Yet more evidence of ObamaCare failure.

[jbander]

To my point, I'm simply pointing out your Hypocrisy, that hypocrisy is that healthcare insurance and cost went up more in Bushes presidency then it did in Obamas.

 

[Andylusion]

To my point, I'm simply pointing out your Hypocrisy, that hypocrisy is that healthcare insurance and cost went up more in Bushes presidency then it did in Obamas.

Actually what you said is not true.

If you look only at one specific statistical number.... the flat cost of a monthly premium on only employer sponsored health care, then what you said, and your previous post is correct.

Flat premium rates, on employer sponsored health plans, has increased at a lower rate than prior to ObamaCare.

True.

There is a number of problems with that.

First, as the link I posted before from well known economists, as the cost of health care packages have gone up, many companies have offset that cost by holding wages down.

If a company has a position that they allotted $35,000 in pay, and the cost of benefits is $10,000... then the position pays out $25,000. Your wage is reduced by the cost of the benefits. So if the government mandates benefits that increase the cost to $15,000, then that position will end up being reduced to $20,000. This is an extreme example, to make the point.

So while the premiums only increased by a lower amount, the employees may be facing reduced wages and/or less pay increasing, to offset that cost.

I personally, actually work at a company that has done exactly this. They cut all the wages in the warehouse by $1/hour. If you only look at their premiums, you would assume they are better off. In reality while premiums increased less, their wages decreased by more than the theoretical cost reduction.

Second, as the other graph showed, deductions have almost quadrupled.

A deduction is the amount of money the individual must pay out of pocket, before the insurance kicks in and covers the cost.

Which is simply a way of increasing the cost on consumers, while reducing the level of insurance coverage.

Back in 2006, I had a high deductible insurance policy that covered everything I wanted, for just $67 a month.

Now, the cheapest high deductible insurance policy is $250 a month.

Back before ObamaCare, the primary, if not, the only reason to have a high deductible insurance policy was to reduce your premiums. Today, a high deductible policy is the only reason premiums have not increased faster than before Obama Care.

In short, the cost on the consumer has drastically gone up, in order to still have premiums go up, but just a little less than before ObamaCare.

Thirdly, the only way you can even try and conclude that premiums have not increased faster under ObamaCare, is by looking exclusively at employer backed family plans.

If you look at any other group, from individual plans, or non-employer backed plans, premiums have increased many times faster for all other groups. That's why the only positive way to spin this train wreck is by looking at just employer backed family plans.

There is actually a very logical and simple reason for this. Most of the mandated coverage that ObamaCare requires all insurance policies to have, is coverage that all family insurance plans already had for the most part.

Things like neo-natal coverage, for single males, was very rare in individual insurance policies. Thus those policies were very cheap. Again, I had a policy for $67 a month, that covered everything I needed.

When ObamaCare came into effect, the minimum required insurance policy covered tons of stuff, that an individual likely didn't need. Thus all of those cheaper cost-efficient policies were destroyed, and eliminated from the market.

This logically drove up prices for everyone that didn't fit into the neat per-defined minimum coverage insurance, that ObamaCare demands.

If you averaged all insurance premiums across all groups, you would find insurance premiums rose far faster under ObamaCare than before. That's why proponents conveniently avoid those other groups where insurance premiums tripled in price.

But again....

If you look at the increase in deductibles, and the loss of wages, even the best groups in this country, are worse off under ObamaCare. There is no logical, rational, or empirically supportable conclusion to make, other than everyone is worse off.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Damn then it should be a slam dunk to repeal

That assumes congress is smart.

 

[jbander]

To my point, I'm simply pointing out your Hypocrisy, that hypocrisy is that healthcare insurance and cost went up more in Bushes presidency then it did in Obamas.

Actually what you said is not true.

If you look only at one specific statistical number.... the flat cost of a monthly premium on only employer sponsored health care, then what you said, and your previous post is correct.

Flat premium rates, on employer sponsored health plans, has increased at a lower rate than prior to ObamaCare.

True.

There is a number of problems with that.

First, as the link I posted before from well known economists, as the cost of health care packages have gone up, many companies have offset that cost by holding wages down.

If a company has a position that they allotted $35,000 in pay, and the cost of benefits is $10,000... then the position pays out $25,000. Your wage is reduced by the cost of the benefits. So if the government mandates benefits that increase the cost to $15,000, then that position will end up being reduced to $20,000. This is an extreme example, to make the point.

