Shut 'em Down!

It is cutting into their profits yes, but it is also pushing cost down to the consumer.

You act like it's legal for corporations to make unlimited contributions to politicians anonymously... oh wait...

It's pushing cost down to the independent consumer, ones that are engaged as a group, either through an employer or the public exchanges aren't paying more. In fact, the majority of the added cost is for benefits that are required under the law that they weren't receiving before. They're paying more because they are getting more. It's like saying the cost of a cheeseburger went up 60%, because you are now legally required to purchase a drink and fries. The cheeseburger isn't more expensive, you're just buying more stuff. I don't agree that those benefits should be forced on them at their own expense, though.

We pay more though deductibles.... My deductible have gone up from 750 to 1200 dollars. You cant just look and say OH PREMIUMS WENT DOWN THAT IS AWESOME! It's irrelevant if you deductible is high.

Low and zero deductible plans are available as they always were. Your plan changed, the prices changed. Shared risk is the only way that those costs go down, that's the point of the individual mandate.

Again, I think it's the wrong way to do it, but that's the reason and mechanics of how and why it DOES work.

Have you looked at the before and after cost of low and zero deductibles?

I agree shared cost is the reason cost go down, I am saying that the cost so far shows no signs of real decrease.

When a company's profit margin is capped by law, and their consumer base is going to increase substantially, they are going to take a big slice right off the bat. Better to have to return those profits than not make them, right?

I'm a steadfast opponent of ACA as it currently is, and I'm more than happy to discuss it's shortcomings, so long as we are discussing the actual law and it's mechanics and not some hyped up strawman demonization of it.

I pay more than most for health insurance for me and my wife, and I'm looking optimistically at the exchanges. My employer offers a high deductible plan and a zero deductible plan. Most people take the high deductible plan and some couple it with an HSA, I have the zero deductible plan and have carried my HSA over as well. But I now pay ~800 bucks a month for 2 young healthy non-smokers with no chronic conditions, no medications, and a low-risk lifestyle. I also pay another 150 per month penalty for her insurance because she has an HMO available through her employer. That's almost a third of my income now going directly to health insurance. Believe me, I'm not happy, but I do understand that the majority of my purchasing group are on high deductible plans and I will likely get a lot of that increase back.

I want to see how the market actually works once it has stabilized before I pass judgement on complex economic mechanics that I don't understand.

How are the profit margins capped?

Under ACA, 80% of the premium is required to be spent on claims or improvements. Anything above that is required to be returned to the consumer either as a rebate or applied toward future premiums. That means the 20% of the premiums are allowed to be profit, clerical, salaries, bonuses, CEO "retreats" to the virgin islands, etc. You would expect that to result in higher premiums and lower deductibles in order to bring in as much cash as possible and ensure that as much of that 80% is spent on claims as possible. After all, 20% of 200 billion is more than 20% of 100 billion. But it is too new and uncertain. Let the market stabilize and see if these prices are a knee-jerk reaction or the norm, then we can go about making changes.

I agree that the market needs to stabilize. However, it will be a balance of maximizing premium gain and using high deductibles to retain as much money as possible.

Hard to say exactly what it will mean. But one thing is certain, the more people who have insurance, the lower our collective healthcare costs will be as providers won't be forced to gouge paying customers to pay for the non-paying ones they are legally required to treat.

The law says they can't profit 80% of the intake like they've been doing. It caps the % at 20.

However it is in theory to be accomodated by an increase in over all customer base and nominal profit margins.

Which would be around 2016-2018 when the penalties for not having health insurance will be 695/adult or 2% of the indivuals income whichever is higher.

By forcing everyone to get insurance it will essentially have the effect of giving the lowest cost provider the largest customer base (because we're thrifty when it comes to forced costs) and the highest nominal profit margin. Of course this will fluctuate due to the adaptative nature of market competition. End of day you will get what you pay for.

I see insurance companies skyrocketing deductibles to maintain as high of profit margin as possible and from the looks of what I have seen of some plans, certain medications no longer applying toward your deductible. We will end up getting less than what we pay for, but that may be an equivalent exchange for the preventative care. MIGHT

Premiums are not solely based on how much an insurance company want to profit. The Medical field will dictate a lot of that cost. even if there is a cap on profit, it doesn't mean there is a cap on cost.

Does anyone know if they have any cap on what people can charge in the actual health field? That is where the reform actually needs to be to make this an actual strong, beneficial bill..

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see this work out, however I don't see it.

The individual mandate is a free market solution to provider cost, but it's yet to be seen if it will actually have an impact. There aren't any caps on what providers are allowed to make as far as I'm aware, but insurance companies will dictate those costs at least to the extent they already do because a provider is worthless if nobody is paying them, and if everyone has insurance, the insurance companies will have the final say on what they are willing to pay for specific procedures.

I meant that in the most cynical way possible.
This article does a pretty good explaining costs for providers and even why we dont have single payer on the table.

