Obamacare screws the young & healthy

Annie said:
Well that article you posted was from 6 days before the roll out and as ABC commented, only the least expensive plans were listed. Why in the world would anyone pay more than $200 per month, still with a $5k deductible, when one can mitigate against that deductible, while co-pays become 0 or close to for all services, including meds? Anything you do pay is deducted from your deductible, unlike the lower cost plans.

As I said to Dude or Dung, he's not raking in the $$, but has enough to make wise choices.
Click to expand...
Because a high deductible plan is EXACTLY what he needs. He's healthy, and only needs to worry about catastrophes.

I'm twice his age, and I pocket the $500/month that a low deductible plan would cost me. I have over $3k in a HSA. I've pocketed over $35k in the last 4 or 5 years by employing that scheme.

But, I'm healthy, and I work at staying that way.
 
Big money said:
Now, back to our regularly-scheduled topic:

If they can get the Obamacare exchange website to work, young people may learn some bad news upon signing up.

A report from the conservative American Action Forum found that health insurance rates for 2.7 million people aged 18 to 35 — the so-called young invincibles crucial to the health-care law’s success — would rise dramatically.

The main purpose of the individual mandate was to have these younger, relatively healthy consumers subsidize the costs of older, sicker and more expensive insurance enrollees.

“Due to the ACA’s sweeping market reforms, rates for low-premium plans have increased exponentially between 2013 and 2014. In fact, on average, a healthy 30 year old male nonsmoker will see his lowest cost insurance option increase 260 percent,” reads AAF’s report.

A healthy 30-year-old would see his health insurance costs rise in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Pre-Obamacare premiums average about $62 per month, according to AAF, while post-Obamacare premiums average about $187 per month — a 202 percent difference. The average change between 2013 and 2014 low-cost premiums is 260 percent.

Premium increases vary by state. The biggest increase is in Vermont, where young people will face a $332, or 600 percent, increase in insurance costs. Young people in Massachusetts, on the other hand, will only see premiums go up by nearly $20, or 9 percent.

AAF notes that Massachusetts is an outlier because it has been under an Obamacare-like system since 2006 and has already experienced premium spikes to pay the highest premiums before the new federal health law.

Youngsters in other states won’t get hit as hard as Vermonters, but still will see huge premium increases. South Carolinians will see premiums spike by 227 percent and Californians will pay 247 percent more for low-cost health plans.

“Vermont, Georgia, Nebraska, Arkansas, and Wisconsin. Vermont, Wyoming, Mississippi, Alaska, and Indiana all experience the highest actual dollar amount changes between 2013 and 2014,” AAF reports.

These cost increases raise questions about whether even the individual mandate will be able to keep younger workers in the health insurance market.



http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/03/study-obamacare-spikes-young-peoples-health-insurance-costs/#ixzz2hGfNBsLJ
Click to expand...
misleading. coverages are much better, and less than $200/month isn't going to break the bank. Why won't employers offer bennies at less than $200/month?
 
Annie said:
His employer has many options, major bank. All of their plans, like other employer plans must conform to ACA. He'd like his old plan, no longer possible. Besides, nothing on the exchanges would be as inexpensive as his employer contributions and low deductible. So, if forced into paying he chose the one that seems best/most cost efficient. Isn't that what you'd do?
Click to expand...
I think it's safe to say your son won't retire from this same company. In the past, let's say your healthy son was diagnosed with something that is easily treatable, but still something that requires a prescription or two. Let's say high blood pressure. For a daughter, let's say that she had a baby.

They both now have a pre existing condition. If they got fired, or chose to switch jobs, they may very well be denied insurance, or charged much higher rates than the previous plan charged.

Imagine if the condition were worse. I've actually seen people fired when they had a heart attack, because it screwed the group rates for the rest of the employees. Of course, that's illegal, so the excuse for the firing was fabricated.

Employee was forced to pay huge premiums to COBRA, until the issue was worked out in court.

That cannot happen today.
 
Althea said:
You first. Show us a state by state comparison of new plans, vs old plans.
Click to expand...


This is Big Phoney at his most hypocritical.

When Jarod made a claim earlier, Big Phoney demanded that Jarod back it up.

Now of course it's Big Phoney making the claim, so naturally he expects others to refute what he says.

Typical BS stunt from your typical two-faced, lying Rightie.
 
LOL, the difference is that Gerud made a claim with no proof.

I asked for some, and Zaps thinks I need to prove that Gerud doesn't have any...

Hilarious.
 
Big money said:
LOL, the difference is that Gerud made a claim with no proof.

I asked for some, and Zaps thinks I need to prove that Gerud doesn't have any...

Hilarious.
Click to expand...


As did you.

You made a claim and posted no proof.

Oh, I'm sorry...the truth just too much for you to handle once again, eh?
 
Althea said:
Health club membership? Are you kidding? That's part of the reason for the Cadillac tax. Healthcare in this country has to get back to being about health.

Why should the taxpayer pay for your son's health club membership?

So, you're comparing paying $0/month, to paying a premium? What is his new deductible? Remember...we're discussing catastrophic policies
Click to expand...

The taxpayer didn't and nobody was asking for that. What happened was the insurance company gave him a discount due to his working towards being healthy. He'd like to keep his insurance like Obama promised, but he can't.

I'm betting that in the future you'll see something like that for ACA too... Along with "credits" for "eating right" and other "cost saving" measures.
 
I keep hearing about these people being denied their choices to retain their insurance coverages due to Obamacare but I've seen no proof of anything like that. Somehow, somewhere, the whole story isn't being told. It also seems to me that the very ones claiming these difficulties are pretty well known liars anyway. And why would they be telling the truth about a program or person they admittedly hate? Really, now!!!!!!

Petula
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top