So while the premiums only increased by a lower amount, the employees may be facing reduced wages and/or less pay increasing, to offset that cost.

I personally, actually work at a company that has done exactly this. They cut all the wages in the warehouse by $1/hour. If you only look at their premiums, you would assume they are better off. In reality while premiums increased less, their wages decreased by more than the theoretical cost reduction.

Second, as the other graph showed, deductions have almost quadrupled.

A deduction is the amount of money the individual must pay out of pocket, before the insurance kicks in and covers the cost.

Which is simply a way of increasing the cost on consumers, while reducing the level of insurance coverage.

Back in 2006, I had a high deductible insurance policy that covered everything I wanted, for just $67 a month.

Now, the cheapest high deductible insurance policy is $250 a month.

Back before ObamaCare, the primary, if not, the only reason to have a high deductible insurance policy was to reduce your premiums. Today, a high deductible policy is the only reason premiums have not increased faster than before Obama Care.

In short, the cost on the consumer has drastically gone up, in order to still have premiums go up, but just a little less than before ObamaCare.

Thirdly, the only way you can even try and conclude that premiums have not increased faster under ObamaCare, is by looking exclusively at employer backed family plans.

If you look at any other group, from individual plans, or non-employer backed plans, premiums have increased many times faster for all other groups. That's why the only positive way to spin this train wreck is by looking at just employer backed family plans.

There is actually a very logical and simple reason for this. Most of the mandated coverage that ObamaCare requires all insurance policies to have, is coverage that all family insurance plans already had for the most part.

Things like neo-natal coverage, for single males, was very rare in individual insurance policies. Thus those policies were very cheap. Again, I had a policy for $67 a month, that covered everything I needed.

When ObamaCare came into effect, the minimum required insurance policy covered tons of stuff, that an individual likely didn't need. Thus all of those cheaper cost-efficient policies were destroyed, and eliminated from the market.

This logically drove up prices for everyone that didn't fit into the neat per-defined minimum coverage insurance, that ObamaCare demands.

If you averaged all insurance premiums across all groups, you would find insurance premiums rose far faster under ObamaCare than before. That's why proponents conveniently avoid those other groups where insurance premiums tripled in price.

But again....

If you look at the increase in deductibles, and the loss of wages, even the best groups in this country, are worse off under ObamaCare. There is no logical, rational, or empirically supportable conclusion to make, other than everyone is worse off.

Start from the beginning nonsense Quote from a person who has no clue "First, as the link I posted before from well known economists, as the cost of health care packages have gone up, many companies have offset that cost by holding wages down." Sure someone knows that the insurance is the reason why there is no increase in wages , Bullshit. Income since Reagan's trickle down lie hasn't increased other then for the few at the top as Reagan planned. that is 81 to now. So your insurance being the cause is stupid. -------Next garbage comment from this guy "Second, as the other graph showed, deductions have almost quadrupled." Who cares when the rate increase is way below, for instance, Bushes disaster period. Add in the fact that Obama care supply insurance laws that result in a massive increase in health and a lower increase in healthcare cost.----- Third nonsense comment by our little friend here."Thirdly, the only way you can even try and conclude that premiums have not increased faster under ObamaCare, is by looking exclusively at employer backed family plans." Well then it's a success then by all standards because
Employer Supplied insurance makes up what 80 or 85% of healthcare insurance. Every little hate created Idea that's in you little head is garbage.

 

[jbander]

And from the dept of labor "Retirement and medical care benefits were available to 70 percent of civilian workers in March 2017, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Ninety-four percent of union workers had access to employer-sponsored retirement and medical care benefits. For nonunion workers, 66 percent had access to retirement benefits and 67 percent to medical care benefits. (See chart 1 and tables 1 and 2.) For civilian workers, the shares employers paid of medical care premium costs were 80 percent for single coverage and 68 percent for family coverage. The employee and employer shares of premiums also varied by bargaining status. Employers assumed 87 percent of the premium for single coverage for union workers and 79 percent for nonunion workers. For family coverage, union workers had 80 percent of the premium paid for by employers, whereas nonunion workers had 65 percent of the premium paid by employers. (See chart 2 and tables 3 and 4.) " add in the fact that 100% of government workers are insured and walla Obama care is a thing of beauty

 

[1pissedoffcitizen]

The ACA is extortion, plain and simple.