Preimums rise faster under Obamacare than in piror 8 years combined!

[BUnit1701]

"Health insurance premiums have risen more after Obamacare than the average premium increases over the eight years before it became law, according to the private health exchange eHealthInsurance.
The individual market for health insurance has seen premiums rise by 39 percent since February 2013, eHealth reports. Without a subsidy, the average individual premium is now $274 a month. Families have been hit even harder with an average increase of 56 percent over the same period — average premiums are now $663 per family, over $426 last year.
Between 2005 and 2013, average premiums for individual plans increased 37 percent and average family premiums were upped 31 percent. So they have risen faster under Obamacare than in the previous eight years."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/18/r...ears-before-obamacare-combined/#ixzz2wQJILJAT
​

 

[Knowing]

The link to eHealth shows a downward trend on my computer, and relative stability since ~January 8th.

 

[fskimospy]

"Health insurance premiums have risen more after Obamacare than the average premium increases over the eight years before it became law, according to the private health exchange eHealthInsurance.
The individual market for health insurance has seen premiums rise by 39 percent since February 2013, eHealth reports. Without a subsidy, the average individual premium is now $274 a month. Families have been hit even harder with an average increase of 56 percent over the same period — average premiums are now $663 per family, over $426 last year.
Between 2005 and 2013, average premiums for individual plans increased 37 percent and average family premiums were upped 31 percent. So they have risen faster under Obamacare than in the previous eight years."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/18/r...ears-before-obamacare-combined/#ixzz2wQJILJAT
​

As the article mentions but you conveniently leave out, the policies being sold today are not the same as the policies in the past and are often considerably more comprehensive. (not to mention the risk pool has been expanded to include the less healthy that were deliberately excluded before)

Apples to oranges.

The metrics that actually measure what we're doing are per capita health expenditures, health and wellness data, and % of GDP spent on health care.

 

[BUnit1701]

The link to eHealth shows a downward trend on my computer, and relative stability since ~January 8th.

Apparently you ignored the pink line labeled 'Avg 2013 monthly premium'. It is hard to notice way down at the bottom of the chart...

 

[BUnit1701]

As the article mentions but you conveniently leave out, the policies being sold today are not the same as the policies in the past and are often considerably more comprehensive. (not to mention the risk pool has been expanded to include the less healthy that were deliberately excluded before)

Apples to oranges.

The metrics that actually measure what we're doing are per capita health expenditures, health and wellness data, and % of GDP spent on health care.

Never mind that we were told it would save us $2500 per year on average. Keep covering.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Apparently you ignored the pink line labeled 'Avg 3013 monthly premium'. It is hard to notice way down at the bottom of the chart...

So the Daily Caller knows what health insurance premiums will be a millennium from now?

 

[BUnit1701]

So the Daily Caller knows what health insurance premiums will be a millennium from now?

A) its not Daily callers chart.

B) Way to be an ass, it was obviously a typo.

 

[fskimospy]

Never mind that we were told it would save us $2500 per year on average. Keep covering.

You realize that from the data you're quoting you would have no idea if it was saving you that $2,500 a year or not, right?

I personally don't think the $2,500/year savings will ever materialize, at least not in the way that people think. The important part is slowing health care cost inflation that has generally been happening much faster than inflation over the last 20 years or so. In that sense you could save $2,500 a year or more in the end, but that's a fairly nebulous idea.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Affordable? Not so much. Another example of progressive doublespeak.

 

[BUnit1701]

You realize that from the data your quoting you would have no idea if it was saving you that $2,500 a year or not, right?

I personally don't think the $2,500/year savings will ever materialize, at least not in the way that people think. The important part is slowing health care cost inflation that has generally been happening much faster than inflation over the last 20 years or so. In that sense you could save $2,500 a year or more in the end, but that's a fairly nebulous idea.

Math isn't hard.

Average family premium for 2013 : $426x12 = $5112

Dear leader specifically called out premium decreases, so if he haddn't been lying out his ass, the average family would now have premiums of $2612. Instead they are currently at $8040.

Sounds affordable to me! /sarc

 

[Knowing]

Apparently you ignored the pink line labeled 'Avg 2013 monthly premium'. It is hard to notice way down at the bottom of the chart...

Whoa boss, calm down.

I see the red line, but the trendline for "max" is downward. Further, an increase is entirely to be expected given the required extras (that I disagree with politically). If premiums spike (because of increased enrollments before the first deadlines) it'll make for a good hitpeice now that looks rather foolish in hindsight if premiums decline (like they appear to be).

 

[BUnit1701]

Whoa boss, calm down.

I see the red line, but the trendline for "max" is downward. Further, an increase is entirely to be expected given the required extras (that I disagree with politically). If premiums spike (because of increased enrollments before the first deadlines) it'll make for a good hitpeice now that looks rather foolish in hindsight if premiums decline (like they appear to be).

Downward to 50% plus higher than they were! Sorry, thats not a real decrease any more than reductions in baseline increases are budget cuts.

 

[fskimospy]

Math isn't hard.

Average family premium for 2013 : $426x12 = $5112

Dear leader specifically called out premium decreases, so if he haddn't been lying out his ass, the average family would now have premiums of $2612. Instead they are currently at $8040.

