Out of what was out there, I picked compatible KP silver plan with HSA option. My beef is that my out of pocket has trippled and my deductable doubled, and I now have no out of network coverage whatsoever. Bad pure fiction indeed.
BS! I'm not ignoring "millions" more insured, I'm measuring the actual cost and efficiency of the ACA. If you're stupid enough to ignore that, fine, but don't point an accusatory finger at me for pointing out the reality you refuse to see.
I've read the CBO report. It's still making a cost projection of +$1trillion over the next decade. Yes, it's a slightly lower projection, but they're assuming a lot to get to that projected cost and the cost doesn't account for where we get the $1trillion or the cost of borrowing it, which we will be doing. And, from what I can glean, the CBO is only accounting for the cost of subsides, not the Fed's cost of managing this law via HHS & the IRS. Another point worth mentioning is that the law is not fully implemented and this latest CBO projection is based only on current enrollment. Then you can add to that the added tax burden many business's are being forced to pony-up, the penalties ofr non-compliance and the higher cost of insurance many individuals are paying. No matter how you slice this law financially it simply doesn't work. It's a financial albatross that'll harm the country and deliver only a very narrow, limited benefit. The winners are basically a few million uninsured and the federal government, outside those two you'd be hard spent to find any other beneficiaries.
You reference the "added tax burden" of the ACA while pretending the law is deficit financed. Nice trick. Anyway, their "assumptions" this time around are based simply on looking at what premiums in the exchanges actually cost. The premiums they were projecting four years ago when calculating the cost of the law never materialized. The real premiums turned out to be 15% lower than CBO was expecting. More importantly, 2015 premiums are starting to trickle out and it's becoming clear that benchmark premiums (those to which federal subsidies are pegged) are either outright dropping or growing by less than 1% next year in dozens and dozens of rating areas around the country. Meanwhile Medicare spending growth continues to be hundreds of billions less than the CBO was expecting when projecting federal health spending when the ACA passed. And yet quality in the health care delivery system continues to grow. Interesting times.
Assuming this to be true, and knowing that many families are facing drastic increases in premiums, why were we promised the average family would save $2500 per year.
All the conservatives that claim the only thing you have to do is work hard. That's why all the blacks in the ghetto stay poor - because they're lazy. For a middle class white person, it should be a breeze.
I'm still wTing for the first bit of good news about Obamacare. Without that there can't be " more good news".
None of the following do it for you? Around 10 million newly insured, just in the first year Significantly lower-than-expected (~15 percent lower) premiums in 2014, surprisingly many premium [i[]drops[/i] (or only tiny increases) going into 2015 -- both of which drag down the price tag of the law Steadily increasing selection of insurers selling products and insurance plans available to shoppers in nearly every state as market get more competitive Record low health care price inflation and health care spending growth Medicare spending dropping on a per capita basis Hospitals getting safer, new health care delivery models under the ACA improving quality, and the new Medicare Advantage performance incentives improving quality in those plans
Please note what you wrote: "..why were we promised the average family would save $2500 per year." It's probably more than that, though I doubt anyone has bothered to figure it out. Why? Because the massive annual premium increases, ON AVERAGE, are far less than they have been; medical costs are rising, but at a much slower rate. Those two things by themselves indicate substantial savings and that's your payback.
Only libs can twist math in a way to tell those who are shelling out 100+% increases in premiums and doubling/tripling deductibles that they are saving money. Sorry but no.
I don't know what world some of you are living in, but Obamacare has driven up the cost of health insurance premiums dramatically in my community. My organization has a mixture of Active Duty military, government servants, and contractors. Talking to all the other contractors here, (three different contracting companies, mind you) every single person has witnessed both a rise in health insurance premiums and a cut in tangible benefits. The increases in premiums since the implementation of Obamacare were slight between open-season premium years 2011 and 2012, but SIGNIFICANT between 2012 and 2013. I did the fine-pencil math, and chose to decline my company's health insurance package this past season. It was just too expensive, and the benefits were diminished from the previous year. I am fortunate in that I am able to use my TRICARE benefits (I served 26 years Active Duty), and thus far this is working out okay. There are out-of-pockets costs now, but I am finding a way to stay on top of them. Many of my team-mates are not so fortunate, sadly. Most of them don't have a second option, and they have to pay thru the nose for their health care now. Couple that with the rise in grocery prices (double over the past three years), most of them are barely making ends meet. Many of my coworkers here report that they are considering working a second job after hours, just to help get their kids thru college, and to hopefully afford even one small vacation a year. Funny; the President takes many vacations each year. Most of us common taxpayers are now so financially-strapped that we can't afford even one vacation annually. Ironic.
Worth noting that the CBO's original projections were based on the entire implementation of the law and the new projections are based only on the current impact of what has been implemented. So, in essence, it's really not a valid comparison, but ......
