|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Then its only going to get worse because they are all greedy and getting away with charging more and more while providing less and less.
ins companies are raising deductables so high you might as well not have ins because they dont cover jack squat unti youve already paid thousands.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
Quote:
Then its only going to get worse because they are all greedy and getting away with charging more and more while providing less and less.
ins companies are raising deductables so high you might as well not have ins because they dont cover jack squat unti youve already paid thousands.
And doctors and hospital are raising rates so high you may as well not go.......but they do so because insurance companies only pay a portion of the bill, then throw in mal practice insurance that doctors and hospitals pay, keeping in mind the outrageous lawsuits they get saddled with.
It's a circle. Who makes out? Insurance companies. Who makes out under this new bill? Insurance companies.
Hey - why are so many doctors refusing new medicare patients? Any idea why? (heres a hint: because gov't. is involved). Why are many doctors retiring early?
Wasn't all that long ago - couple of years - our county hospital was very close to not delivering babies anymore. Why? malpractice insurance rates.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Believe me, I hate the ins companies as much as the next person. I cannot get ins because I have a pre existing chronic illness which is very expensive to treat. I have to live with this nightmare every single day. My cobra which covered nothing, runs out next month, and then all of my expenses are out of pocket for six months until I can get on the govt ins.
In a way I can see why the ins companies are being bastards about rates and deductables. They have to pay these extremely inflated prices that doctors and hospitals charge and for the fancy pants meds. If those things were regulated the ins companies would not have to bend us over a rail.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
What came first - the chicken or the egg?
Why do hospitals or doctors charge so much? Because insurance companies only pay a fraction of the bill.
Why do insurance companies charge so much? Because hospitals and doctors charge so much.
Now - you go find a solution to the answer. And I'll guarantee your solution won't be "everyone has to have insurance", when you look at the costs/taxes involved and what it will do to the economy.
We don't live in an ideal world.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
And I have researched this. Ins companies dont have a huge profit margin. They only make a lot of money by the sheer numbers of people they cover.
Pharmaceutical companies have the largest profit margin followed by healthcare facilities.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Most hospital doctors are salaried and make much less than private practice doctors. They arent inventing their salaries, they get whatever the hospital pays them.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,249
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,249 |
Quote:
It's a circle. Who makes out? Insurance companies. Who makes out under this new bill? Insurance companies.
And who was behind closed doors with Obama creating this plan? Insurance companies!
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
Quote:
Most hospital doctors are salaried and make much less than private practice doctors. They arent inventing their salaries, they get whatever the hospital pays them.
I won't argue this with you - but in my experience, that's not the case. But, I'm experienced with smaller hospitals.
Now - I will say you're talking "hospital" doctors.......maybe that's where my issue comes up? Off the top of my head, I can't think of one single "hospital" doctor (other than the e.r. doctors), that don't have a private practice. Around here, that is.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
You should read the two paragraphs I quoted again, particularly the first one, which you didn't address in your response. I'll quote it for you again: Quote:
It won't be too terribly long before your job says "we can't afford to offer health insurance any longer".
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
If you need a specialist, they will likely be part of a private practice, but a general internal medicine doc like an er doc is going to be salaried. All doctors do their residency at a hospital and are paid by the hospital.
In any case, docs dont get paid that much in general. I know primary care docs might get a bit over 100k. That is not much money. I work in IT. I can tell you there are very many programmers who make over 100K and there is no national crisis about paying IT People.
So whatever drives up the cost so much for these doctors offices needs to be addressed.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
I both do/don't agree: Quote:
If they want to fix the healthcare system they need to address the actual problem: costs are spiraling out of control. The answer is not to force consumers or employers to pay for these costs. The answer is to regulate the industry with regards to costs. Everyone with their hand in the pot.
Most numbers seem to indicate that the reason costs are increasing so quickly - is that there is so much more that doctors can do. 100 years ago, they could give you aspirin, or else you died. 50 years ago they could do more - but it was a number of relatively simple, relatively cheap procedures -- and drugs which were easy to create.
Now there are drugs which took 20 yeas of R&D to create - which take hours of human labor, and thousands of dollars worth of ingredients in order to formulate - which do save lives.