Sounds affordable to me! /sarc

Please provide quotes as to this effect.

Regardless, my original point stands: your wallet doesn't care how much of your money is going into the premium and how much is going into other health costs. It's all money out the door. What matters is how much per-person we spend, how much we spend as a country, and how much health we get for that money.

Not to mention that this all excludes federal subsidies, which is absurd. Money out of your pocket is what matters. (oh, and before you say 'well someone has to pay those subsidies!' that's the entire point of using % of GDP spent on health care, etc)

 

[BUnit1701]

Please provide quotes as to this effect.

Regardless, my original point stands: your wallet doesn't care how much of your money is going into the premium and how much is going into other health costs. It's all money out the door. What matters is how much per-person we spend, how much we spend as a country, and how much health we get for that money.

Not to mention that this all excludes federal subsidies, which is absurd. Money out of your pocket is what matters. (oh, and before you say 'well someone has to pay those subsidies!' that's the entire point of using % of GDP spent on health care, etc)

And forcing everyone to buy 'enhanced' health insurance does nothing to reduce spending, it just increases the payment pool.

EDIT : Will a video do? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_o65vMUk5so

 

[JockoJohnson]

Please provide quotes as to this effect.

Regardless, my original point stands: your wallet doesn't care how much of your money is going into the premium and how much is going into other health costs. It's all money out the door. What matters is how much per-person we spend, how much we spend as a country, and how much health we get for that money.

Not to mention that this all excludes federal subsidies, which is absurd. Money out of your pocket is what matters. (oh, and before you say 'well someone has to pay those subsidies!' that's the entire point of using % of GDP spent on health care, etc)

Do you mean this one?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...st-typical-familys-health-insurance-premium-/

 

[fskimospy]

And forcing everyone to buy 'enhanced' health insurance does nothing to reduce spending, it just increases the payment pool.

What are you basing that on?

To find out what the effect of the ACA is on the cost of health care we actually need to wait and see how much we spend on health care after it is in place.

 

[bshole]

Math isn't hard.

Average family premium for 2013 : $426x12 = $5112

Dear leader specifically called out premium decreases, so if he haddn't been lying out his ass, the average family would now have premiums of $2612. Instead they are currently at $8040.

Sounds affordable to me! /sarc

The savings won't really kick in until we begin rationing health care. There is no rational reason on earth to spend a million dollars of taxpayer dollars attempting to keep some 70 year old retired person alive. Once America realizes this and starts triaging services like Canada, then the REAL savings will kick in. The truth really really does suck. I don't like it anymore than anybody else but there it is.

 

[BUnit1701]

The savings won't really kick in until we begin rationing health care. There is no rational reason on earth to spend a million dollars of taxpayer dollars attempting to keep some 70 year old retired person alive. Once America realizes this and starts triaging services like Canada, then the REAL savings will kick in. The truth really really does suck. I don't like it anymore than anybody else but there it is.

But remember, there are no death panels and Sarah Palin is insane for thinking there are!

 

[fskimospy]

Do you mean this one?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...st-typical-familys-health-insurance-premium-/

Sure! I don't agree with him at all on that and it sounds like he was misusing the statistic that was given to him. Obama was definitely wrong on that one.

I don't think that changes my point however, which relates to what his adviser was saying: total health costs are what matter the most by far.

 

[BUnit1701]

What are you basing that on?

To find out what the effect of the ACA is on the cost of health care we actually need to wait and see how much we spend on health care after it is in place.

Umm, these little things called logic and common sense. How does forcing more individuals to purchase insurance cause more efficient spending on healthcare? How does having more premiums paid reduce the cost of drugs and services? Simple answer is it doesn't.

 

[CrackRabbit]

A) its not Daily callers chart.

B) Way to be an ass, it was obviously a typo.

Lighten up, Francis.

 

[biostud]

Only explanation is that there's not a free market with enough competition.

 

[fskimospy]

Umm, these little things called logic and common sense. How does forcing more individuals to purchase insurance cause more efficient spending on healthcare? How does having more premiums paid reduce the cost of drugs and services? Simple answer is it doesn't.

Umm, the ACA encompasses a lot more than the individual mandate, including a good number of measures explicitly designed to control costs. What's the confusion?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The savings won't really kick in until we begin rationing health care. There is no rational reason on earth to spend a million dollars of taxpayer dollars attempting to keep some 70 year old retired person alive. Once America realizes this and starts triaging services like Canada, then the REAL savings will kick in. The truth really really does suck. I don't like it anymore than anybody else but there it is.

You'll be pleased to know that the rationing is already underway.

Nation’s elite cancer hospitals off-limits under Obamacare

http://nypost.com/2014/03/19/nations-elite-cancer-hospitals-off-limits-under-obamacare/

Obamacare enrollees hit snags at doctor's offices

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/04/business/la-fi-obamacare-patients-20140205

 

[Knowing]

Downward to 50% plus higher than they were! Sorry, thats not a real decrease any more than reductions in baseline increases are budget cuts.

No, it's not a net decrease. I didn't say it was. I said that it appears to be in decline. How things shake out is considerably more important than how high they spike temporarily.