FREEEEEEEE
- Thread starter REFLOG
- Start date
Controls every aspect of your life?
Apparently not your right to free speech. You have a job. Your mortgage rate should be the lowest ever. You're allowed to get married in any state. Not sure how anyone is being controlled but at least you have good insurance rates
Kind of ironic you mentioned insurance rates. My liberal bro-in-law who was so happy about getting obama care fell off a ladder a few days ago and broke his hip in 4 places. Barry wants 8k plus wont help with his hip re-hab. Not sure he is liking his obarry care so much now.:0corn
He must not have chosen the best policy. I got my insurance through the marketplace and it covers that, and I pay peanuts compared to before the ACA
Mine will be $1400 a month for H&W with a $12K deductible. Just wonderful. :0008
Serious question, Jack. (May need it shortly.) Is that cheap? It sounds fairly expensive to me (compared to free). And what/who does that cover exactly?
Peace!
Serious question, Jack. (May need it shortly.) Is that cheap? It sounds fairly expensive to me (compared to free). And what/who does that cover exactly?
Peace!
Hell no, it's ridiculously expensive. It doesn't cover shit until I spend the first $12,000. It's just for me and my wife and the worst plan I ever had but who can afford more than that, I can't? Christ, it's higher than my mortgage payment.
About 8 years ago I was bitching on here about my health insurance and at that time it was around $1200 a month but it covered everything with zero deductible. But, I was bitching about it because every year, up, up, up. Then my wife went to work for the State and we were covered by her work insurance so I've been out of the loop since then. Now, my wife isn't going to be able to continue with her job because of a car accident injury and it's back on us. Just terrible, but I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I think once you are making more than about $70K a year you're basically fucked because if you make less than that I think the rates are around $300-$400 a month. I don't know, I don't have to deal with it for another couple of months so I'm just trying to not think about it.
I also think but not positive, that cut off at about $70K a year the rates explode and the people that are making $71K pay the same as people who make $800,000. That's fair, huh?
I know, I know....."go get a job that pays for your insurance". You know who preaches that bullshit. :SIB
On the bright side, I guess if there was no affordable care act, I'd probably be in the same boat so the plan does help people who can't afford it or makes it more affordable. I guess :shrug:
Thanks, Jack! Something else to consider prior to making a final decision, I guess.
I would think that some employers (universities in particular) would help cover some of these costs?
Peace!
Thanks, Jack! Something else to consider prior to making a final decision, I guess.
I would think that some employers (universities in particular) would help cover some of these costs?
Peace!
HUH? No clue what that means.
:0008
FDC:
I gotta tell you, I find this hard to believe. Given that you are a TX resident, I know that ACA premiums, for similar coverage, were much higher in 2014 than they were in 2013, due to the inability of carriers to price for the risk (the pre-ex exclusion issue). Of course this assumes you buy Individual coverage. If you have coverage in the Group market, then the impact to you would be minimal. The discussion that follows is about the Individual Market - the one that got the most affected (and screwed up) by the ACA.
The only way I can see you paying "peanuts" starting in 2014, compared to 2013, assuming of course that you have similar coverage, is for you to be receiving a large taxpayer financed premium subsidy based on your income. If that is the case, good for you. But it doesn't make the cost of your policy go down - it just means you (or anyone else that would received subsidies) are only paying a portion of the premium cost - and taxpayers are paying the rest (and technically, it is mostly high earning taxpayers).
This is an interesting year for Obamacare, especially the Individual Marketplace. 2016 will be the first plan year where companies will be setting premiums based on actual Obamacare experience (companies are required to use 2014 claims/premiums in setting rates for 2016). As you remember, 2014 is the first year that guaranteed issue was required in the Individual market (can't deny people for pre-ex conditions). So, now we are finally seeing the impact of the ACA on Individual premium rates (products sold on the Exchange).
Nobody is paying attention right now - well, the actuaries are - and we are starting to see the impact, which most actuaries predicted:
- Many companies in the Individual market experienced loss ratio's over 100% in 2014. In other words, they lost money - even after the ACA's risk spreading mechanisms were applied (reinsurance, risk adjustment, risk cooridors).
- Companies are now submitting to states their rate increase proposals for 2016. States have to review and approve rates - which most states do a very good job of, to ensure that companies are being fair and rate increases are needed and appropriate.
- While not all states will be this high, here are some of the proposed increases for the individual market for 2016 by the largest company (BCBS) in the state: Iowa 28%, South Dakota 42%, Maryland 30%. I sure hope that all states don't see these levels of increases.
You aren't hearing about these increases yet as they are not finalized/approved by states. And surely states will push back hard and attempt to see if companies really need these levels of increase.
But if they go down at all, it will be incrementally. And remember this come November/December, when people see their renewal bills for 2016 and start shopping on the exchanges (at least in the states with the high increases). There will be a media shitstorm. It won't be pretty.