Heath care costs have to go up, and they will continue to keep going up.
I think there is a valid question about how much we value R&D -- a large chunk of the prescription drug costs go to fund it (a much larger percentage in the US than any other country). On one hand, that makes pharmaceutical companies a lot of money, and means that most of the new drugs in the world are made here (those are good things) -- but it does greatly increase the cost of medical care in the US, compared to other countries.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
Quote:
You should read the two paragraphs I quoted again, particularly the first one, which you didn't address in your response. I'll quote it for you again:
Quote:
It won't be too terribly long before your job says "we can't afford to offer health insurance any longer".
I'm not sure how I didn't address that - not being an a hat here, but what am I missing?
Are YOU paying your health insurance? No. According to you - a grant is paying it.
What happens when that grant runs out?
What happens when companies decide to not offer insurance anymore? Not saying it WILL happen - and I speak only from a small, tiny, actually - sample - but I know businesses that are seriously considering dropping the health insurance benefit.
Now - huge companies may not consider that. But not everyone works for a huge company.
Anyway, I'd like to address your question - but could you be more specific?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
Quote:
I both do/don't agree:
Quote:
If they want to fix the healthcare system they need to address the actual problem: costs are spiraling out of control. The answer is not to force consumers or employers to pay for these costs. The answer is to regulate the industry with regards to costs. Everyone with their hand in the pot.
Most numbers seem to indicate that the reason costs are increasing so quickly - is that there is so much more that doctors can do. 100 years ago, they could give you aspirin, or else you died. 50 years ago they could do more - but it was a number of relatively simple, relatively cheap procedures -- and drugs which were easy to create.
Now there are drugs which took 20 yeas of R&D to create - which take hours of human labor, and thousands of dollars worth of ingredients in order to formulate - which do save lives.
Heath care costs have to go up, and they will continue to keep going up.
I think there is a valid question about how much we value R&D -- a large chunk of the prescription drug costs go to fund it (a much larger percentage in the US than any other country). On one hand, that makes pharmaceutical companies a lot of money, and means that most of the new drugs in the world are made here (those are good things) -- but it does greatly increase the cost of medical care in the US, compared to other countries.
Correct.
Then throw in MRI machines, for example. CAT scan machines.
Check out the number of mri machines here in the states with the number in canada - per capita.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
You said that jobs wouldn't offer insurance any longer -- i.e. jobs that used to offer insurance, will stop doing it, a tax on not offering insurance can't possibly do that. Some companies will certainly opt to pay the tax, instead of paying insurance on their employees -- but those companies also wouldn't be offering insurance now.
For a company that already offers insurance, a $2000/person tax on not paying insurance will have no effect.
For a company that doesn't currently offer insurance, a $2000/person tax on not paying insurance will have one of the following effects:
a.) pay insurance
b.) pay tax
c.) fire employees to become a company which doesn't need to.
Option c is possible for companies which have say, 50-70 employees or something similar. That will happen to some effect. Maybe most companies will choose option B (although in that case they have to pay employees more than companies who choose A -- so there were additional costs you don't take into account).
But some companies will choose A -- which means that in every case, a greater percentage of jobs will have insurance post-law than pre-law.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Quote:
I both do/don't agree:
Quote:
If they want to fix the healthcare system they need to address the actual problem: costs are spiraling out of control. The answer is not to force consumers or employers to pay for these costs. The answer is to regulate the industry with regards to costs. Everyone with their hand in the pot.
Most numbers seem to indicate that the reason costs are increasing so quickly - is that there is so much more that doctors can do. 100 years ago, they could give you aspirin, or else you died. 50 years ago they could do more - but it was a number of relatively simple, relatively cheap procedures -- and drugs which were easy to create.
Now there are drugs which took 20 yeas of R&D to create - which take hours of human labor, and thousands of dollars worth of ingredients in order to formulate - which do save lives.
Heath care costs have to go up, and they will continue to keep going up.
