1) Nothing you propose changes any of the incentives that are causing problems. E.g. Insurers will still refuse to cover people with pre-existing conditions, and/or refuse to pay for various conditions.
2) A major driver of costs is, wait for it... the insurers. The hospitals set "chargemaster" rates, which serve both as a negotiating point with insurers, and are also what uninsured people pay. Nothing about what you're suggesting changes this system. ACA at least gets more people in the pool, which gives insurers more leverage to reduce costs. Plus, with less people uninsured, fewer individuals get socked with the full chargemaster rates. It's not ideal, but it is an improvement.
The insurers have had years to get ready. And it hasn't cost them much -- surely much less than if, for example, a single-payer system was offered.
I'm also explicitly, and now repeatedly, pointing out how insurance premiums have been rising steadily since at least 1999.
And as already noted, the additional costs from covering people with pre-existing conditions are offset by the mandate. That's the whole point of the mandate -- to push more people into the risk pools. It is way too early to categorically declare that it can't work. And if not enough people sign up, they can always increase the tax penalties if absolutely necessary.
In addition, insurers in Massachusetts have worked with this exact same system for years, and they're doing fine.
So, in summary:
• Your costs were going to go up anyway. Just like they've been going up for years.
• The factors you cited are not, by a long shot, responsible for any increases in your personal health care costs over the past few years.
• The insurers will do just fine. If anything, ACA is a huge boon to them, since they get more ratepayers and don't have to worry about being wiped out by a single-payer system.
• Covering more people is a Good Thing.