IRS: Cheapest Obama Care Plan for Family of Four will be $20,000/year

[Charles Kozierok]

Thanks sactoking. I almost PMed you to ask you to weigh in here. Appreciate the voice of reason.

In terms of your averages, wouldn't premiums for kids be lower than adults?

 

[blankslate]

You want to be mad, be mad at the GOP, this is THEIR healthcare plan (specifically from the Heritage foundation and the one the GOP endorsed in response to Hillarycare). Obama foolishly compromised with you idiots on this. You don't want this shit, support a single payer system like every advanced economy in the world.

^this...

Also as another poster said, I don't give the source much credibility.... it's like asking a firearms enthusiast to watch MSNBC opinion show editorials about guns and not throw up.

 

[michal1980]

CNS news??

I'd sooner believe The Onion

you would.

since the left only believes news that agrees with them. All other news sources are invalid.

 

[blankslate]

since the right only believes news that agrees with them. All other news sources are invalid.

this edited version of your statement is just as true. And you know it.

If you see a news story on either Fox or MSNBC or any other source with a definite viewpoint you should find multiple sources to find out all of the details.

 

[tcG]

There were plenty of problems with health care in the U.S. before Obamacare, none of which had anything to do with there being a "free market". The notion is laughable.

Healthcare CAN be provided through a system of voluntary exchange (no pooling of public funds or regulations required), just like cheap, quality pencils can be produced through a system of voluntary exchange.

 

[sactoking]

Thanks sactoking. I almost PMed you to ask you to weigh in here. Appreciate the voice of reason.

In terms of your averages, wouldn't premiums for kids be lower than adults?

Yes, with caveats:
1. CCIIO has proposed an age curve that lumps 0-26 into one age band, 65+ into a second age band, and 27-64 are 38 separate age bands. The 3:1 age band ratio, whereby the highest age band can cost no more than 3x the lowest age band, starts at the 0-26 band and not the age 27 band. This means that "kids" (is 26 really a kid?) will be part of the 3:1 compression, which means youth premiums will be dragged up quite a bit.
2. The blended average provided by KFF not only blends markets (individual, small group, large group) but it blends age as well. If I assume that the national uninsured population is, for the sake of age, demographically similar to the insured population, the blended average will not be affected solely by demographics. In other words, while the current blended average is $278 now, the 0-26 age band might be $225 and the blended 50+ age bands might be $325.

 

[Ausm]

Then you don't understand your opponents' position very well.

Healthcare is one of the most tightly regulated and manipulated markets in the economy. It is nowhere near to being a "free market".

Free to rape the Consumer for profits, my Sir, is the crux of the Republican party.

 

[Ausm]

Not testy, just curious. Since you cant seem to answer the question after asking 3 times. I will conclude the market isnt as free as your talking point wants us to believe.

Which talking point are you referring to?

 

[Darwin333]

Yes. But the health care market before the ACA was hardly "free".

For a variety of reasons, health care is not a product that works well in a free market environment. Which is why every developed country except ours uses a different system.

The health care system in the US has not been anything even close to a free market for quite some time. Anytime you have the government quite literally forcing private entities to cost shift it is no longer even close to a free market.

 

[Acanthus]

Um, why would people need to get ER only care at this point?

Everyone will be insured. You pay for insurance on a sliding scale based on what you can afford.

I'm not seeing the outrage here, insurance is expensive. Heathcare is expensive.

Until we abandon the current model entirely (for profit healthcare with an emphasis on business) there is no fix for it.

