USA Health care costs

[MoreCoffee]

In other words Trump being the usual liar

Donald Trump was inaccurate which means he told a lie.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Here you can choose how much you pay. I pay 90 a month because I'm never sick, but you can also choose to pay extra for extra Insurance, then it's 135 or something, did that when I was pregnant, you can change it every year.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/hea...alth-care-rankings-with-UK-in-14th-place.html

Sounds interesting. Here you pay through the tax system. If you do not pay taxes then you do not pay anything. If you do pay taxes then you pay a percentage of your taxable income. The amount is 2% of one's taxable income.

 

[tango]

I think that the USA could do far better.

I don't doubt it for a minute. It's just that having centrally funded healthcare isn't necessarily the utopia that some make it out to be.

In essence a system where people pay their own way encourages people to live healthily because if they do smoke and drink heavily and don't exercise their costs will go up, but falls down because a lot of the time the things that are really expensive to treat (cancer etc) are the kind of thing where life just deals you a dud hand. On the other hand the system that's centrally funded means people don't worry about a financially ruinous bill if they are bitten by a rattlesnake in the woods and need to be airlifted to hospital, but is exposed to the worst of government inefficiency combined with people taking advantage of a system that rushes to pick up the pieces if they don't bother looking after themselves. It also never stops picking up the tab for the hypochondriac who rushes to see the doctor every time they have a cough or a sniffle.

As far as I can see the best system would be one that lets people pay their own way for run-of-the-mill routine stuff but has some means of covering the cost of life threatening illnesses that would be financially ruinous to treat. But just where to strike a balance is difficult.

 

[tango]

A news source here in Australia did a fact check on the third candidate's debate. On health care costs Donald Trump stated
“Next week [the healthcare premiums] are going to go up 100%”
The fact check revealed:

Trump and Clinton both accept the reality that healthcare premiums have increased since the Affordable Care Act was enacted, but Trump appears to be exaggerating wildly. On average, premiums have risen by about 5.8% a year since Barack Obama took office, compared with 13.2% in the nine years before Obama, Politifact found earlier this year. Trump, however, is cherry-picking data from various states and providers where rates have had higher jumps. The most common healthcare plans will increase 9% on average, according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation.​

Click the links for the sources used.

Whatever sources you've linked here, as I mentioned before most people care about what their premium is doing rather than what average premiums are doing. My experience is that premiums have roughly doubled for policies that, functionally speaking, appear more or less identical, in three years. 100% in three years is way more than 5.8% or 13.2% annually.

 

[Josiah]

Whatever sources you've linked here, as I mentioned before most people care about what their premium is doing rather than what average premiums are doing. My experience is that premiums have roughly doubled for policies that, functionally speaking, appear more or less identical, in three years. 100% in three years is way more than 5.8% or 13.2% annually.

ONE of the reasons why my premium went WAY up under Obamacare is that now, as a male, I MUST have (and pay for) coverage for child birth, mamagrams, abortions, etc. It is MANDATED to be included and paid for in policy of men (even though I personally don't know of any men who have had a baby or an abortion).. Fortunately for ME, my employer pays the full cost of my ever-more-expensive health care (for me and for mine) - something that use to be very widespread but under Obama, something increasingly rare. But I'm sure that's just a minor part of the reason for my skyrocketing heath insurance costs.

 

[tango]

ONE of the reasons why my premium went WAY up under Obamacare is that now, as a male, I MUST have (and pay for) coverage for child birth, mamagrams, abortions, etc. It is MANDATED to be included and paid for in policy of men (even though I personally don't know of any men who have had a baby or an abortion).. Fortunately for ME, my employer pays the full cost of my ever-more-expensive health care (for me and for mine) - something that use to be very widespread but under Obama, something increasingly rare. But I'm sure that's just a minor part of the reason for my skyrocketing heath insurance costs.

It's hard to know. I'm sure insurance companies took advantage of the chance to raise prices and blame Obamacare for it. On the flip side it's ridiculous to require that all qualifying policies must offer very specific services. As you say, as a man I will never have a mammogram or an abortion, and if I have reasons for not wanting specific treatments (be it not needing an abortion due to being male, having moral objections to abortion, or having personal preferences against anything from organ donation to blood transfusion to being aided by a female doctor to whatever else) I don't see any reason why I shouldn't be able to choose a cheaper plan that doesn't cover those things. Then the plans that cover the more expensive treatments cost more, just like it costs more to insure your house for $400,000 than it does to insure it for $200,000.