I think there is a valid question about how much we value R&D -- a large chunk of the prescription drug costs go to fund it (a much larger percentage in the US than any other country). On one hand, that makes pharmaceutical companies a lot of money, and means that most of the new drugs in the world are made here (those are good things) -- but it does greatly increase the cost of medical care in the US, compared to other countries.
Yes and No. pharmaceurical companies have a larger profit margin than most other industries of any kind. It might take them years to develop a drug, but then they slap a patent on it and have a monopoly on that drug for twenty years and make money hand over fist.
Also alot of research comes from grants and acedemia, and private donations that goes to charities for research.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
Here's one thing they ought to do: Ban advertising for drugs.
Let the doctors decide what's best - don't go advertising.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
Okay - you clarified.
I disagree.
I guess we'll continue this discussion in a couple of years.
I still see the cost benefit for companies to not offer insurance, and I truly believe once a few companies start that - many, many, will follow.
But, we'll find out in the coming 2 or 3 years.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
That wont work either because drug companies visit dr offices and give them perks for prescribing their drugs. More than free pens. Like luxury vacations to attend a seminar about their drugs, and stuff like that. All docs dont take bribes like that, but a lot do.
I am sorry to be argumentative. I am just so epically frustrtated because of the broken system, our inept govt, and being stuck with it because of my medical condition.
I dont know what the answer is, mostly it seems like a lot of smoke and mirrors and somebody somewhere is getting really rich from it while people suffer and have to carry the burden for other peoples greed.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Quote:
Okay - you clarified.
I disagree.
I guess we'll continue this discussion in a couple of years.
I still see the cost benefit for companies to not offer insurance, and I truly believe once a few companies start that - many, many, will follow.
But, we'll find out in the coming 2 or 3 years.
I don't think it's really an opinion - explain to me how a company that used to offer healthcare - would suddenly stop because they would be fined for stopping?
Adding a tax to not offering insurance can't possibly make "not offering insurance" any more attractive to a company than it currently is.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Also, I dont understand the statements from people who say that docs charge high prices because ins wont pick up the bill.
I have had surgery and multitudes of expensive procedures and tests. On every single bill it says ins didnt cover whatever amount so i have to pay it. It has never not once said the doc or hospital was picking up part of the bill.
So I am not quite understanding that.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
Quote:
Okay - you clarified.
I disagree.
I guess we'll continue this discussion in a couple of years.
I still see the cost benefit for companies to not offer insurance, and I truly believe once a few companies start that - many, many, will follow.
But, we'll find out in the coming 2 or 3 years.
I don't think it's really an opinion - explain to me how a company that used to offer healthcare - would suddenly stop because they would be fined for stopping?
Adding a tax to not offering insurance can't possibly make "not offering insurance" any more attractive to a company than it currently is.
I don't know where you work but my company pays into our insurance so it will depend on if the fine is less than the cost of insurance. So if the insurance costs the company $5000/employee yet the fine to not have insurance is $4000/employee then bean counters might drop the insurance and save some money.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
But right now the fine is $0/employee to not offer insurance - and the company is offering insurance now -- that's the part that doesn't make sense.
It makes total sense that some companies will choose to pay the fine, instead of paying insurance - but that company would never pay for insurance when there is no fine -- which is what archbold was saying.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Quote:
Also, I dont understand the statements from people who say that docs charge high prices because ins wont pick up the bill.
I have had surgery and multitudes of expensive procedures and tests. On every single bill it says ins didnt cover whatever amount so i have to pay it. It has never not once said the doc or hospital was picking up part of the bill.
So I am not quite understanding that.
Go in and ask what a "surgery" costs - you will get a very different number than the amount the insurance paid.
I had ankle surgery in February - the "cost" of the surgery when I went in, was $18000 for the operating room (not including the doctor/anesthesiologist).
After that, insurance negotiated a price of $6500, they paid 90% of it, and I paid the other 10%.
That's the cost difference people are talking about -- it's basically like all medical procedures are on sale by 50% - insurance companies will never pay the sticker price.
Actually if you negotiate with the company, you can definitely pay much less too, even without insurance.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
Quote:
Quote:
Okay - you clarified.
I disagree.
I guess we'll continue this discussion in a couple of years.