The Affordable Care Act, with all due credit to Willard Mitt Romney for the realization of his "ultimate conservative idea" individually-mandated approach, and to Tea Party firebrand Jimmy Demint for his having prescribed Willard's approach as "something we should do for the whole country," remains an unnecessarily costly concession to powerful corporate special interests, and retains the enormous $250 billion annual taxpayer subsidy that sustains employer-administered plans. An incremental lowering of the Medicare eligibility age is probably the least disruptive method of achieving universal coverage with the economic efficiencies of advanced nations, but the powerful forces for whom the current system is a bountiful cash cow will resist mightily. The US is neither going to progress nor retrogress any time soon in the matter of health care coverage.
Turnover between plans in the individual market isn't unusual. The ten million people gaining coverage (and accompanying sharp drop in the uninsurance rate) is a net gain. As for whether or not more competition in markets is a good thing, I suppose we just disagree on that point (obviously I believe it is, and not just due to the premium trends noted below). The CBO updated their ACA spending projections in April to incorporate actual premium data (instead of their expectation of what premiums would be). The result? A lower price tag for the law, since exchange premiums came in lower than they expected: "Lower premiums (yes, really) drive down Obamacare’s expected costs, CBO says" On Medicare: Per Capita Medicare Spending is Actually Falling | SEPT. 3, 2014 On broader spending trends: Affordable Care Act effect linked to lower medical cost estimates | September 5, 2014 Early Analysis Finds a Drop in Obamacare Premiums Next Year | Sept. 5, 2014 Latest Good News in Health Spending: Employer Premiums | SEPT. 10, 2014 Meanwhile health care price growth has been below 2% for a few years now, taking it on par with (or even below) overall economic growth--a historic rarity. As for some state-level trends in the new marketplaces, they're well below the double digit increases that were prevalent in the pre-ACA individual market. Good news for Oregonians! Health premiums to drop next year Health-care premiums fall in Arkansas Exclusive: many New Mexicans will pay less for health insurance next year Health exchange premiums will drop [in Mississippi] ("Premiums for Magnolia Health, which offers the only plans available for Northeast Mississippi counties except for Alcorn and Tishomingo, are expected to go down by about 25 percent") After rate hike rejected, Anthem to decrease premiums next year [in Connecticut] Premiums for Obamacare plans in Maine dip or remain flat for 2015 Many Floridians Will Find A Cheaper ACA Plan In 2015 2015 health insurance premiums on Obamacare exchanges won’t increase much [in Montana] ("Prices for 2015 health insurance policies sold on Montana’s federal online “marketplace” will increase only 1.35 percent") [Massachusetts] Connector health plans for 2015 will rise by 1.6% 90 health plans approved for 2015 Exchange [in Washington] ("The overall approved average rate change is just 1.9 percent") District of Columbia: 2015 premium increase only 2.3% (unweighted) Colorado health insurance premiums to rise 3.4% next year Obamacare rate hikes in California to average 4% in 2015 More Indiana options coming on insurance exchange ("Korty said a 5-percent average increase in exchange premiums is expected on Indiana policies") Maryland approves smaller rate hikes for CareFirst, lowers rates for 3 others New York's Obamacare rates will rise an average of 5.7% for its second year Utah Health Premiums to Increase 5.7 Percent Medicare Advantage plan quality grew after after the ACA began rewarding performance, as documented by the National Committee for Quality Assurance: The law's accountable care organizations are showing the potential to improve quality while holding down (even reducing ) costs. Meanwhile, hospital readmissions and the prevalence of dangerous hospital-acquired conditions are falling. Or, put more simply, under the ACA hospitals are getting safer, new health care delivery models are improving quality, and the new Medicare Advantage performance incentives are improving quality in those plans.
I love it when we are shown how one small group of people benefited from the ACA but no mention of the millions of families that are being burdened for that to happen. 10 million new insured is mostly medicaid/medicare and heavily subsidized which equals much higher premiums and costs for the rest of us. While you keep repeating how premiums are decreasing, I'm getting notifications from my agent that the companies here are having increases as of Jan 1st of about 20%. Keep talking and posting, and maybe someone will believe it even when the truth is hitting millions of middle class families directly in the face.
Everyone benefits from safer hospitals and higher-quality care. Everyone benefits from a more sustainable Medicare program and slowing health care spending growth. The health system itself is starting to change to deliver better care while keeping costs in check. That's hugely important and doesn't just benefit a select few. Premium growth is moderating, premiums certainly aren't outright decreasing everywhere (the sheer number of places where they are so far is, frankly, surprising). Most people have employer-sponsored insurance, which is why the article about employer-sponsored premiums staying nearly flat this year is particularly significant. I wouldn't expect the ACA to have had as much an impact in Louisiana as other places thus far, given the state's hostility to its implementation, lax oversight of insurance rate filings, and the general health status of the population there historically. All the more reason that state should get serious about it.
When huffpo said "paid", what they really meant is that everybody else paid for them. Haha. - - - Updated - - - Nobody cares about cost when its paid for with other people's money. Especially if paid for by the mean, greedy, 1%.
Funny that. I'm paying $300/mo less for the wife and myself and have coverage where ever I go. With zero subsidy. That's how it's a lot better. Dig?
