get to deduct the insurance costs from our taxes.

If you want more info, PM me and I will be glad to give you my phone number. I have done lots of research and I am able to see all the NC plans on healthcare.gov. I will be glad to answer any questions.

Thank you! This is the kind of data we want to see. My pet peeve, whether you call it political or not, is that this is not health care reform. The primary goal of health care reform needs to be about driving costs down so that health care becomes more affordable for all.

 

[Luanne]

Thank you! This is the kind of data we want to see. My pet peeve, whether you call it political or not, is that this is not health care reform. The primary goal of health care reform needs to be about driving costs down so that health care becomes more affordable for all.

To me, the reform part is that those with pre-existing conditions can now get health insurance and also that birth control AND pregnancy are covered.

 

[rickandcindy23]

Insurance is for those times when you need it, so of course you are paying for all of the other people who are sick and needing it. It's called insurance because that is what it is. That's the very definition.

Just like life insurance. You get a huge amount of money if your spouse dies, but you are paying very little, because your spouse is likely not going to die until well into old age. Same thing.

Some day, all of the money you paid for insurance will be justified. In the last ten years I have had gallbladder problems and a hysterectomy. Before that, I had three kids, but that was a long time ago. I have done well with insurance, but in the beginning, not so much. Now, I feel it's starting to pay off. I went to the doctor just yesterday for tests.

Nothing changes for us, except a slightly higher cost for us to pay each year, which happens every year. But I guarantee that when we are off of the insurance the DFD provides (20 months from now), I will be looking at the Affordable Care website to look at options. If I can get a better deal that way than by staying with our Kaiser, I will switch. We have had Kaiser for 40 years and love it. My doctor is amazing, and my OB/Gyn is great, too.

I saw on CNN yesterday that some computer experts are concerned about the security of SS#'s and personal information on the website for the Affordable Care Act. I hope they fix it soon. But I think it's wise to freeze one's credit with all credit reporting agencies as an added peace of mind.

 

[ace2000]

So my supposition is that about 16% of any rate increase would have happened with or without the law. If your increase is higher than that, then the difference could be attributed to the law. I think that is a reasonable supposition after the statements made by my BCBS agent. Please let others decide this for themselves without going into attack mode.

Not going into attack mode here, and not to beat a dead horse, but how can you keep repeating this statement that your entire 16% increase would have happened with or without the law? And then you tell everyone that any increase up to that point is all on the insurance companies?

The insurance companies are now forced under ACA to cover pre-existing conditions as well as provide coverage to dependents less than age 26. Those are major factors for insurance costs.

Please provide some support to the claim you have chosen to repeat several times.