Premiums up, profits up, employers paying the tab

PLC1

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 20, 2007
Messages
10,665
Location
The Golden State
Job-based health insurance premiums rise sharply

WASHINGTON — After modest increases last year, the cost of job-based health insurance for families and individuals has jumped sharply this year, even though insurers are paying less in benefits as cash-strapped American workers opt for less medical care.

For the estimated 150 million workers with employer-sponsored coverage, the average cost of family health insurance jumped 9 percent this year to $15,073, while the price of individual coverage rose 8 percent to $5,429.


This has been going on for years. The costs leveled out during the past five years or so, but the cost has roughly doubled in the last decade.

The impact of costs like this on employment are obvious.

Countdown to blame "Obamacare"..4, 3, 2, 1...
 
Werbung:
costs up...profits up...hmm where could the money be going...hmmmmm

whats sad is republicans think health care is ever a free market..

whats the value of a heart transplant....what ever you can possibly afford...and someone will always be there to charge it. Hey your mom is doing very poorly, do you want the realy spendy option that could possibly save her...or to let her die...don't worry the goverment will not force a choice...you know its a free econ , you can go shop rates or something..you got a hour or 2 maybe...

Yay Free Market!
 
costs up...profits up...hmm where could the money be going...hmmmmm

whats sad is republicans think health care is ever a free market..

whats the value of a heart transplant....what ever you can possibly afford...and someone will always be there to charge it. Hey your mom is doing very poorly, do you want the realy spendy option that could possibly save her...or to let her die...don't worry the goverment will not force a choice...you know its a free econ , you can go shop rates or something..you got a hour or 2 maybe...

Yay Free Market!


Conservatives know full well that its not a free market but we understand that government is to blame for that.
 
Conservatives know full well that its not a free market but we understand that government is to blame for that.

How would you envision health care in a totally free market, no regulations, no government "interference", just private contracts between the patient and providers?

How would that work out, do you think?
 
How would you envision health care in a totally free market, no regulations, no government "interference", just private contracts between the patient and providers?

How would that work out, do you think?


Biggest difference is you would be free to buy the coverage YOU want as opposed to what your state's insurance commissioner requires. Single males would not have to buy OBGYN coverage for example. This alone would allow a NY family of four to get Wisconsin's 5k plan as opposed to the 12k it costs in NY.
 
Biggest difference is you would be free to buy the coverage YOU want as opposed to what your state's insurance commissioner requires. Single males would not have to buy OBGYN coverage for example. This alone would allow a NY family of four to get Wisconsin's 5k plan as opposed to the 12k it costs in NY.

So, everyone would be free to purchase an individual plan, or perhaps to opt to pay as they go. That would no doubt be less expensive than what we have, and looks good on the surface.

So, what happens when an individual gets a long term illness, and his company drops him?
 
So, everyone would be free to purchase an individual plan, or perhaps to opt to pay as they go. That would no doubt be less expensive than what we have, and looks good on the surface.

So, what happens when an individual gets a long term illness, and his company drops him?


Same as happens today. But if thats important to you then you buy coverage that accommodates this scenario.
 
Same as happens today. But if thats important to you then you buy coverage that accommodates this scenario.

No one is going to sell coverage that "accommodates that scenario," as it would be unprofitable. People with ongoing illnesses can't get individual coverage now, nor would they with an unregulated market. The current option is to keep a job with an employer with group insurance, or to hope you live to 65 and get on Medicare.
 
No one is going to sell coverage that "accommodates that scenario," as it would be unprofitable. People with ongoing illnesses can't get individual coverage now, nor would they with an unregulated market. The current option is to keep a job with an employer with group insurance, or to hope you live to 65 and get on Medicare.


I did not suggest it would be cheap but if companies are free to make their own plans anything is possible. People with horrible driving records can still get insurance though its costly, its possible.

Of course with the current scenario and the ACA you can pay the fine till you want premium coverage and get it. Oh and you and I pick up the tab for the difference. Oh wait it'll probably be China.
 
I did not suggest it would be cheap but if companies are free to make their own plans anything is possible. People with horrible driving records can still get insurance though its costly, its possible.

I didn't suggest it would be cheap, either. In fact, I suggested that it would not be available at all.

I could be wrong, of course, and coverage could be available at a cost of twice the individual's net income.

The bottom line is that, in a totally unregulated market, we'd see:

companies competing for the cheapest demographic, while refusing to cover the most expensive.

"remedies" being sold to the public with no proof that they are either safe or effective.

Policies being sold that really don't cover any likely expenses.

Companies going out of business as soon as the cost of paying medical bills got too high, simply leaving the patients and providers high and dry.



Of course with the current scenario and the ACA you can pay the fine till you want premium coverage and get it. Oh and you and I pick up the tab for the difference. Oh wait it'll probably be China.

The current scenario is not really a solution, either.

You could simply pay the fine, of course, but it would be foolish in the extreme to do so. Once you have a claim, insurance is going to be a lot more expensive.
 
Werbung:
I didn't suggest it would be cheap, either. In fact, I suggested that it would not be available at all.

I could be wrong, of course, and coverage could be available at a cost of twice the individual's net income.

The bottom line is that, in a totally unregulated market, we'd see:

companies competing for the cheapest demographic, while refusing to cover the most expensive.

"remedies" being sold to the public with no proof that they are either safe or effective.

Policies being sold that really don't cover any likely expenses.

Companies going out of business as soon as the cost of paying medical bills got too high, simply leaving the patients and providers high and dry.





The current scenario is not really a solution, either.

You could simply pay the fine, of course, but it would be foolish in the extreme to do so. Once you have a claim, insurance is going to be a lot more expensive.

its like saying a guy with 10 DWI's still can get auto Insurance....it will just cost a ton more and only a few may take him....If you got DWI's at random and not threw your choice and they can be passed down from your parents.
 
Back
Top