I still see the cost benefit for companies to not offer insurance, and I truly believe once a few companies start that - many, many, will follow.
But, we'll find out in the coming 2 or 3 years.
I don't think it's really an opinion - explain to me how a company that used to offer healthcare - would suddenly stop because they would be fined for stopping?
Adding a tax to not offering insurance can't possibly make "not offering insurance" any more attractive to a company than it currently is.
We'll find out in a few years, when all this "coverage" kicks in, won't we?
But - using your numbers from above ( think it was your numbers - if not, forgive me. Someone said they pay $250 per month - the company - for health insurance for an individual. That's $3000 per year per individual covered.................and you said it was paid from a grant also.)
Real world scenario: Health insurance costs a lot more than $250 per month per employee.
Consequently - a business looks at the $3000 per year for health insurance vs. the $2000 tax for not providing insurance.
Not a tough decision, is it? Say it's 100 employees - and you can save $1000 per employee by not providing insurance. That's $100,000 saved - for doing nothing other than paying the tax.
The employee, on the other hand - still has to pay for insurance - and I guarantee $250 a month ain't cutting it for insurance. But, if the employee doesn't get health insurance - they'll get taxed as well.
Now - imagine yourself as someone that runs a for profit business. What would you do? Remember - as someone that runs this said business - YOU are responsible for the bottom line............that may be a foreign thought for you.............but it isn't for businesses.
Here's the scenario. I employ 100 people. I can pay 3 grand per employee for the year for health insurance - costing me $300,000..........OR I can pay the $2000 tax per employee - costing me $200,000 a year.
In the mean time - if people quit - with unemployment as it is - I'll just hire the next joe off the street.
Do you get it? Or are you stuck on "that wouldn't ever happen"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Ok I see what you are saying. That makes sense, thanks for explaining. :-)
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,980
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,980 |
If I understand the law right ...... and it's a mess to start with ...... the employer mandate doesn't say that they have to cover a family ...... just the individual who works for them. Thus it could come down to a choice between $5000 (or more) in cost for a family .... or a $2000 fine ...... and guess which wins out there?
That's not the biggest problem though. It's the employers who employ people in entry level positions, such as fast food restaurants, stores, and so on. These companies have both full and part time employees. You will see the number of full time employees drop like a rock if they have to suddenly cover all of their full time employees.
My old restaurant, for example, had somewhere around 10 - 15 full time employees and the rest were part time. (plus managers)
Let's just use 10 employees.
10x2000=20,000 per year in new payroll cost.
Let's say that the company has some locations that are struggling to make a profit ..... and that were making just a $1000 per month profit. Suddenly these locations are losing money. What often happens when companies have locations that are losing money? Buh-bye entry level jobs ....... hello higher prices for everyone ....... see ya full time jobs for young people starting out and entry level positions .......
Yep .... that should help everyone ......
As far as the parents of these young people ..... some have insurance ...... many others don't. How long before the question asked at interviews is "Do your parents have insurance, and can you verify it?".
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,945 |
Quote:
But right now the fine is $0/employee to not offer insurance - and the company is offering insurance now -- that's the part that doesn't make sense.
It makes total sense that some companies will choose to pay the fine, instead of paying insurance - but that company would never pay for insurance when there is no fine -- which is what archbold was saying.
No man - I wasn't saying that at all.
Let it all play out - you just aren't getting it. I'm not talking today - I'm talking the result of this bill.
How much of this ACA bill has taken effect today? That's right - basically nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
I think the problem is going to be much worse than whether an employer covers ins or not. In the last few years at my previous employer before all this happened.....rates went up and deductables went up because that is what the company negotiated with the ins company to keep a low cost.
I feel that if employers keep ins for employees they will negotiate higher and higher rates and higher and higher deductables until it catches up to individual ins rates. And it will keep going until ins only covers catastropic events and most healthcare is paid for out of pocket.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Quote:
I think the problem is going to be much worse than whether an employer covers ins or not. In the last few years at my previous employer before all this happened.....rates went up and deductables went up because that is what the company negotiated with the ins company to keep a low cost.
