Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

djean111

(14,255 posts)

5. I think we will be bled out by insurance companies until we have single payer by default.

Reply to Kolesar (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:37 AM

Jan 2013

If people start to HAVE to pay more and more of their disposable income to insurance companies, then they will not be able to buy things like food and clothes and houses. Talk about a cascading effect! Perhaps higher and higher premiums will put people into government health care by default?
I think the current way that the ACA deals with increasing premiums is to send a sternly worded letter and a frownie sticker. The insurance companies have quickly learned to ask for a huge increase, then settle for what they likely wanted in the first place - there is, after all, always next year, and the next.
Wouldn't it be lovely if all enterprises were guaranteed a profit?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

PA advocates want single payer; 'Obamacare' doesn't go far enough [View all] eridani Jan 2013 OP

Remember back when "insurance" meant "sharing risk" instead of "making profits"? Scuba Jan 2013 #1

The ACA doesn't address this sort of thing, really. The high premium part. djean111 Jan 2013 #2

Is $9000/year for health coverage a ridiculous price? Kolesar Jan 2013 #3

I think we will be bled out by insurance companies until we have single payer by default. djean111 Jan 2013 #5

9000/12 = 750. LWolf Jan 2013 #9

Or cancelled when needed based on a previously unknown pre-existing condition? n/t Earth_First Jan 2013 #13

Customers cannot get dropped after 1/1/2014 Kolesar Jan 2013 #16

Young peoples' premiums would be about a third of that Kolesar Jan 2013 #15

Adjustable rates LWolf Jan 2013 #19

I'd say it's deserved Congress-bashing more than anything. HughBeaumont Jan 2013 #7

That was my complaint with Obamacare all along Victor_c3 Jan 2013 #4

So, it would have been better to demand Single Payer and get nothing... brooklynite Jan 2013 #6

It would have been better to allow single payer on the table. LWolf Jan 2013 #10

Single Payer was on the table. HR 676. It died in committee. stevenleser Jan 2013 #18

I haven't forgotten HR 676, LWolf Jan 2013 #20

We are addressing the flaws. djean111 Jan 2013 #12

The "mandate" is what pays for the system ... eom Kolesar Jan 2013 #17

YES, it would have been better Demo_Chris Jan 2013 #14

Waiver on insurance exchanges reteachinwi Jan 2013 #8

Exactly. The waiver was put in to allow Vermont to work toward Single Payer. nt bluestate10 Jan 2013 #21

I had a very bad experience with an insurance company as well. PA Democrat Jan 2013 #11