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

[geekette]

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.

agree. this is Insurance Reform. Nothing with healthcare is changing.

 

[ace2000]

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.

Not a bad idea... or at the least be careful.

 

[geekette]

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.

How about the fact that it has gone up 16% for her Every Year in the past?

 

[ace2000]

How about the fact that it has gone up 16% for her Every Year in the past?

I have no idea what the background on her insurance policy is. You don't either.

 

[tschwa2]

I'll try to look up our last couple of years. I don't think we have had a 16% increase but it certainly has been in the 9-12% annual increase over the past several years.

 

[geekette]

I have no idea what the background on her insurance policy is. You don't either.

Try post #65

 

[ace2000]

Try post #65

I've read it. An insurance premium is based on a lot more factors than just those details.

 

[geekette]

I've read it. An insurance premium is based on a lot more factors than just those details.

Fine, try post 50 that says "normal increase".

What is it you actually want??? Would you like to contact her ins co to find out Exactly What these increases are based on, because I don't think anyone here, except maybe an insurance exec, can give you exactly what you want.

if your rates haven't been skyrocketing for the past decade or so, Lucky You. The rest of us have seen annual increases, some of them Very Large. Do I know Exactly Why? No, my insurer doesn't quite provide the sort of intimate detail you request.

Why don't you tell us what the premiums are precisely based on so that we will have a formula to use next year?

 

[ace2000]

Fine, try post 50 that says "normal increase".

What is it you actually want??? Would you like to contact her ins co to find out Exactly What these increases are based on, because I don't think anyone here, except maybe an insurance exec, can give you exactly what you want.

if your rates haven't been skyrocketing for the past decade or so, Lucky You. The rest of us have seen annual increases, some of them Very Large. Do I know Exactly Why? No, my insurer doesn't quite provide the sort of intimate detail you request.

Why don't you tell us what the premiums are precisely based on so that we will have a formula to use next year?

You're asking me to comment on why her premiums are going up at 16%? I don't know. You don't know either.

I'm only questioning the blame the insurance company mentality path that the OP chose to go down.

 

[ace2000]

Why don't you tell us what the premiums are precisely based on so that we will have a formula to use next year?

I don't have the answer for you. Have you thought about trying a Google search?

 

[momeason]

The point is that premiums have been going up a lot every year. I had group coverage prior to June 1,2013 so I have very little history in the individual market. Our group plans usually increased at least 10%. The individual market has been based on many factors age, gender and most importantly health history. I do not know how much the rates have been increasing since I had group coverage. I am just believing my insurance agent. We cannot compare apples and oranges…let's just drop this attack.

I guess the insurance industry will get a little cost savings from not having to hire all those people who dug deep into our medical histories before granting or denying coverage. I was interviewed by multiple people from two insurance
companies in 2011 and 2013 when I was shopping for coverage. They asked about so many details from various diagnosis..(many of which had been changed for the better). If a doctor tested me for anything, it was assumed I would have problems. I had to try to get through that most of those test results were negative. We took COBRA group coverage after being turned down in 2011.
Started individual coverage on June 1.2013.

 

[geekette]

I don't have the answer for you. Have you thought about trying a Google search?

You're the one stating they are based on a lot more, that it couldn't possibly just be the insurance company raising it. google it your own self. It matters nothing for me, I'm covered by employer.

 

[svwoude]

For Conan


I am 55 and my husband is 62.

And from an earlier post - My previous plan did not have maternity coverage

This is part of the reason your new plan is going up 16%
You are being forced to pay for coverage ( I am making an assumption here)
that you don't need

 

[momeason]

And from an earlier post - My previous plan did not have maternity coverage

This is part of the reason your new plan is going up 16%
You are being forced to pay for coverage ( I am making an assumption here)
that you don't need

The 16% increase is if I keep my existing plan per the new option to keep my plan. I will still not have maternity coverage. I made that clear when I posted the 16% increase. The 16% increase is not related to any new plan changes. The plan remains the same. It is a rate increase from the insurer for the identical plan.
This plan does not meet the new standards but it is being grandfathered.

 

[Passepartout]

You are being forced to pay for coverage that you don't need

That's what insurance and taxation is about. It's a part of living in a civilized society, and not like animals in 'survival of the fittest'. I have never fathered a child. Yet I have paid property taxes for nearly 50 years. The vast majority of which has gone to support schools I have never set foot in- nor has any progeny of mine benefited. Another healthy chunk supports a fire department. Thank goodness, I've never needed them. The number of times I have directly interacted with the police- again very few.

