This diary - more of a question - was inspired by this comment:
"The individual insurance market is still quite tiny. And in any given state, the number of people receiving subsidies is quite small compared to those on employer provided insurance.
In a few weeks we will know how ACA has affected that employer provided market. Even sooner in my case. We are supposed to be having a meeting on health insurance this Friday. The scuttlebutt is premiums are going up.
For companies with a young, healthy employee base, premiums will be going up a LOT. A friend of ours who works at a company with mostly younger workers says theirs went up 51% and the management had to pass on 25% of the premium to the employees for the first time in their history. Employees were not happy."
by JJ in Illinois
I want to have an honest discussion about this. Now, for the record, I am on the individual marketplace and have been for a quarter of a century - ACA has been a blessing for me.
But I'm very concerned about a couple of points that have been raised here and would like to get some information from people who know this stuff better than I. If you're one of those very informed folks, or someone who's just curious and concerned, like I am, then please follow me below.
Two things in particular are bothering me about ACA: the effect on employer-based insurance and the undecipherable deductible morass.
For the first, see the quoted post above. I don't understand the logic behind these increases, if there really are massive increases coming to employer plans. From everything I've read, the cost-curve is bending favorably regarding health care costs, so if this is true, I see only 2 possible reasons:
1. Employers were getting ridiculously cheap deals and won't get those anymore.
2. Employer plans in question were crap and must be updated.
or, if I may:
3. Employers are using ACA as an excuse to stick it further to their employees. I doubt this is the case in many instances, but perhaps in those anecdotal ones we're hearing about?
On the second, "deductibles" apparently can mean several different things. I've had large deductibles on my insurance for many years, but they DON'T MEAN that I have to pay them before I get any benefits.
These deductibles are for certain procedures, hospitalization, etc. I still go to my doctor with no co-pay, or a minor co-pay. I still get my colonoscopy or my wife's mammogram with no co-pay, paid for by my insurance company. If I needed a second procedure, my deductible might apply, however.
Those deductibles, by the way LOOK more imposing than they often are. For those who don't get subsidies, a $2,500 deductible means about $200/month that you're not paying on top of your insurance bill UNLESS you need it, so for someone in a good financial position, the Bronze Plans seem by far the best choice.
Also, I have heard that deductibles ARE SUBJECT to subsidies as well. Big ones.
So can we have an honest discussion about these two important issues, please? If the first, the quoted comment, is correct, then this could be a huge political problem and also could be very counterproductive to what we're hoping to achieve 9and detrimental to the working/middle class).
The second looks to e very much like more insurance company money-grubbing shenanigans, using confusing language to herd the masses into a corner of maximum insurance company profit. If so, the Feds MUST ACT to clear up the confusion and break down the fence rails.