The #1 reason for the inflated costs are the insurance companies, their entire business model is taking more money from subscribers then service provided. If they couldn't do that then they would go out of business fast (that would be a good thing BTW). You pay then $1000 over the course of a year, they can only provide you with $500 in medical services. Financially speaking you'd be better off just paying the $500 and pocketing the extra $500.

The above reason is why all inclusive insurance can't ever work, it's always better for you to pay in cash then to pay someone else and have them charge you double.

This is why I'm 100% for MSA's (HSA in the USA). Start when your in your 20's and treat it as a retirement plan. Companies contribute to it also and all contributions are tax deductible (pre-tax dollars). You end up with a high deductible but you can use the money in that account to pay that deductible whenever you have a health issue. If that you end the year with a positive balance in the account it rolls over to the next year, so on and so forth. This way I can save money in my younger years and have a large account ready for when I get older. Also since this is treated as cash payment vs insurance payment you get a significant discount (20~50%) when paying. I now pay all my health bills in cash up front, saved me a ton of money.

Now the bad part of this is that since the money is going into my HSA it's not going to pay for Jassik's diabetes medication or his 2nd triple heart surgery. I'm not covering Zerowone's wife's 3rd pregnancy nor Fumiku's treatments for his lung cancer. I find this all agreeable because I have zero interest in paying for someone else's poor life decisions and inability to responsibility for their future.

I believe there is a cap on HSA contributions, at least tax free contributions. It's not really practical to have ONLY an HSA early on. A single large medical procedure could financially cripple you.

Also, aside from the screws in my back and a bad attitude, I'm in great health, and my sugars, blood pressure, and cholesterol are perfect. I'll lose my mind or get hit by a bus long before you'd ever have to pay for my diabetes meds!

There is no such thing as an HSA-only policy. HSA is a type of High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP). Yearly contributions for 2014 are


Yearly deductibles are


Maximum out of pocket expenses (before insurer must pay everything) are


And that's Aetna though most are similar. The plan is similar to a 401K in that you and your employer contribute to it. Due to it being a HDHP and HSA you get really low premiums as your expected to pay for regular care with your balance. And because your paying cash (most accounts give you a VISA debit card linked to your account) you also get the discount for up front payment.

Again this is something for young people just entering the workforce. The vast majority of health expenses are in the final 10~20 years of your life, usually 60+. I wasn't joking about those things I listed above, cancer treatments, heart surgery's, dialysis, all that is incredibly expensive and statistically effects people nearing the end of their life. The idea is you build up a tax-free large balance over the long term and then use it to reduce the costs of health. It also provides a form of reward for those of us who take our health seriously.

I participate in an HSA, I know it isn't a stand-alone. I would like to see contribution caps lowered and the option to transfer at least a portion of what an employer would pay for insurance to be contributed to a standalone HSA style account like you were talking about.

If you could accrue money quickly in the first few years then dial it back with later life costs in mind, it would make that kind of healthcare plan more appealing and feasible for young people.

Most HSAs I seen are the "use it or lose it" type of plans.

Meaning that you use the money you put into the savings account that year, and if you have any money left, you lose it (I have yet to see where the money goes).

If anyone knows of a plan that doesn't expire, please let me know >.<

OH YEAH!? /gloveslap

This thread is awesome and I demand you acknowledge it!!!


yeah because it isn't going to cost one dime!

unfortunately the tea party forgot to make the case that obamacare shouldn't need any funding because it wasn't supposed to cost anything.

too busy filibustering for no apparent reason I suppose...

Those aren't HSA's those are FSA's. Flexible Spending Accounts where you get a certain amount of money per year to spend and if you don't then you lose it (insurance company keeps it as profit).


The contribution cap isn't just for you but also for your employer's contributions (their putting some in right). You contribute some and your employer should be contributing some with the premiums being low.

Remember insurance isn't "free money". A company is paying that money and it gets it from the money you've already given them, after they take their share for profit. Your healthcare is a liability on their ledgers with your premiums (you and your company's) being assets. This makes it impossible for them to stay in business unless they rip you off in some fashion. All inclusive insurance turns the insurance company into expensive middle men who only serve to collect premiums from you and pay your doctors / hospitals while pocketing a percentage as profit. Just cut out the middle man and pay for things yourself which turns them into emergency nets (what they should be) for catastrophic problems.

Haven't you seen the movie Wall-E!?

Left to our own devises we will all devolve into gelatinous garbage generating monsters. WE NEED HELP!!! FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HELP!!

Save us from ourselves!!!

my hsa is no longer active from an employer standpoint as I've switch to a zero deductible plan, i just carried it over and continue to make contributions. worst case is i am not able to make contributions after this year and pay the taxes and cash it out. though with the drastic change in the way insurance is bought and volatile market, I'm trying to hold onto it as long as possible.

Did your employer tell you they were dropping the HSA (due to low enrollment) and you had to go PPO by Oct. 1st? That's what happened on my end. Now I gotta stay in network and fear gouging by radiologists and anesthesiologists since they aren't PPO.

http://www.gao.gov/products/HRD-87-114BR

not one drunken recorded rant, you *** really let me down this time.

the chinese say we need to get our ***together, guiz.