Good news for us re: Obamacare/ACA

[JJ Husker]

So, humor me cuz I might be slow on the uptake here.......you're claiming that if we renew December 1, 2013, at a 14% increase, THAT is a post ACA rate?

Yes.

Well, I think I'm beginning to understand our disconnect. It seems you are failing to acknowledge that passing the ACA legislation is profoundly different than when the provisions contained in it are actually implemented. My analogy- today apples can be sold without being handwashed. They cost $1.00 each. But a law was passed two years ago that states beginning September 20th, all apples sold must be handwashed prior to sale. On September 20th the cost of an apple increases to $1.25 each. I logically attribute the price increase on Sept 20 to the new law. Carl claims that the cause and effect link cannot be proven.

 

[carlfense]

Well, I think I'm beginning to understand our disconnect.

You might be!

It seems you are failing to acknowledge that passing the ACA legislation is profoundly different than when the provisions contained in it are actually implemented.

Some provisions are implemented already. Some are not. Some companies (yours included, presumably) are planning and/or adapting to already implemented provisions and to provisions that will be implemented in the future.

My analogy- today apples can be sold without being handwashed. They cost $1.00 each. But a law was passed two years ago that states beginning September 20th, all apples sold must be handwashed prior to sale. On September 20th the cost of an apple increases to $1.25 each. I logically attribute the price increase on Sept 20 to the new law. Carl claims that the cause and effect link cannot be proven.

You must really enjoy assigning arguments to me that I haven't made. Also . . . I can't imagine why you'd rather discuss apples than something as complicated as health care costs/premium rates/ACA.

Perhaps you can dumb it down even further. Between the oversimplification and the assigning of unassumed posititions . . . this will go well.

 

[JJ Husker]

Well, I think I'm beginning to understand our disconnect.

You might be!

It seems you are failing to acknowledge that passing the ACA legislation is profoundly different than when the provisions contained in it are actually implemented.

Some provisions are implemented already. Some are not. Some companies (yours included, presumably) are planning and/or adapting to already implemented provisions and to provisions that will be implemented in the future.

My analogy- today apples can be sold without being handwashed. They cost $1.00 each. But a law was passed two years ago that states beginning September 20th, all apples sold must be handwashed prior to sale. On September 20th the cost of an apple increases to $1.25 each. I logically attribute the price increase on Sept 20 to the new law. Carl claims that the cause and effect link cannot be proven.

You must really enjoy assigning arguments to me that I haven't made. Also . . . I can't imagine why you'd rather discuss apples than something as complicated as health care costs/premium rates/ACA.

Perhaps you can dumb it down even further. Between the oversimplification and the assigning of unassumed posititions . . . this will go well.

Maybe it's just that I don't have the ulterior motive of not wanting to admit that the ACA is not all sunshine and roses, especially where consumer costs are concerned. Unlike you, I have no problem acknowledging that the provisions of Obamacare, that take effect January 1, 2014 (as good as some of those provisions may be for many people), also have the direct effect of increasing peoples cost for health insurance. As much as you would like to treat it like some overly complicated concept, it really is just as simple as my apple analogy. Lots of effort could've been spared if you were willing to admit the obvious instead of obfuscating the issue. The premium cost increase IS a direct result of ACA implementation. You can accept that or not, I don't care, but I'm done.

 

[carlfense]

Maybe it's just that I don't have the ulterior motive of not wanting to admit that the ACA is not all sunshine and roses, especially where consumer costs are concerned.

You must be talking about someone else. I've never said anything of the sort. In my opinion (and I've said this here before) the ACA is better than the status quo.

"All sunshine and roses?"

Unlike you, I have no problem acknowledging that the provisions of Obamacare, that take effect January 1, 2014 (as good as some of those provisions may be for many people), also have the direct effect of increasing [ ] peoples cost for health insurance.

See those empty brackets? A crucial word is missing there.

As a hint, the provisions of Obamacare, that take effect January 1, 2014 have the direct effect of lowering some peoples cost for health insurance.

As much as you would like to treat it like some overly complicated concept, it really is just as simple as my apple analogy.

No it isn't. It would certainly be easier for you to prove if it were . . . which is, I have to assume . . . why you'd like to use your analogy.

 

[JJ Husker]

Maybe it's just that I don't have the ulterior motive of not wanting to admit that the ACA is not all sunshine and roses, especially where consumer costs are concerned.

You must be talking about someone else. I've never said anything of the sort. In my opinion (and I've said this here before) the ACA is better than the status quo [ ].

See my empty brackets? There's a crucial qualifier missing there too.

For a hint it's [for some people]

Unlike you, I have no problem acknowledging that the provisions of Obamacare, that take effect January 1, 2014 (as good as some of those provisions may be for many people), also have the direct effect of increasing [ ] peoples cost for health insurance.

See those empty brackets? A crucial word is missing there.

As a hint, the provisions of Obamacare, that take effect January 1, 2014 have the direct effect of lowering some peoples cost for health insurance.

Agreed.

As much as you would like to treat it like some overly complicated concept, it really is just as simple as my apple analogy.

No it isn't. It would certainly be easier for you to prove if it were . . . which is, I have to assume . . . why you'd like to use your analogy.

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree. Yes, the ACA is more complicated than my analogy but, when it comes to attributing the timing of premium increases to my and many peoples group plans, the cause is that simple to determine.

