Health Insurers Seek Hefty Rate Boosts

\

By all means.

I really don't care what Forbes says on this subject. Their pieces have generally tended toward fear mongering and cherry picked spin. Their claims have seldom panned out either.

Most people with employer provided health insurance didn't feel anything at all.

Millions of people who could not obtain affordable health insurance are now insured.

Obamacare isn't going away.

And I fully expect Mrs Clinton to revive the Public Option as a way of improving it.

 

What is this "it" you refer to?
Or does you revisionist arguing allow you to say? Obama wanted single payer, ideally. But then, so what?
He got 100% behind what he reasonably and possibly could get...not what his progressive dreams wanted.

 

I see. Don't confuse me with facts and figures!

Very credible arguing technique.

41% increases in health premiums across the board and you are certain this is what people will fight to retain?
LOL!!! That is so believable.

 

I just proved this false.

 

Lol, 41% across the board premium increases.

 

You proved nothing, it is me proving what a crock of feces you are trying to spread, Obama apologized for lying, which is what you say he didn't do. He pushed the healthcare we got, whether it was his preferred version or not. He is a liar, live with it

 

Kind of debunked already

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-premium-growth-slowed-after-obamacare/

And the program cost estimates are way down.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...eive-coverage-under-health-care-law-cbo-says/

My non-subsidized ACA policy went up 18% this year. Compared to the 30-40% annual increases i was seeing prior with noncompliant policy?

Feels like a picnic, AND my deductible is 70% lower and benefits have doubled or tripled.

Face it, conservatives will hate Obamacare until there's a Republican president. And then, you won't call it Obamacare anymore.

 

Your anecdotal evidence notwithstanding premiums are up across the board 41%. Kind of hard to counter that.

 

Yank a hefty butt-nuggett out of thin air and THEN call me and my own personal experience AND two links "anecdotal evidence" .. REALLY?

 

I see the people most likely to just dismiss this study and analysis of 49 different state health insurance markets (and DC), without any thought, any rationale, any counter arguments or analysis whatsoever are the ones
using "LOLs", words like butt nugget and "funny" gifs as their counter arguments.

That sort of says it all.

 

Indeed

But the OP (even though written by an O-care hater) didn't say what you claim it said.

 

Really? What did I claim it said? Go find my post where I specifically referenced what was in the OP.
Hint...it does not exist.

My reference was to a link that studied the health market premiums of 49 different states in order to get a picture of health care costs under Obama Care. The results may be the same, increased premiums and no "downward bending" of health costs under Obama Care, but I haven't used any of the OP to get there.

And considering the big picture (an increase across the board of 41% in premium costs) your personal anecdotes count for very little, except for you.

 

Proven false

- - - Updated - - -

No they aren't.

- - - Updated - - -

There is no across the board 41% increase in premiums.

 

I'm delighted to hear it! Thanks for letting us know, even though the news concerning healthcare costs related to Obama's wonderous EXCHANGE here in Colorado had me scared for a while. Must have been some more of the right-wing fear mongering....

Now, does anybody know when Obama is going to send us all a check for the $2,500 that he said Obamacare would save us in costs, every year...?! Or is that coming to us directly from the healthcare insurance companies...?

 

Add a new Part E to Medicare to insure those with diseases and conditions too costly for private health insurance companies to insure at an affordable rate. That will bring down the cost of private premiums and provide those with pre-existings an affordable premium, while saving the taxpayer and the federal government billions of dollars. Doctors and Hospitals hate Medicare as it barely covers the cost of providing care/treatment. So to put everyone on Medicare is not good at all. They, the providers can afford to see a small percentage of Medicare patients in their practice but rely on private insurance to pay their overhead and provide them the profit they deserve.

 

So is revisionist "history".

 

Millions will cancel their Obama Care policies and the system will collapse under it's own weight. Hawaii already dumped their state exchange and California hasn't paid their Advisers in months. It's coming unglued all by itself Tommy. It's in the 4th spin of a 5 spiral crash and Obama signed the death warrant when he signed that Republican budget that offered NO additional funding to keep Obama care a float. What do you want on the headstone?

 

It's documented fact

 

How about "We Told You So"?

 

I think they thought they would own Congress for a long time like the Republicans did and never anticipated losing it that fast. This way they could force "single payer" down the throats of the American people.

[video=youtube;f3BS4C9el98]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3BS4C9el98[/video]

The American people know what single payer means, higher taxes and wizz poor health care.

 

You won't confuse me with right wing spin pieces from a publication with a history of fear mongering on this issue.

I'll rely on my own personal experience, which is very different.

 

That's the sort of post that gets people laughed at in global warming threads (by people on your side of the fence).
All you have to do is disprove the study but, of course, I know that will never happen.

 

My part of my Obama Care Premium went up 33%.

 

I'm curious. What feeling does it give you to force your morality on others through force of law?

Cite your source for this assertion. Make sure to take into account any costs savings that are transferred by departments, such as other government organizations that provide services to the medicare but do not charge for them, pension costs, and off-loading of disabled employees onto other systems. Also, what must be taken into account is the cost of obtaining the money from the taxpayer.

I doubt that they operate with lower overhead. I'm sure if all factors are considered, the cost is significantly higher.

And they often make up for it by either over-billing, over medicating, or obtaining revenue from other sources.

What is the per patient cost of overhead for Medicare versus non-profit and private insurers? You are, after all, asking Medicare to take on tens of millions more patients. I bet that the cost of operations for Medicare is significantly higher than for private systems, and that's not even taking into account the cost of obtaining the money (what is lost between the taxation and the allocation to medicare) and other costs foisted off onto other government programs and departments that private providers cannot do. http://www.heritage.org/research/re...e-higher-not-lower-than-for-private-insurance

Aside from that, Medicare loses $60 billion a year to fraud (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/23/60minutes/main5414390.shtml), which is 11% of their budget. Private insurers are in the business of limiting use in order to control costs, which means they are hyper aware of overuse. Medicare uses its monopoly powers to control prices, and does not work hard to limit overuse. In some cases, people are seriously injured by providers who run up Medicare bills by overtreating their patients. Here's an example: http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/d...dlessly-to-get-millions-in-medicaid-benefits/

Why does it "seem reasonable"? Because it supports your argument?

http://www.galen.org/assets/PDFArtic.pdf

This suggests that there are a lot of factors that you aren't considering. That's not surprising. Providers can take a loss on medicare by making up for it with private insurance and cash payors, much as hotels can take a loss on selling rooms below costs, because any dollar is better than no dollar when it comes to empty rooms. What you suggest is that providers, such as doctors and hospitals, can run their entire businesses at a loss.

 

Super, super, super question. What goes through the head of one who considers it just to violate the person or property of his fellow man? How can one think it is ethical to hurt other people or take their stuff? Don't all parents teach their children that such actions are wrong?