Health Insurers Raise Rates Because of Obamacare

[saveliberty]

Had their chance at what?

Focus there Greenbeard. What is the thread topic again? Wipe your mouth your drooling.

Have we moved on from "this law does nothing to prevent medical bankruptcies" to "this law does too much to prevent bankruptcies"?

Well, the thread title says, "Health Insurers Raise Rates Because of Obamacare". I'm inclined to say no, your totally off topic.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why didn't the Dems eliminate medical bankruptcies then? I mean this in the nicest way, but if you can't be more honest then STFU.

Well, start with some facts:

Woolhandler and her colleagues surveyed a random sample of 2,314 people who filed for bankruptcy in early 2007, looked at their court records, and then interviewed more than 1,000 of them.

They concluded that 62.1 percent of the bankruptcies were medically related because the individuals either had more than $5,000 (or 10 percent of their pretax income) in medical bills, mortgaged their home to pay for medical bills, or lost significant income due to an illness. On average, medically bankrupt families had $17,943 in out-of-pocket expenses, including $26,971 for those who lacked insurance and $17,749 who had insurance at some point.

Overall, three-quarters of the people with a medically-related bankruptcy had health insurance, they say.

"That was actually the predominant problem in patients in our study -- 78 percent of them had health insurance, but many of them were bankrupted anyway because there were gaps in their coverage like co-payments and deductibles and uncovered services," says Woolhandler. "Other people had private insurance but got so sick that they lost their job and lost their insurance."​

So it looks like if we're talking about medical bankruptcies, we're look at two basic kinds of people:

1. People who don't have insurance but get sick; or, conversely, people who get sick and lose their job/coverage because of it. Either way, they then have trouble paying for the care they need.
2. People who do have insurance (the large majority) but find their coverage isn't comprehensive enough or that the cost-sharing is more than they can handle, financially.

So if you wanted to address this issue, how might you proceed? First, you might eliminate lifetime limits and put restrictions on annual limits with respect to benefits (I'll tack on there the obvious step of also ending rescissions). Second, you might put limits on out-of-pocket spending. Third, you might establish a uniform baseline standard of comprehensive coverage that plans must meet. Fourth, you might create viable alternatives to employer-sponsored coverage so that someone who loses their job need not necessarily become uninsured. All of these will be happening, some of them starting in plan years that begin after next week.

Combating medical bankruptcies means addressing their causes.

Unfortunately all those "solutions" will result in health insurance which is cost prohibitive (see OP) so fewer people, not more, will be covered.
Or do you think that risk doesn't cost anything?
A solution worse than the problem.
Leave it to the Democrats.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I didn't when it was me, and I wouldn't now if I was 20 something.

Why would you? If you get sick then you apply afterwards. They can't deny you coverage. That's the law.

Ignorance on full display. You can't go without coverage and then just pick it up the day you get sick. What happens if you are in a car accident and are in a coma? Still gonna call to request coverage? Well thought out logic though.

In reality, there will be enrollment periods preventing people from being able to do this.

The insurers can deny someone coverage based on the preexisting condition of them not having insurance?

 

[saveliberty]

It was never about better or cheaper or more accessible health care.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes, I'm the first to have ever considered it.


Illness and medical bills caused half of the 1,458,000 personal bankruptcies in 2001, according to a study published by the journal Health Affairs.

Read more: Medical Bills Leading Cause of Bankruptcy, Harvard Study Finds

LOL, I'm still laughing!

You just proved exactly why health reform is needed in this country, because of the overwhelming number of people who went bankrupt due to medical bills.

LOL, Thank you for the good laugh, I appreciate it.

Actually, he didn't. What he proved is that a study made a baseless claim. Actual court filings list medical expenses as the primary or secondary cause of bankruptcy in less than 15% of actual bankruptcies. The reason for this is actually pretty simple, most hospitals do not pursue delinquencies to the point that a person has to declare bankruptcy to avoid paying them. They have social service offices in order to find a way for people to get insurance after they need it, and they can write off the losses and get compensated through various taxing agencies if they do not pursue the accounts.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why would you? If you get sick then you apply afterwards. They can't deny you coverage. That's the law.

Ignorance on full display. You can't go without coverage and then just pick it up the day you get sick. What happens if you are in a car accident and are in a coma? Still gonna call to request coverage? Well thought out logic though.

In reality, there will be enrollment periods preventing people from being able to do this.

The insurers can deny someone coverage based on the preexisting condition of them not having insurance?

No, of course not. RDD is not playing with a full knowledge pool and despite having been embarassed several times already for his ignorance he continues to post nonsense.

 

[Care4all]

in massachusetts, a few years back, before I moved to maine...insurance companies COULD deny you their health insurance if you did not have health insurance previously....I kid you not! It was like being denied for a preexisting condition.

 

[The Rabbi]

in massachusetts, a few years back, before I moved to maine...insurance companies COULD deny you their health insurance if you did not have health insurance previously....I kid you not! It was like being denied for a preexisting condition.

Car insurance worked the same in PA when I was there. So?

