patrick.net

I would at least be less outraged if all of the Obamatrons out there would at least acknowledge this. But instead they just blindly assert, that insurance has been rising all along, and it actually increased less this year than last. While it's gone up 100% just since it passed.

And not one son of a bitch that crafted the Act, has said one God damn word about it, or called the Insurance companies out on it.

Im not surprised... why are you surprised?

rfsanders says

got a call from my father today. He's watched his health insurance premium jump 30-60% a year since 2000. Today his provider informed him that his company-subsidized premium was going up ...

TWO-HUNDRED-AND-FIFTY PERCENT for 2013!!!

That's over $200 a month, increase!

Let's put some numbers to this so we can see what we are talking about in terms of $.

If a $200 monthly increase is 250% more than he paid in 2012, then it means he was paying $80/month in 2012. If his premiums went up by 30-60% annually since 2000 (let's call it 40% average per year), that means he paid 40 times more in 2012 than in 2000.

So, in 2000 he paid $2/month for insurance.

If this is all true, I'm guessing what has happened is that his employer has been shifting most or all of the increases to him or has otherwise changed the percentage of the premiums he is expected to pay.

I'd love to be able to get even decent insurance for $280/month. Where does he work?

This post just doesn't wash. Premiums on employer sponsored plans went up 4.6% in 2011 from $4349 to $4547 per person. Increase for 2012 is projected to be 4.1%. That's actually down from the 8.7% average increase 2000 to 2010. So how is it Obamacare which is just starting to be implemented now and won't see the major parts in operation until 2014 responsible for your fathers 200% increase? Looks like the company is shifting some of the ongoing cost rises to employees.

This is not to say I'm in favor of ACA, which I consider an oxymoron. It's not going to solve the baseline problems. It would have been better and cheaper to simply double the medicare tax and put everyone on medicare.

It kept on increasing for us(company subsidized)

It went by about 30% last year

but this year its stayed the same

I think going forward there is a limit on by how much they can increase by(%age) because of ACA

Also given the fact the insurance companies will have to spend majority of the amount in payments and profits are capped,it will be good for public in longer run

With the medicare paying lesser pvt insurers also pay less to providers(if they arent already doing)

Op
Did u check the details?
I think there are other reasons than ACA
I'd assume you already know and cherry picking info you wanted to posted

Repubthug says

I think going forward there is a limit on by how much they can increase by(%age) because of ACA

There are no such rules.

The law only makes more hoops for insurers to jump through. For example, the insurance companies must spend 80% of their premiums on health care for individuals or small groups and 85% for large groups.

Allowing spending to increase would let them collect more without violating that provision. For instance their prescription plan which covers Prilosec but not Nexium could add coverage for the new drug which is identical but lacks a non-bioactive chiral form of the molecule and is still covered by patent which allows a higher price. They could just negotiate higher fees for services with providers.

Things could get really interesting where hospitals and health insurance companies are owned by the same parent company (The McCarran-Furguson act exempts the insurance companies from federal anti-trust laws as long as there are state regulations in the area).