I feel that if employers keep ins for employees they will negotiate higher and higher rates and higher and higher deductables until it catches up to individual ins rates. And it will keep going until ins only covers catastropic events and most healthcare is paid for out of pocket.
Well, quite a bit of that is forbidden by the law -- which will of course have the effect of driving up the cost to companies.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Quote:
No man - I wasn't saying that at all.
Let it all play out - you just aren't getting it. I'm not talking today - I'm talking the result of this bill.
Quote:
It won't be too terribly long before your job says "we can't afford to offer health insurance any longer".
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
If I am understanding correctly companies are free to negotiate prices and benefits for their group ins?
I know the law says ins has to justify rate increases, but it has been happening for years. If rates are not frozen then they will go up, or what they cover will go down.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Quote:
If I am understanding correctly companies are free to negotiate prices and benefits for their group ins?
I know the law says ins has to justify rate increases, but it has been happening for years. If rates are not frozen then they will go up, or what they cover will go down.
Yeah - definitely either coverage will go up, or coverage will go down. I'm not knowledgeable enough about the law itself to know which.
Insurance companies do have to pay out 85% of revenue now -- which apparently is creating a little wiggle room, at about the 10% level. They are also going to get a larger pool of healthy people (due to the mandate) who are applying for insurance -- that could help with rates a bit. Government spending on health care will also increase a bit and hospitals will lose less money treating the uninsured (and those savings will get passed onto insurance companies).
What the net affect is - I don't quite know. I assume rates will continue to go up (I would bet on that regardless of who is in charge of health care -- like I said, it's just a consequence of better medicine).
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Agreed. My biggest fear, and what I feel will happen is that they will cover less and less. Right now, if you want uber inexpensive individual ins the deductible is 10k. I have not yet heard of a law that says they have to provide some resonable amount of coverage beyond wellness exams.
So mostly I see them raising the deductables until it is only covering catastropic events like hospital visits and expensive things of that nature.
It is why I was hot about the govt needs to regualate costs or some investigation needs to be done to see what is driving these costs and regulate it. Because becoming sick is going to put the average person into a lot of debt. And we all get sick at one point or another.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
This seems to argue that the price of insurance will go up, instead of the deductible. The yearly deductible on a person is set by ACA at $5950 (which still sounds somewhat high to me). http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba738
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Oh that makes me feel much better. Yeah that is really high. Especially if you are used to group coverage. If you try for individual ins it is about par for the course right now for less expensive plans.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Quote:
Oh that makes me feel much better. Yeah that is really high. Especially if you are used to group coverage. If you try for individual ins it is about par for the course right now for less expensive plans.
Yeah - that was my impression, we looked at some catastrophe plans like this - which have the benefit of being cheap (like $90/month if you are in your 20s -- costs increase a lot with age.)
EDIT: Just checked quickly, lowest priced coverage for a 26yo is $90/month, for a 50yo $149/month, for a 60yo $271/month.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 07/08/12 10:29 PM.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
The best one I found was CoventryOne at 128 with 2500 deductible. I think for that you have to have an immaculate medical record and not seen a dr in 12 months. Dont know how widely it is accepted, but that was the best deal for individual ins I saw. All the major ins wanted a lot more and covered less.
No Craps Given
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
If you need to go this route ever you can use an HSA plan to sock away the deductible pre-tax. That is what I do for my business which is a one man show.
HSA's may disappear with Obamacare but they are the best thing out there right now for individual insurance plans IMO.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,570 |
Oh, it's probably location dependent too, i used Santa Cruz CA.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,845
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,845 |
Quote:
If anything, your premiums should decrease over time, as Obamacare is designed to lower health care costs.
LMAO Ya right That's why my health care just took another huge jump in Premiums for the 3rd year in a row. It's now going to cost me and my wife 740 per month in premiums for a policy with a 2,000 deductible per person, with a co pay and total out of pocket limit of 5,000 per person for IN Network coverage. Double those figures if you go out of the network. 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Universal Healthcare Ruling at
10am Today
|
|
![[Linked Image from mypsn.eu.playstation.com]](http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Letherface.png)