So MA passed Romneycare, which is not teetering on bankruptcy. The governor's solution has been to exert more and more control over insurers. Younger people aren't taking insurance,knowing they can get it later if needed.
In short, whatever we've predicted for Obamacare is happening right now with Romneycare.

 

[Gadawg73]

I propose a private system where YOU own your own individual policy, pay the bills, scrutinize the billing and charges and then submit for payment to your insurance company be it through a benefit or your own.
That is NOT a third party system. That is how my policy works.
Group health care has ruined American health care. Americans, under group health care, utilize the system based on what IS COVERED, NOT ON WHAT IS HEALTHY FOR THEM.

 

[The Rabbi]

I propose a private system where YOU own your own individual policy, pay the bills, scrutinize the billing and charges and then submit for payment to your insurance company be it through a benefit or your own.
That is NOT a third party system. That is how my policy works.
Group health care has ruined American health care. Americans, under group health care, utilize the system based on what IS COVERED, NOT ON WHAT IS HEALTHY FOR THEM.

The GOP basically proposed the exact same thing.
Yes, third party payment has shredded the economics of health care, driving up costs phenomenally.

 

[Care4all]

do you all really think the businesses buying these group plans for their workers do not have an incentive to negotiate and bring the health care costs down?

 

[The Rabbi]

do you all really think the businesses buying these group plans for their workers do not have an incentive to negotiate and bring the health care costs down?

No, they don't.
First, businesses don't negotiate health care costs. They negotiate insurance rates.
But since insurance companies are state regulated and there are few of them, there is less competition. But insurers do not have the ability to drop rates to zero. Their business is very low margin, so everyone is going to quote within a range. And that range is higher, thanks to Obamacare's mandates.

But leave it to you to mis-state fact and present a bungled question cum argument. You truly are clueless here, aren't you?

 

[Care4all]

do you all really think the businesses buying these group plans for their workers do not have an incentive to negotiate and bring the health care costs down?

No, they don't.
First, businesses don't negotiate health care costs. They negotiate insurance rates.
But since insurance companies are state regulated and there are few of them, there is less competition. But insurers do not have the ability to drop rates to zero. Their business is very low margin, so everyone is going to quote within a range. And that range is higher, thanks to Obamacare's mandates.

But leave it to you to mis-state fact and present a bungled question cum argument. You truly are clueless here, aren't you?

KUDOS!

You are one of the most vulgar, and nonsensical posters on this board faux rabbi!!!!

 

[The Rabbi]

do you all really think the businesses buying these group plans for their workers do not have an incentive to negotiate and bring the health care costs down?

No, they don't.
First, businesses don't negotiate health care costs. They negotiate insurance rates.
But since insurance companies are state regulated and there are few of them, there is less competition. But insurers do not have the ability to drop rates to zero. Their business is very low margin, so everyone is going to quote within a range. And that range is higher, thanks to Obamacare's mandates.

But leave it to you to mis-state fact and present a bungled question cum argument. You truly are clueless here, aren't you?

KUDOS!

You are one of the most vulgar, and nonsensical posters on this board faux rabbi!!!!

Excellent! Not only do you demonstrate your inability to debate, or understand what's been written, you can't even come up with an original insult, recycling them from that poor nutjob Jillian.

 

[saveliberty]

do you all really think the businesses buying these group plans for their workers do not have an incentive to negotiate and bring the health care costs down?

I don't see us negoiating health premiums here. Usually two or three agents come in and offer two or three plans each. The owner and office manager review the plans for the best fit and costs and we have a new plan.

The history is, the premiums always go up and the coverage is the same or less. I imagine we are not that different from other small businesses.

 

[Greenbeard]

I propose a private system where YOU own your own individual policy, pay the bills, scrutinize the billing and charges and then submit for payment to your insurance company be it through a benefit or your own.
That is NOT a third party system. That is how my policy works.
Group health care has ruined American health care. Americans, under group health care, utilize the system based on what IS COVERED, NOT ON WHAT IS HEALTHY FOR THEM.

It sounds like you're just pushing for more individual health insurance coverage over group (i.e. employer-based plans). I agree that's a better system but it's still third party payment.

I don't see us negoiating health premiums here. Usually two or three agents come in and offer two or three plans each. The owner and office manager review the plans for the best fit and costs and we have a new plan.

The history is, the premiums always go up and the coverage is the same or less. I imagine we are not that different from other small businesses.

How about some sort of SHOP exchange for small businesses, based on defined contributions from your employer but granting you full access to any plan of your choice offered through the exchange, similar to the exchange Utah recently rolled out. Does that sound appealing to you?

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't see us negoiating health premiums here. Usually two or three agents come in and offer two or three plans each. The owner and office manager review the plans for the best fit and costs and we have a new plan.

The history is, the premiums always go up and the coverage is the same or less. I imagine we are not that different from other small businesses.

How about some sort of SHOP exchange for small businesses, based on defined contributions from your employer but granting you full access to any plan of your choice offered through the exchange, similar to the exchange Utah recently rolled out. Does that sound appealing to you?

Have those been shown to reduce insurance premiums? Has any "exchange" system been shown to reduce premiums?
No, I don't think so.