At least now, people can go to the doctor.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Yes, with caveats:
1. CCIIO has proposed an age curve that lumps 0-26 into one age band, 65+ into a second age band, and 27-64 are 38 separate age bands. The 3:1 age band ratio, whereby the highest age band can cost no more than 3x the lowest age band, starts at the 0-26 band and not the age 27 band. This means that "kids" (is 26 really a kid?) will be part of the 3:1 compression, which means youth premiums will be dragged up quite a bit.
2. The blended average provided by KFF not only blends markets (individual, small group, large group) but it blends age as well. If I assume that the national uninsured population is, for the sake of age, demographically similar to the insured population, the blended average will not be affected solely by demographics. In other words, while the current blended average is $278 now, the 0-26 age band might be $225 and the blended 50+ age bands might be $325.

Thanks. That would suggest a rather lower premium for a family of 5 than $20,000, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Ooh, know what's even better? The OP is complaining that the poor will just use the emergency room and skip out on the bill. Since the penalty basically only serves to keep people from doing just that... his real complaint is that he would like to keep going to the ER and skipping out on the bill but now he can't.

Also, from the examples in the article: what percentage of American families make $120k a year and don't provide health care for their children?

One reason for unnessary costs of public programs is the overutilization of expensive facilities for non emergency needs. What part of obamacare stops this, and by what mechanism can a hospital deny service for things like colds?

 

[sactoking]

Thanks. That would suggest a rather lower premium for a family of 5 than $20,000, if I'm not mistaken.

I wouldn't be surprised if the total cost of insurance for a family of 5 was, say $17,500-20,000. In most cases though the family will either get subsidized coverage from an employer or the government, so the out of pocket premium will be much lower.

 

[Cerb]

So...in the end...it's the Republicans fault. Interesting perspective.

It's the truth, though. Didn't you know Baucus was a DINO?

 

[tcG]

The AMA is a government-supported cartel that shits out cookie-cutter doctors and games the market by withholding supply. The FDA has resulted in the death of thousands of people from withholding valid treatments, and is used as an anti-competitive strong arm of big pharma/agribusiness. Licensing practices result in not the best treatments and the curbing of quackery, but instead contributes to the harassment of legitimate alternative doctors. Employer and insurance mandates/regulations result in further distortions. Government funding of medical research focuses on expensive research for glamorous diseases instead of more appropriate public education in areas of nutrition. These are just a few of the reasons that health care is so expensive that people have to have insurance for even basic care, which shouldn't require insurance.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I wouldn't be surprised if the total cost of insurance for a family of 5 was, say $17,500-20,000. In most cases though the family will either get subsidized coverage from an employer or the government, so the out of pocket premium will be much lower.

Makes sense.

I can recall when I had no employer insurance paying on the order of $10k per year for a family of four, and that was ten years ago.

The problem here isn't that example from the IRS, but rather the way it was misportrayed (predictably) by this news propaganda source.

 

[shadow9d9]

"Forced down our throats"... talking point.. drink!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

"Forced down our throats"... talking point.. drink!

What, in numerical terms, was the percentage of citizens who wanted the mandate vs. those which did not? What serious dedicated study was performed by experts (not politicians) to give us the best possible result regardless of political concerns before legislation was written? There must have been serious research dedicated to this specific adventure beforehand. Otherwise we had a bunch of politicians writing in ignorance a political construct first, a well thought out means of achieving results with a minimum of unintended consequences a far distant second. Please tell us who these apolitical experts are and the means and methods dedicated and used for this express purpose.

Thanks.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I have no idea how this will affect my plan. I pay $350/month for BlueCross BluShield. But I don't know if that will be an acceptable governement plan. It is possible I may have to move to another type of coverage that will cost more or less...

The reason I posted this was to show those who DON'T HAVE COVERAGE what the potentials are. The Obama supporters who voted for him that don't have coverage are the ones that will be affected by this in the upcoming years and they have no idea...

If those people are not buying insurance now, then I am being forced to pay for their free ride. Why should I have to do that?

I'm happy to make them either get insurance or pay the IRS $2,000 to help cover the cost.

Employers should also be offering insurance. Employees that aren't getting it now will have more reason to demand it, again lowering the amount that I have to pay to cover their care.

