SKYROCKETING 2016 insurance premium rate rise for ACA marketplace

buck · Aug 14, 2015

Slyfox696 said:
Well, you seemed to be saying some won't be having large premium increases because they'll pay more out of pocket. I guess my point how is that any different than it's ever been, with the exception more people now have access to health insurance?

Maybe not different, don't know.. except choice, obviously.

Regardless, premiums are going up for a lot of people. They can apparently, in at least 6 of the states, change plans, doctors and (likely) face higher OOP expenses by changing plans and companies. Not sure that is such a good thing, but some can certainly disagree.

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

Slyfox696 said:
Well, you seemed to be saying some won't be having large premium increases because they'll pay more out of pocket. I guess my point how is that any different than it's ever been, with the exception more people now have access to health insurance?

He is also trying to use the word "facing" as if it were a scary word, as in "facing large premium increases" in the hopes someone will be confused to think that "facing large premium increases" means something more than "they have the option of choosing a more expensive plan"

OH NOES!!!! People are "facing" expensive plans!!!!

The HORROR!!!

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
Regardless, premiums are going up for a lot of people.

if they choose more expensive plans. OH NOES!!!!

They can apparently, in at least 6 of the states, change plans, doctors and (likely) face higher OOP expenses by changing plans and companies. Not sure that is such a good thing, but some can certainly disagree.

I don't see any evidence that this means they will face higher OOP expenses.

Threegoofs · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
if they choose more expensive plans. OH NOES!!!!

.

Back on the good old days before the ACA, people paid LESS when the chose more expensive plans.

Thanks, Obama.

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
And people can buy cheaper plans!!

For many, there is no real choice and they will be facing much higher costs (beyond the headline number KFF used) no matter which way they go - in 4 of the cities between 9.2% and 16.2%.

Additionally, in the one example KFF highlighted to show how great things are, things turned out not to be so great. And you know they chose that one, as it showed the highest premium difference to ensure they made their point.

In that example, those that change will either be facing much higher premium.. Or much higher OOP expenses. Sure, they get a choice of how they would rather pay those much higher costs. Good for them. But, the costs will be much higher for many regardless.

I only wonder if KFF knew that and hoped no one else would notice.. Or they truly had no idea. Based on their track record, I tend to believe the former.. but.. ok...

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
He is also trying to use the word "facing"

I had no idea "facing" was a scary word for you.. Does it remind you of faces you see in mirrors or something? Sorry, I will be certain not to use that word for you anymore. :roll:

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
if they choose more expensive plans. OH NOES!!!!

Both options are more expensive then the prior year.. Just in different ways. So, I really do not know which plan you mean.

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
For many, there is no real choice and they will be facing much higher costs (beyond the headline number KFF used) no matter which way they go - in 4 of the cities between 9.2% and 16.2%.

Additionally, in the one example KFF highlighted to show how great things are, things turned out not to be so great. And you know they chose that one, as it showed the highest premium difference to ensure they made their point.

In that example, those that change will either be facing much higher premium.. Or much higher OOP expenses. Sure, they get a choice of how they would rather pay those much higher costs. Good for them. But, the costs will be much higher for many regardless.

I only wonder if KFF knew that and hoped no one else would notice.. Or they truly had no idea. Based on their track record, I tend to believe the former.. but.. ok...

The avg is 4.4% so everytime one city goes over that, it only means that the rest are that much lower.

And you keep repeating this lie about OOP expenses going up even though you haven't supported that claim. Is this another of those "buck supposes" thingies?

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
I had no idea "facing" was a scary word for you..

It's not but it seems to be scary for you because you keep whining about how people are "facing" premium increases

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
Both options are more expensive then the prior year.. Just in different ways. So, I really do not know which plan you mean.

I miss the days before ACA when premiums never rose

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
And you keep repeating this lie about OOP expenses going up even though you haven't supported that claim. Is this another of those "buck supposes" thingies?

Actually I did. I provided a link to an article that specifically talked about the insurance company KFF said was now the new price leader in Seattle (and helped that average looked really good with a negative 10% premium) and how they were increasing their OOP expenses in order to lower premium.