As to health insurance, I don't know if my old insurance covered pap smears, pregnancy, or birth control. I DO know it covered PSAs and digital prostate exams, though my wife couldn't care less. Medicare covers both.

So anyway, welcome to being a member of civilized society.

Jim

 

[momeason]

That's what insurance and taxation is about. It's a part of living in a civilized society, and not like animals in 'survival of the fittest'. I have never fathered a child. Yet I have paid property taxes for nearly 50 years. The vast majority of which has gone to support schools I have never set foot in- nor has any progeny of mine benefited. Another healthy chunk supports a fire department. Thank goodness, I've never needed them. The number of times I have directly interacted with the police- again very few.

As to health insurance, I don't know if my old insurance covered pap smears, pregnancy, or birth control. I DO know it covered PSAs and digital prostate exams, though my wife couldn't care less. Medicare covers both.

So anyway, welcome to being a member of civilized society.

Jim

Thank you Jim. I wanted to say some of this but I was trying not to be political.
To some other posters, I would prefer that if you do not have the need to shop for individual coverage for yourself or someone you care about, then keep your opinions to yourself. My intent was to help people make informed decisions in the individual marketplace. I started the first post in the first thread with that. If you are not here to help, then you are just noise.

 

[Miss Marty]

An estimated 800,000 Maryland residents currently are uninsured.


Affordable Care Act Health Coverage

Signed into law in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires legal residents ages 18 to 64 to have health insurance coverage beginning in 2014 or pay a fine.

 

[Conan]

I was interviewed by multiple people from two insurance companies in 2011 and 2013 when I was shopping for coverage. They asked about so many details from various diagnosis..(many of which had been changed for the better). If a doctor tested me for anything, it was assumed I would have problems. I had to try to get through that most of those test results were negative. We took COBRA group coverage after being turned down in 2011. Started individual coverage on June 1.2013.

Thanks for posting the information about your insurance premiums and history. We've been in an employer's group plan so we haven't had to look into private coverage. The way our deal with the employer was structured though, we've had to pay the full cost of coverage by salary reduction, $17,000/year for a pretty good family plan. We're about to cross the finish line and get into Medicare. Part B and D premiums are looking good to us!

The prices you're seeing for people who haven't made it to 65 are consistent with the calculator at http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/ The truth is, people who don't have the benefit of a subsidized employer plan, if they also earn too much to qualify for the tax rebate, aren't going to find any bargains. So as you note what's new under ACA is that insurance companies will no longer be able to cherry pick who they want to cover in the individual market. (And people with an employer plan who leave or lose their job can expect to find health insurance that's cheaper than COBRA and that doesn't expire.)

On the other hand, Obamacare may help put an end to what was the strategy for healthcare, by default or by design, for many of the 47 million Americans who didn't have an employer plan, weren't poor enough for Medicaid or old enough for Medicare, and couldn't or wouldn't pay the price of private coverage. http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/ Their strategy almost always was to do without preventive medicine, tough it out or go to the emergency room if something happened, and in the worst case hope to get treated on credit and then just go bankrupt.

But they had Freedom!

 

[dioxide45]

The only way for the system to work is if everyone pretty much has the same coverage (just pays different premiums, deductible and coinsurance/copays). To only cover maternity for those that need it is pointless. Their premiums would be through the roof. The idea of insurance is and has always been that the people that don't make claims pay for those that do make claims. If people didn't add maternity coverage to their plan, people that needed it would not be able to afford it since they would be the only people wanting it. People usually plan to get pregant or have a child (I know, not always). It isn't like getting ill or injured where it is unplanned.

One issue with medical insurance today is that insurance companies have to insure basic maintenance. When you have to get your oil changed in your car you don't file an insurance claim. But you do when you go for an annual checkup at the doctor. Now if you had an extended warranty and needed an engine replaced, you would file a claim but you still wouldn't for the oil change. Insurance should really just cover catastrophic loss, not day to day maintenance.

Another problem is equal access to helthcare. Countries with a single payer system usually don't have this issue like the USA does. In the USA, the wealthy have easier access to healthcare than the poor. In single payer systems, everyone is usually equal. Now I am not saying single payer systems are the answer as they have their own problems. The issue for many people though is equal access to healthcare.