Unless we move to a single-payer system or to the libertarian ideal of no free care at all for the uninsured, a mandate is the only way to make the leeches get coverage.

 

[werepossum]

The CNS article is completely wrong:
1. As mentioned, the $20,000 figure is an assumption used for illustrative purposes. It is not an explicit or implicit statement from the IRS that the least expensive coverage will cost that much.
2. Notwithstanding #1 above, the number may not be that ar off. Currently, the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that the average health insurance premium nationwide is $278.22 per member per month. That's a blended average, with individual insurance policies coming in lower and group policies coming in higher. The whole point of the ACA (or at least one point) was to provide group-like coverage to individuals, since group coverage tends to be better. The side effect is group coverage is more expensive. $20,000 annual for a family of 5 would be ~$333 per person per month. Given the blended average premium that's not too far off.



Yes and no. Starting in October of this year each Exchange will have an open enrollment period to purchase insurance for the upcoming calendar year. If you fail to purchase during open enrollment you will not be eligible to purchase on the Exchange until the next open enrollment period, in the following October.

Many (most?) states are looking at enacting similar open enrollment periods for off-Exchange business to counteract the adverse selection. In all likelihood, someone who missed open enrollment will not be able to buy "on the way to the hospital". Additionally, there are rules that dictate a "cooling off" period for those who have a life qualifying event; coverage purchased under those circumstances won't be effective for 15-45 days, again preventing last-minute purchase.

Thanks for the hard info, as usual. Obamacare has already cost me $1,000 per year, by mandating that health savings accounts must have an out-of-pocket of at least $3,400 for two people. Our out-of-pocket was $2,400 per year.

Personally I'm ready for single payer, even though it fundamentally goes against my principles. I recognize that Obamacare's main purpose is to eliminate private health care insurance (and eventually private health care) and government requirements will only increase - especially since there is no longer any requirement for legislation to impose a new mandate. Small companies like mine are the natural prey of such behavior; we're the ones who will be driven out of employer-provided health insurance first.

The irony is that the very people who drive me onto Medicaid will be enjoying premium private health insurance paid by my tax dollars long afterward.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So werepossum-

You want people who couldn't exercise due diligence, don't know that having automatic weapons is already beyond the ability of almost everyone to own, who can't even get the IRS up and running in time for the tax season, who can't grasp the most basic needs of healthcare, you know those people? You want to effectively give them full control over your loved ones health? Dude.

 

[Zebo]

So...in the end...it's the Republicans fault. Interesting perspective.

it is did they support public option? I think not so all has to go through private insurers. middle man more cost and more profit like bush''s no bid medicare D. instead of Eisenhower 48% retail military cost

"free market " FTW now pay up bicthes. ppl want HC now u will pay more for it thanks to republicans medicaid D medicare and so on. claiming to be against it so their buddies can get non negotiated profiteering even being single biggest buyer in the world. Who's really getting welfare... think hard.

 

[werepossum]

So werepossum-

You want people who couldn't exercise due diligence, don't know that having automatic weapons is already beyond the ability of almost everyone to own, who can't even get the IRS up and running in time for the tax season, who can't grasp the most basic needs of healthcare, you know those people? You want to effectively give them full control over your loved ones health? Dude.

Do I want them in control, no. But I'm one of those people who's going to be collateral damage, and I'd rather be on Medicaid sooner rather than have them make me so miserable I'll be glad to get it later.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Do I want them in control, no. But I'm one of those people who's going to be collateral damage, and I'd rather be on Medicaid sooner rather than have them make me so miserable I'll be glad to get it later.

That's fine. I just hope people remember when they get what they asked for. One of the most foolish things ever uttered is "Hey why not? Things couldn't possibly be worse."

 

[JEDIYoda]

When Obama care hits and you are forced to either pay for the government plan or pay the penalty we can re-visit what is "nonsense".

what is nonsense is when backed into a corner you spout nonsense...address the issue...