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
I miss the days before ACA when premiums never rose

Again, at least you acknowledge expenses for those insured are going up quite a bit (See, I didn't use "facing". Oops I just did. You are probably shaking right now)

Either with large premium increases.. or large OOP increases. Things aren't nearly as rosy as originally suggested in the op or by KFF.

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
Actually I did. I provided a link to an article that specifically talked about the insurance company KFF said was now the new price leader in Seattle (and helped that average looked really good) and how they were increasing their OOP expenses in order to lower premium.

No, you didn't. The link you posted shows how a plan in Seattle is raising it's deductible (which doesn't necessarily lead to an increase in OOP costs) - it doesn't say if the new plan will have higher OOP costs than the plan that was previously the price leader.

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
Again, at least you acknowledge expenses for those insured are going up quite a bit

Wrong.

Their premiums are going up by an avg of 4.4%. That's not "quite a bit" - it's actually relatively small.

Either with large premium increases.. or large OOP increases. Things aren't nearly as rosy as originally suggested in the op or by KFF..

You haven't shown that anyone who switches from 2015's price leader to 2016's price leader will have higher OOP expenses

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
No, you didn't. The link you posted shows how a plan in Seattle is raising it's deductible (which doesn't necessarily lead to an increase in OOP costs) - it doesn't say if the new plan will have higher OOP costs than the plan that was previously the price leader.

You are right.. What I meant, but didn't say properly, was that insureds will now be paying a higher deductible.

Anyway, the article specifically indicates that Ambetter is lowering premiums by increasing deductible from 5k to 6500.

Or, it will cost many insureds more no matter which way they go.

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
You are right.. What I meant, but didn't say properly, was that insureds will now be paying a higher deductible.

OH NOES!!! If people CHOOSE to save money on their premiums by choosing a plan with a higher deductible, they're going to have a higher deductible!!

The HORROR!!!!

Anyway, the article specifically indicates that Ambetter is lowering premiums by increasing deductible from 5k to 6500.

And yes, it's horrible the way people can choose plans with higher deductibles because they cost less.

They should pass a law banning that.

Or, it will cost many insureds more no matter which way they go.

4.4% more

The HORROR!!!!

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
OH NOES!!! If people CHOOSE to save money on their premiums by choosing a plan with a higher deductible, they're going to have a higher deductible!!

Whether you think it's bad or not, people are "facing" (*shiver*) higher expenses. Whether through higher premiums (of 12.6% in Seattle for those that stay in their previously cheapest silver plan) or higher deductibles for those that go the cheaper premium route.

I am only indicating that expenses are going up a lot for many. There is more involved than premium. People now get a choice of how they want to pay those higher insurance dollar amounts.

4.4% more

not exactly... 12.6% more premium for those that stay with their current plan.. Or even a higher percentage for those that change plans and face (*shiver*) the higher deductible.

More expensive for many.

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
Whether you think it's bad or not, people are "facing" (*shiver*) higher expenses.

I miss the days before ACA when people's health spending never increased

Whether through higher premiums (of 12.6% in Seattle for those that stay in their previously cheapest silver plan) or higher deductibles for those that go the cheaper premium route.

You still have not shown that people who switch from 2015's price leader to 2016's price will see any increase in total OO]s.

I am only indicating that expenses are going up a lot for many.

Yes, you are "indicating" that.

But you have no proof that it's true.

not exactly... 12.6% more premium for those that stay with their current plan.. Or even a higher percentage for those that change plans and face (*shiver*) the higher deductible.

OH NOES!!! People who chose a more expensive plan are going to have to pay more in premiums!!!

The HORROR!!!!

I miss the days before ACA when the expensive plans cost the same as the cheaper plans

Threegoofs · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
Whether you think it's bad or not, people are "facing" (*shiver*) higher expenses. Whether through higher premiums (of 12.6% in Seattle for those that stay in their previously cheapest silver plan) or higher deductibles for those that go the cheaper premium route.