 

[carlfense]

See my empty brackets? There's a crucial qualifier missing there too.

For a hint it's [for some people]

This is true. Some people will pay more. Some people will pay less. Millions more will have health insurance. That coverage isn't free. Etc.

I've never said that the ACA is all sunshine and roses. Quite the opposite actually. It's a cobbled together collection of compromises. On balance, in my opinion, it's still far better than doing nothing. The best, and really only, alternative is politically impossible at the moment.

 

[Mierin]

I'm not very knowledgeable on this topic but I looked up the catastrophic insurance choice and it would cost me around $100/month. I'm a college student and I work very few hours and the penalty for not getting insurance will cost me less per year than the insurance costs per month.

 

[JJ Husker]

I'm not very knowledgeable on this topic but I looked up the catastrophic insurance choice and it would cost me around $100/month. I'm a college student and I work very few hours and the penalty for not getting insurance will cost me less per year than the insurance costs per month.

So, I take it your parents are no longer claiming you as a dependent or providing you with health insurance. It seems you have an option (or think you do) to not have health insurance. I don't have that option. I have a family of 4 and we cannot reasonably forego having coverage. If we did, yes the penalty would be much less than the cost of coverage. Right now I pay about $1,000 per month for our plan that would probably be considered "bronze". Beginning Jan 1st, I have been informed that my premium cost for a similar plan is likely to jump to about $1,400 per month. This plan will not provide me with anything additional that I need. It will simply cost me an additional $400 per month. That is my reality with Obamacare.

 

[carlfense]

I'm not very knowledgeable on this topic but I looked up the catastrophic insurance choice and it would cost me around $100/month. I'm a college student and I work very few hours and the penalty for not getting insurance will cost me less per year than the insurance costs per month.

You're probably eligible for some pretty sizable subsidies to help cover (or cover entirely) your insurance.

If you live in Nebraska this link will help you find a navigator to the insurance exchange. I believe, but don't quote me on this, that they can provide some general guidance as to subsidies as well. http://www.canhelp.org/map

If you live in a different state you should be able to find the information by searching for something like "<your state> insurance exchange navigator."

 

[JJ Husker]

I'm not very knowledgeable on this topic but I looked up the catastrophic insurance choice and it would cost me around $100/month. I'm a college student and I work very few hours and the penalty for not getting insurance will cost me less per year than the insurance costs per month.

You're probably eligible for some pretty sizable subsidies to help cover (or cover entirely) your insurance.

If you live in Nebraska this link will help you find a navigator to the insurance exchange. I believe, but don't quote me on this, that they can provide some general guidance as to subsidies as well. http://www.canhelp.org/map

If you live in a different state you should be able to find the information by searching for something like "<your state> insurance exchange navigator."

Carl is absolutely right about this. I would venture a guess that, if you have very limited income, your parent(s) are not providing you with health insurance, and they no longer claim you as a dependent, you could receive a very healthy subsidy, if not for the full cost, or you may also qualify for Medicare. The health insurance exchange links that Carl provided should have all the information you need. I would suggest looking into it and choosing to get some insurance instead of taking your chances. The coverage will likely end up costing you less than simply paying the penalty.

 

[KJ.]

Could you include a link . . . or provide a source?

Are you really that slow to not realize that this entire topic is concerning JJ's specific rates? Nobody here is talking about anything across the board for all Americans. JJ said his rates have been inflating at a rate of about 1% per month (or 1.25% based on 15% per year). On January 1st, they increase a bit more than that. I'm completely lost on why you think there needs to be a link for that when the graph is just putting a visual representation to what JJ has been saying.

 

[JJ Husker]

Could you include a link . . . or provide a source?

Are you really that slow to not realize that this entire topic is concerning JJ's specific rates? Nobody here is talking about anything across the board for all Americans. JJ said his rates have been inflating at a rate of about 1% per month (or 1.25% based on 15% per year). On January 1st, they increase a bit more than that. I'm completely lost on why you think there needs to be a link for that when the graph is just putting a visual representation to what JJ has been saying.

Yeah-that. And thanks for the visual. I have not tried to claim that the experience of my small group plan applies across the board for the everyone. However, I am sure it is fairly representative of other small group plans in Colorado and likely across the country. Our provider is Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield. I'm pretty sure they insure more than an insignificant number of people.

 

[carlfense]

Are you really that slow to not realize that this entire topic is concerning JJ's specific rates?

I must have been particularly clairvoyant back on May 24, 2013.

http://www.huskerboa...ost__p__1162483

Nobody here is talking about anything across the board for all Americans.

That's incorrect. I am, in fact, talking about Obamacare/ACA for all Americans.

See here, for example:

http://www.huskerboa...ost__p__1214844

JJ said his rates have been inflating at a rate of about 1% per month (or 1.25% based on 15% per year). On January 1st, they increase a bit more than that. I'm completely lost on why you think there needs to be a link for that when the graph is just putting a visual representation to what JJ has been saying.

So you weren't adding anything. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[BigRedBuster]

That's incorrect. I am, in fact, talking about Obamacare/ACA for all Americans.

So, you respond to JJ over and over again and now admit you are not talking about the same thing?

 

[carlfense]

That's incorrect. I am, in fact, talking about Obamacare/ACA for all Americans.

So, you respond to JJ over and over again and now admit you are not talking about the same thing?

I'll bold it for you.

Are you really that slow to not realize that this entire topic is concerning JJ's specific rates?