As I mentioned before, including routine treatments within insurance plans as a matter of obligation is equally absurd. It's on a par with with expecting my car insurance to pay for my routine oil change.

 

[Josiah]

It's hard to know. I'm sure insurance companies took advantage of the chance to raise prices and blame Obamacare for it. On the flip side it's ridiculous to require that all qualifying policies must offer very specific services. As you say, as a man I will never have a mammogram or an abortion, and if I have reasons for not wanting specific treatments (be it not needing an abortion due to being male, having moral objections to abortion, or having personal preferences against anything from organ donation to blood transfusion to being aided by a female doctor to whatever else) I don't see any reason why I shouldn't be able to choose a cheaper plan that doesn't cover those things. Then the plans that cover the more expensive treatments cost more, just like it costs more to insure your house for $400,000 than it does to insure it for $200,000.

As I mentioned before, including routine treatments within insurance plans as a matter of obligation is equally absurd. It's on a par with with expecting my car insurance to pay for my routine oil change.

I fully agree.....


1. I don't deny changes are needed. And I think SOME aspects of Obamacare (as I understand it) are good - being able to take policies with you when fired.... being able to get insurance for pre-existing conditions..... being able to "shop" outside ones own state.... But there is much in this (all promoted by HILLARY - we forget that, this wasn't Obama's plan, it was HILLARY'S that she tried to push during her husband's first term but even he saw as flawed and ceased to support), much in this that even Hillary can't deny is BAD. And rates aren't going down AS PROMISED, they are going way up! And lots of folks are not being added to insurance, a lot are LOSING their good employer provided insurance.


2. Your analogy to car insurance paying for an oil change is excellent! That IS part of the absurdity of this, and PART of the reason for the absurd costs. I have a friend who is self-employed and thus must have his own insurance; he USED to get a pretty cheap plan that ONLY covered hospital and ER's (and that with like a $1,000 deductable). He's pretty healthy and can easily afford normal office visits, prescriptions, etc. But Obama can't allow that approach since then the policies for some 50 year old woman who wants an eye lift would have to pay for that and HER insurance would go up! All this makes no sense..... we don't supply ALL food to ALL people - just necessary food to those who can't afford it! We don't supply houses to ALL people, just a gym one can sleep in at night if need be. We don't buy a Lexus for all - we give bus discount cards to those who NEED it. Why should we supply Donald Trump and Bill Gates with Lexus health insurance that ALL of us have to pay for - BIG TIME? Makes no sense.... Socialism makes no sense.



- Josiah

 

[tango]

I fully agree.....


1. I don't deny changes are needed. And I think SOME aspects of Obamacare (as I understand it) are good - being able to take policies with you when fired.... being able to get insurance for pre-existing conditions..... being able to "shop" outside ones own state.... But there is much in this (all promoted by HILLARY - we forget that, this wasn't Obama's plan, it was HILLARY'S that she tried to push during her husband's first term but even he saw as flawed and ceased to support), much in this that even Hillary can't deny is BAD. And rates aren't going down AS PROMISED, they are going way up! And lots of folks are not being added to insurance, a lot are LOSING their good employer provided insurance.

Another problem is the way there are such a bewildering array of plans to choose from. A friend of mine is looking for insurance for the first time due to some unfortunate life changes and said he was just looking at page after page after page of options with no idea what was worth paying extra for and what was not. Some insurance will cover doctor A but not B, others will cover B but not A, then you've got HMO and PPO and some are designed to pair with an HSA and others are not, and it just goes on and on and on.