I am only indicating that expenses are going up a lot for many. There is more involved than premium. People now get a choice of how they want to pay those higher insurance dollar amounts.

not exactly... 12.6% more premium for those that stay with their current plan.. Or even a higher percentage for those that change plans and face (*shiver*) the higher deductible.

More expensive for many.

Are you also going to mention that it's cheaper for many, too?

Neomalthusian · Aug 14, 2015

Threegoofs said:
Are you also going to mention that it's cheaper for many, too?

There remains serious volatility in this market. Alaskans are seeing some of the biggest increases ever. Percentage increases in many places are still well above the CPI, which after a decade or more of annual double digit increases can still be tremendously painful even if the percentage by itself doesn't look that alarming.

Employers nation-wide should stop offering insurance to all their employees <400% FPL and pay the "penalty" so that they're all eligible for the subsidy. This would divorce insurance from employment and limit what people will spend on premiums and leave it to DHHS to sort out the mess they created.

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
I miss the days before ACA when people's health spending never increased

Obamacare was supposed to change all that. In fact we have a whole OP about how premiums are increasing at low rates, which really isn't true. The plans with the most insured are increasing at large rates. Most will be facing (*shiver*) large premium increases. The new price leaders will have much larger deductibles than the prior price leader, which has negative impacts on the people Obamacare was supposed to actually help.

Vern · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
I am sorry that you are not understanding what the study is indicating or what our conversation is about. Par for you.

buck, you're right. I didn't understand your point was concern for "people staying on one of the 2 lowest silver plans without shopping around". But in my defense you are making claims that aren't shown in the study.

buck said:
What this seems to be indicating is that the plans that most people have signed up for, will be increasing quite a bit. However, a plan that not many people have signed up for will now take over as the cheaper option in that area. While the average customer is facing a large rate hike... the average plan increase is muted because of this change.

You even did it in this post.

The 2015 lowest premium silver plans are increasing a lot. However, they are being replaced by different plans/companies that are now (for 2016) the lowest priced silver plans.

I don't see in the study where it "indicates" the lowest priced silver plans "will be increasing quite a bit." And I don't see where "the average customer is facing a large rate hike" if they don’t change plans. where in the study did you get that information? And buck, I find it hard to believe you have any empathy for people who might pay a little more because they didn't bother to shop around. You don’t believe in subsidies so you don’t care about making health care affordable for those that cant afford it. I find rather hypocritical that you feign concern for people who may pay 30 dollars more a month because they chose to stay on their plan. But it does server your agenda.

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
Obamacare was supposed to change all that.

No it wasn't because my statment was sarcasm

In fact we have a whole OP about how premiums are increasing at low rates, which really isn't true.

Except when it is true.

The plans with the most insured are increasing at large rates. Most will be facing (*shiver*) large premium increases. The new price leaders will have much larger deductibles than the prior price leader, which has negative impacts on the people Obamacare was supposed to actually help.

OH NOES!!! People are choosing more expensive plans!!!

The HORROR!!!!!

buck · Aug 14, 2015

sangha said:
Except when it is true.

Not for most of the insureds, who are facing (*shiver*) larger premium increases than those stated by the study. As we have discussed a year ago and a few times since, the plans with the most insureds are seeing the largest premium increases. This study is illustrating nothing different.

sangha · Aug 14, 2015

buck said:
Not for most of the insureds, who are facing (*shiver*) larger premium increases than those stated by the study. As we have discussed a year ago and a few times since, the plans with the most insureds are seeing the largest premium increases. This study is illustrating nothing different.

OH NOES!!! People are choosing more expensive plans!!!!

The HORROR!!!

SKYROCKETING 2016 insurance premium rate rise for ACA marketplace

buck

sangha

sangha

Threegoofs

Sophisticated man-about-town

buck

buck

buck

sangha

sangha

sangha

buck

buck

sangha

sangha

buck

sangha

buck

sangha

Threegoofs

Sophisticated man-about-town

Neomalthusian

buck

Vern

back from Vegas

sangha

buck

sangha