And it will be hard to blame the insurance companies when they can easily show that they paid out $1.40 in claims for every $1.00 in premium they took in for 2014. Even simpletons will be able to understand that you can't stay in business in that situation.
Anyway, long diatribe. Just thought it was good info worth sharing.
Jack, the government provides subsides to folks up to 400% of FPL (Federal Poverty Level). For a family of two in 2015, 100% of FPL is $15,510 in income. But the subsidies drop as FPL increases - and pretty much drop very significantly at 250% of FPL - which would be $38,775 for a family of two.
So, that is likely the issue you are having - MJ's makes way too much money for you to get a great subsidy... :shrug:
Truth is, the ACA was great for the poor, giving many people very cheap and in some cases free insurance. But it is horrible for the middle class. Not only are your rates higher than before the ACA, but you are also paying additional taxes that are buried into your premium to pay for other people's insurance coverage. And in some cases you are paying more in FIT - depending on your income and specifically, investment income.
You can argue in both directions if that is fair or not. But the ACA did not help the middle class, that is for sure.
Thanks for the input mags, sorry you find it hard to believe. I know the feeling though, because I don't believe insurance companies paid out more than they took in by any measure, but that's just me.
Not all of them did, of course. But the ones that are filing for over 20% rate increases did. They have to justify them - and the main way they do it is via past claims/premium experience.
The rate filings are public information, as is the experience/loss ratio info. You could verify if you wanted, but I have a hunch you'd rather not want to know the facts, since it doesn't fit your beliefs you have already relied upon. I don't think the rate filings will be available on healthcare.gov until after they have been acted on - approved or disapproved. But every time a company increases rates over 10% they have to file a Part II, which is supposed to be a consumer friendly explanation of why the rates were increased that much. However, it is very hard to explain actuarial data to the public in a way they can understand, given that the vast majority of the public can't even add or subtract, much less even know who the Vice President is in our country.
You know mags, I would think someone as smart as yourself would have read and comprehended enough if my posts to know that I'm someone that appreciates information and logic. While I may have my own political and religious beliefs, they do not constrain or limit my thought processes. While I'm not always patient or even amiable to everyone on here, I was certainly not insulting towards you. I could have done without the cheap shot about whether it fits my agenda. Especially coming from someone who is posting on a subject that has a very clear bias on, as you should, it's your livelihood.
FDC - I gave you facts (that I've seen but not allowed to share until they are made public later this year), yet you say you don't believe it.
Regarding your premiums - I've love to see the detail of the plan you had (carrier and plan), along with what you have now. I can possibly look them up to see what the premiums are - and then figure out if the reason your premiums are less now is because you are getting a subsidy. I think you are saying that you are not getting a subsidy, your coverage is identical to what you had, pre-ACA, but you are paying a fraction of what you were paying prior to 2014 ("Peanuts" you called it).
I know that is not possible. Not for the same coverage - unless you are getting a taxpayer funded subsidy.
I'd love to know the facts so I can understand. I am concerned that you are representing that premiums went down in 2014 due to the ACA, when in fact they went up in every state for a new policy with the exception of New York.
There is so much false narrative out there, but you are usually good with your facts, so I am very interested if what you say is true. I would expect you to be paying 50% of what you were prior to 2014, which is what I'd consider peanuts.
So, what say you? Is it true?
Is what true? What I'm paying is less than I paid prior to the ACA yes. That is true. However, sharing my personal information with you is not something in willing to do. I don't know you. Sorry man, that's not something I'm willing to do with most anyone.
I have no idea if premiums are up in every state or not. I just know that they're set by providers not by the president.
I have no idea if premiums are up in every state or not. I just know that they're set by providers not by the president.
Well, they are set by carriers but limited by the ACA, in terms of an 80% loss ratio. So, the ACA did put significant restrictions on carriers.
I understand you don't want to share personal info. I get it. And I believe you are paying less than prior to the ACA. This is likely due to the subsidies you are getting OR you have less rich coverage now.
But premiums are up (a lot and soon to go higher) but subsidies mask for individuals (since they are using other people's money to pay that portion of premiums) the true cost.
The claims are the claims and the premiums are the premiums - but if someone else is paying a substantial part of one's premium, I'm sure health insurance is a great deal.
After all, everyone likes free stuff when someone else pays for it.
Not saying that is your specific case for sure (you could have a much higher deductible now, for example, or less people on your plan as your kids may have aged off the plan). There could be many reasons why you are paying less - you could have moved to a cheaper cost area, for example. But it is disengenous to portray the ACA as the reason your premiums went down.
That's all I'm saying.
Okay I'll accept that, because the reciprocal then is also true. It's disingenuous to blame the ACA for your premium going up
LOL... I know that is what you want to believe, even if it isn't true. But that's ok, even Obama wants to believe that every families premium would go down $2,500 with the ACA.
You might be the only person in the US for which that occurred. Good for you!