2. Your analogy to car insurance paying for an oil change is excellent! That IS part of the absurdity of this, and PART of the reason for the absurd costs. I have a friend who is self-employed and thus must have his own insurance; he USED to get a pretty cheap plan that ONLY covered hospital and ER's (and that with like a $1,000 deductable). He's pretty healthy and can easily afford normal office visits, prescriptions, etc. But Obama can't allow that approach since then the policies for some 50 year old woman who wants an eye lift would have to pay for that and HER insurance would go up! All this makes no sense..... we don't supply ALL food to ALL people - just necessary food to those who can't afford it! We don't supply houses to ALL people, just a gym one can sleep in at night if need be. We don't buy a Lexus for all - we give bus discount cards to those who NEED it. Why should we supply Donald Trump and Bill Gates with Lexus health insurance that ALL of us have to pay for - BIG TIME? Makes no sense.... Socialism makes no sense.

It's not even a case of whether we provide extras for people who could pay for their own. If Bill Gates wants to take out an insurance policy to protect himself from having to pay $100 to see the doctor he is free to do so, even though I suspect he wouldn't have too much trouble coming up with the $100 himself. The way I see it, the problem is that we've got all these policies out there that effectively pool the risk of things that are more or less guaranteed to happen.

The key thing with insurance is that on average the insurance company wins. That's why there are still insurance companies. So as a rule the best insurance policy is the one in which you self-insure to the amount you are comfortable risking. So where medical conditions like cardiac arrest and cancer are concerned, it's worth taking out insurance because if you are the unlucky one who fate chooses to deal a dud hand the chances are you can't afford to pay for your own treatment (again, assuming your name isn't Gates, Trump, Buffett etc). Expecting insurance to pay for a routine doctor's visit every year does nothing other than add to the cost of everything because the consumer ends up with the cost of the visit plus the administration associated with dealing with insurance, plus the insurance company's profit.

 

[tango]

A couple of other thoughts, even 8% is a significant increase for people who get a 0% pay raise. And on top of that comes a report from the LA Times that:

Before taxpayer-provided subsidies, premiums for a midlevel benchmark plan will increase an average of 25% across the 39 states served by the federally run online market, according to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states will see much bigger jumps, others less.

and

Moreover, about 1 in 5 consumers will only have plans from a single insurer to pick from, after major national carriers such as UnitedHealth Group, Humana and Aetna scaled back their roles.

and

In some states, the premium increases are striking. In Arizona, unsubsidized premiums for a 27-year-old buying a benchmark "second-lowest cost silver plan" will jump 116%, to $422 from $196 , according to the administration report. Oklahoma has the next biggest increase for a similarly situated customer, 69%.

Linky ----> http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-healthcare-premiums-20161024-snap-story.html

 

[MoreCoffee]

Technically ACA has its roots in FDR's announcements during his election campaigns.

 

[Lamb]

In 2017 most health care plans will increase and some dramatically...over 116% for some in Arizona!!!

The reason is that the big companies low-balled their bids for ObamaCare and then saw that they weren't making the money they wanted and now want a raise

Under the Affordable Care Act, most Americans must have some form of health coverage during the year, or be subject to a fine that is equal to the the higher of 2.5 percent of household income, or $695.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/24/obam...17-plans-and-what-theyll-really-cost-you.html

 

[psalms 91]

Health care is one area I wish would be taken over by the government to insiure that all get healkth care and that they wont be bankruopted by it.

 

[tango]

Health care is one area I wish would be taken over by the government to insiure that all get healkth care and that they wont be bankruopted by it.

The trouble is if they don't get it right, and governments of all flavours are notorious for getting things wrong, you'll end up with an equally expensive mess and not get good health care.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Why is health care so much cheaper in Canada? I've seen comparisons between western nations showing how much money per capita goes into health systems and the USA is about double the amount that countries like Canada & Australia pay yet both Canada & Australia have universal health care systems. (source)

 

[psalms 91]

The trouble is if they don't get it right, and governments of all flavours are notorious for getting things wrong, you'll end up with an equally expensive mess and not get good health care.

While I would agree that health care for the most part is good they still make a lot of mistakes, people should not go broke because they are sick

 

[tango]

While I would agree that health care for the most part is good they still make a lot of mistakes, people should not go broke because they are sick

That much I agree with, it doesn't seem right that something like heart disease or cancer leaves someone more or less bankrupted by medical bills at the time they really don't need the extra stress.