 

[dioxide45]

We have been on a HDHP for the past year. My only issue with these are that they are pure profit to the insurance companies. If one doesn't ever go over their deductible or use any of the preventative care, those premiums are pure profit. Of course that will help off set those that do go over their deductibles. The problem is that it seems that HDHPs are priced high for what you actually get. Several hundred dollars a month on the individual market is high IMO for what amounts to no coverage if you don't have a catastrophic event where you hit your deductible. I think they are using these plans to subsidize all the other plans they offer, even the more traditional plans.

 

[momeason]

Surveys have consistently shown that the large majority of respondents believe that insurance companies should be required to cover people with pre-existing conditions. Respondents also do not believe that insurance companies should be allowed to drop customers who get serious illnesses. Insurance companies have been doing both of these things for many years.
If there was regulation that required the insurance company to accept and keep these higher risk patients and there was no regulation requiring young healthy people to have insurance, insurance rates really would go through the roof.

I agree that rates are high, but only 10% or less of currently insured people need to buy on the individual market. For most employed Americans or those over 65 or retired from government, the law does not change much. Most do not really have a dog in the fight and most of them do not understand the reality of trying to buy an individual health plan.

 

[momeason]

We have been on a HDHP for the past year. My only issue with these are that they are pure profit to the insurance companies. If one doesn't ever go over their deductible or use any of the preventative care, those premiums are pure profit. Of course that will help off set those that do go over their deductibles. The problem is that it seems that HDHPs are priced high for what you actually get. Several hundred dollars a month on the individual market is high IMO for what amounts to no coverage if you don't have a catastrophic event where you hit your deductible. I think they are using these plans to subsidize all the other plans they offer, even the more traditional plans.

I also think the rates are high, but we all insure our homes. Most of the time, we do not use that insurance either. It is there to cover a catastrophic loss.
My husband had expensive golf clubs stolen and in the same year we had a leak in our AC unit that caused damage in our home. We had two claims that year and we received a cancellation notice. We had never had a claim in the 15 years before. ( This was 16 years ago.) It seems it doesn't take much to get cancelled in any insurance market.
We have a health insurance plan to cover what we cannot afford to cover and to get us negotiated rates on the outrageous healthcare costs. The US system is not ideal, but it is what we have. At least, we all have healthcare. I do not want to take the risk that nothing bad is going to happen. Very regularly, someone I know is diagnosed with a serious health problem. Let's be thankful that we all have access to healthcare..it is almost Thanksgiving!

 

[floridabob]

[POST DELETED: floridabob - Did you get my private message? I asked you to stop posting political messages - further violations may result in suspension of your posting privileges. - DeniseM]

[***As it turns out "floridabob" is actually a registered TUG member, posting under a different guest name, to promote his political agenda. "floridabob" will no longer be posting.]

 

[Passepartout]

"Even if the law were fully implemented, there would have been 26 million uninsured people," co-author Steffie Woolhandler said in an interview Thursday. "This isn't just about the Medicaid expansion. This is the system as originally designed."

Thirty million is a lot smaller than the 48.6 million Americans who lack insurance coverage right now.

As you can see, there's not much of a difference.

Actually 48.6 million, minus 30 million is nearly 20 million people who don't have insurance now who will under ACA. You got a better plan to insure more? Please, speak now. We're on pins and needles!

We will see when the law gets fully implemented- which is expected to take 2-3 years. The first year of implementation, 2014, we know there will be some people who will keep their old insurance. In '15, and '16, those older grandfathered plans will have expired, the rebates will be operating as expected, AND the tax consequences will be much higher than they will be in the first covered year.

Sure, a sizable number will choose to stick with HDHP plans that still leave them exposed to significant costs and swallow the miniscule 'fines' for not signing up. Those fines increase in subsequent years and the HDHP plans sunset.

There is your incentive to sign up. Will EVERY person sign up. Nope. But most will when they weigh the benefits vs. the cost.

Jim

 

[dioxide45]

Sure, a sizable number will choose to stick with HDHP plans that still leave them exposed to significant costs and swallow the miniscule 'fines' for not signing up. Those fines increase in subsequent years and the HDHP plans sunset.

Did you mean to use OR in this sentence? I believe some of the plans offered on the ACA exchanges are in fact HDHPs. So they are not going away. The plans that are going away are the ones that don't meet the minimum requirements of ACA. These are not necessarily HDHPs. So you can sign up for a HDHP and avoid the tax penalties.