Pic Of The Moment: Yet Another Obamacare Horror Story Goes Down In Flames

[EarlG]

Good News for Obamacare Is Bad News for Conservative Pundits

Follow @demunderground

[AleksS]

1. Not only in line with, but less than my premiums had

Not only in line with, but less than my premiums had been increasing before Obamacare!

Does anyone have stats on average increases before Obamacare?

[House of Roberts]

3. Not just the increases,

but the fine print exclusions that employer-provided insurance had to keep adding to keep the cost from going up even more.

The policies can't atrophy the benefits like before, so the increases are, at least, more transparent.

[AleksS]

9. Good point!

For years and years not only were my premiums going up, but coverages were going down!

So if the coverages aren't shrinking, and the premiums only went up 7%, then from my (personal) perspective, that's pretty amazing.

[lark]

12. 12-25% is what I remember seeing in recent years

I work in medical billing so do pay close attention to this for both personal and professional reasons.

[glowing]

2. Wasn't there some sort of rule keeping them from going above 10% yr to yr.

And I would think, on a site where they are competing, especially for younger healthier people, they will be finding deals and prices that fit people's budgets. We can all talk about what plans are doing and what companies are a rip off better with a market place to compare with.

[Blanks]

4. Since insurance companies are limited...

By how much they can spend on 'non-health expenses' and there will be more volume in the health care industry, increasing competition and reducing prices, of course the rate of increase will decrease (already has).

Ironically, the folks who are shouting "socialism" don't seem to grasp the concept that the primary advantage to capitalism is competition. Obamacare put competition back into the health care industry where there was none before.

[underpants]

5. I have to disagree a bit

7% is better than "in line" it is fantastic. Premium, in my experience, usually rise 12 to 25% annually.

[rhett o rick]

6. This is good news even if it is still just a prediction.

The increase for the 85% that arent using the ACA is a huge issue. I've spoken with a number of people in the 85% that are ok with the uninsured getting insurance but concerned what it will cost them. This uncertainty may hurt Democrats in Nov. The candidate need to promulgate the statistics provided in your OP. Democrats must run on the truth.

[progressivebydesign]

7. not to mention the "horror stories" faux news is pushing on their news sites...

I stumbled across this headline: Waiting to die: Man says insurance rejected due to Obamacare. Seems that the local Faux news stations are finding their own horror stories, and the kookaid drinkers are just posting them all over facebook in horror.

The writer did not do any investigative work on this at all. Did not find out what was behind this. The guy and his wife are self employed, and their plan changed because of BLUE CROSS not Obamacare. But of course Obamacare gets blamed. Blue Cross got rid of some policies. Obama had nothing to do with that. Without ANY investigative journalism at all, they're simply posting these stories as told to them.


[link:http://www.kmph.com/story/25269345/waiting-to-die-man-says-insurance-rejected-due-to-obamacare|

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. K&R

[IronLionZion]

10. This is such a train wreck

for republicons!

[merrily]

11. Historical increases esp. since 2008, might be relevant.

Largely unfettered, versus regulated. My guess would be that regulation will actually improve pricing very soon, at least where no waivers are in effect.

Even if Obamacare itself does not control prices--and I believe it does--the very existence of a comprehensive regulatory plan has to make providers of health insurance and medical products and services hesitant. After all, predatory pricing on their parts is an invitation to amend the statute in a targeted way; and an amendment to a regulatory scheme is a lot easier to pass than an entire regulatory scheme. It's more than a camel's nose under the tent.

[McCamy Taylor]

13. AS I posted recently, my family paid $30k a year in premiums and deductibles under the old system.

And that was when I was at home, not working and we were a one income family.If we had had the ACA then, we would have been paying $3k.

$30 K to $3k. The ACA is not perfect but it is definitely affordable. And I want my $27K times (how many years was that?) back!

[tanyev]

14. Oh, the inanity!

[doc03]

15. They were saying our Medicare premiums would be $350 this year

but they remained at 104.90 for the second year.

[Cha]

16. Since the Cons live to Lie.. we can keep expecting their "Obama Horror Stories" to

go down in Flames.

Thank you, EarlG

[shaayecanaan]

17. if a 7% rise is a good year

(and this in a time of inflation barely being over 1%) then I genuinely feel for Americans who have to afford it somehow. At that rate even with subsidies medicaid extensions etc it can't be long before healthcare becomes unaffordable again.

[manicmuse1]

18. Some of us

already cannot afford it, if your stae didnt expand Medicaid.

[IronLionZion]

19. Free preventive checkups

premiums are only one part of the cost. There's also deductible and copays. Then there's the health savings account for those who choose it and workplace wellness programs for those employers who choose it for rewarding certain things like not smoking and getting an annual checkup.

My annual checkup actually give me a profit of several hundred bucks each year.

Then there's the patient protection part, the increased coverage, no more annual or lifetime caps, and other benefits in case expensive treatment is needed.

And back to the premiums, there is finally some transparency in pricing and a competitive marketplace. There are nonprofit insurers who can compete on cost, which can help lower prices. And next enrollment year, lots more insurers are entering the government exchanges after observing the first year. Soon, Vermont's single payer system will eventually be up and running, and that will have some impact.

There's a lot going on. Things are changing.

[shaayecanaan]

21. Glad I don't have to worry about any of that shit...

given that we have single-payer over here.

The problem for Vermont, and the US in general, is that even if it gets rid of the Insurers it still has to deal with the hospitals, health professions and drug companies which are even bigger pricks than the Insurers.

The only way to break the professions is to import more doctors. Seems harsh, but thats exactly how the US shafted the working class. I don't see why the professional class should miss out on the pain challenges glories of globalisation.

[IronLionZion]

22. Indian doctors didn't just fall out of the sky

We needed lots of doctors for our new single payer Medicare back in the 60's, as millions of elderly gained coverage. Doctors willing to work in under served areas for low wages.

Taiwan used our Medicare as their model for single payer.

America has a combination of every system: single payer Medicare, socialist Veterans Affairs, Swiss style Obamacare, private insurers, cash providers, alternative healers, and third world style die quickly.

Which country are you in?

[shaayecanaan]

24. They usually get out of a plane

which is generally how they arrive here (Australia). The 457 visa system allows doctors, nurses, etc to work for an employer for two years after which they qualify for permanent residence.

Skilled migration in the US is extremely limited, meaning that the American professional class gets the best of both worlds - they can charge high prices and at the same time pay an undocumented migrant $2.00 an hour to clean their pool. Whereas the American working class earn third-world wages and pay first-world healthcare costs (actually double what the average first worlder pays).

[DesertRat]

20. k&r

[William769]

23. Gotta love that headline.