The US healthcare system is fundamentally broken, I won't argue with that. It's just that a nationalised system isn't the perfect solution many like to think it is. In the UK it's good to know that you can be treated for something like cancer without being presented with a colossal bill at the end of it all, but less good to go into a hospital not knowing if you're going to come out worse than you went in. My local hospital was known as one of the worst in the country for hospital-acquired infections, and across the country it was far from rare to have to wait a week or two to see a doctor. You didn't have to pay, but getting an appointment was often an exercise in frustration.

Then on top of that the levels of waste and incompetence within the NHS were truly shocking. A good friend of mine was a doctor and on one occasion he sent me an email intended for someone else (the usual issue of me being one person removed from them in his address book). Reading through this email the utter incompetence he was detailing was staggering - more than enough to get anyone in the private sector fired. But since it was all centrally managed and government run it was just accepted that "sorry, that doesn't work at the moment".

I agree that people shouldn't be bankrupted because they got unlucky health-wise, at the same time if you have to put some money into your own healthcare it does make you ask whether you really need to see the doctor. Historically in the UK when charges for prescription drugs were eliminated completely doctors reported huge increases in their workload as people went to see the doctor to get a prescription for an aspirin, because with a prescription they didn't have to pay for it.

It comes back to the eternal question of how much abuse is acceptable before taking away the free stuff is warranted, and whether the hypochondriac who is at the doctor's every week with yet another perceived malady should be allowed to soak up unlimited resources that could be better used to help someone who really is sick. Ultimately the market is a better allocator of limited resources than central government so on that basis alone I'd lean towards something based around people paying their own way, even with some safeguards so people don't get wiped out overnight just for getting sick.

 

[tango]

Here are some real figures for the transition from 2016 to 2017

This is calculated before any subsidies or plan changes are taken into account — for people who are eligible for subsidies, the subsidies will mitigate much of the rate hikes; and for people who shop around, lower-priced options may be available. The following average rate increases apply to the plans that will offer coverage in the Pennsylvania exchange in 2017:

Capital Advantage Assurance: 27 percent 43.3 percent rate increase approved
First Priority Health (HMO): no rate change
First Priority Life (PPO): 38.8 percent 45.8 percent rate increase approved
Geisinger Health Plan: 42.08 percent rate increase (HMO only; the PPO plans, sold under the Geisinger Quality Options name, will not be available on-exchange for 2017)
Highmark, Inc. (EPO and PPO): 38.4 percent 50.1 percent rate increase requested, 45.42 percent approved
Highmark Health Insurance Company (PPO): 48.1 percent 50.1 percent rate increase requested, 55.07 percent approved
Keystone Health Plan East (Independence Blue Cross HMO): 19.87 percent 27.97 percent rate increase approved
QCC Insurance Company (Independence Blue Cross PPO): 22.52 percent 28.38 percent rate increase
UPMC Health Coverage, Inc. (HMO): 0.93 percent rate increase requested (only 7 members as of February 2016), 9.3 percent increase approved
UPMC Health Options (PPO and EPO): 9.7 percent requested 22 percent rate increase for Select and Partner networks (EPO), and 27 percent rate increase for Premium network (PPO). Approved average rate increase is 26.5 percent.

Source: https://www.healthinsurance.org/pennsylvania-state-health-insurance-exchange/



I'd love to know where that 5% average figure came from. In Pennsylvania it looks like people are going to be faced with huge increases. Although tax credits may offset the bulk of this for many it's little more than fiddling at the edges of a system that just doesn't seem to work very well.

 

[MoreCoffee]

USA health care insurance is crazy.

 

[Rens]

There is no competition I think. Then it doesn't get cheaper.

 

[tango]

USA health care insurance is crazy.

You're right about that, and the "affordable" care act is doing little to help. I want the freedom to choose a cheap plan, not be required to choose a plan that provides all sorts of things I don't want in it. It's like being told the only car insurance I'm allowed to have is one that includes fitting of a particular brand of tyres every year, when on average I can get a set of tyres to last two and maybe three years and in any event would choose a cheaper brand of tyre, and then being told that if I don't have car insurance I get fined anyway.

So much of it isn't about insurance anyway. I'd be happy with insurance if it meant coverage for catastrophic illness, the kind of thing that would financially ruin me if I tried to pay for it myself. But when that "insurance" covers all sorts of things that aren't risk events in any shape or form you know something is wrong.