In a story out this AM we are warned claim cost are expected to increase 80% in Ohio for those with individual policies. In basic math that would correspond to an 80% increase in premiums.
The disparities are striking. By 2017, the estimated increase would be 62 percent for California, about 80 percent for Ohio,"
As if 80% increase in claim cost wasn't bad enough when the Obama admin tried to spin and respond to it, then it really started to get bad:
"The administration questions the design of the study, saying it focused only on one piece of the puzzle and ignored cost relief strategies in the law such as tax credits to help people afford premiums and special payments to insurers who attract an outsize share of the sick. The study also doesn't take into account the potential price-cutting effect of competition in new state insurance markets that will go live on Oct. 1, administration officials said."
First, giving someone a tax credit doesn't mean you spent less; an 80% increase in claim cost is still 80% more being spent, a problem regardless who is paying for it.
OK, so he helped people afford their premiums, when does he start helping the tax payor afford the government's share? $16+ trillion in debt plus 1 trillion deficits, where are our relief strategies?
Then with a closing only a bureaucrat/politician could muster, "price-cutting effect of competition," what the heck is that? Under Obamacare, individuals are spending tax-payor money and get to complete a 22 page application with a 60+ page instruction manual. Currently they make one phone call to a broker, maybe complete a 3-6 page app and the broker does all the work for them. The market just got infinitely more difficult and when the final buying decision is made they are spending someone else's money and they expect spending to go down?
"Having said that," Foster added, "actuaries tend to be financially conservative, so the various assumptions might be more inclined to consider what might go wrong than to anticipate that everything will work beautifully."
Really? When has a Medicare spending projection ever been overly conservative? When government has a 48 year track record of complete failure when it comes to running healthcare plans I think it is more than fair to say they have not been conservative enough.
Rabu, 27 Maret 2013
Langganan:
Posting Komentar (Atom)
Recent Posts
Popular Posts
-
For those in the path of Hurricane/TS Sandy (and/or for those who may face other severe weather conditions) the Insurance Information Instit...
-
So it appears that women "of a certain age" may well benefit from not one, but two shots of the good stuff: " A glass or two...
-
I've always subscribed to the conventional wisdom that emptying a full bladder as soon as (practically) possible was always the "wa...
-
HHS Secretary Shecantbeserious may be relaxing some privacy rules: " The Department of Health and Human Services says patients should h...
-
Nina Kallen hosts this week's outstanding collection of risk-related posts , with a twist: she's nicknamed this edition "the...
-
■ First the bad news. From the Annals of the Much Vaunted National Health System© comes this alarming development: " Almost half of Bri...
-
HHS is spending $700 million of YOUR money to teach you something your parents did not. In an effort to save Obamacare the government is hop...
-
An overarching theme here at IB has been that health care costs drive health insurance costs. While this may seem obvious to us, it bears ...
-
FoIB Michael Cannon , the Cato Institute's Director of Health Policy Studies, alerts us to this outstanding video that perfectly illustr...
-
It amazes me how often I see comments like this from Jodi Kantor of the NY Times: " By summer 2009, with the country still stunned by e...
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar