Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mine will drop by about 20% and I get co-insurance rate that is 1/2-1/3 of my current employer plan depending on which plan I choose. And that is another thing: I have over 110 plans to choose from versus the one size fits all that my former employer offers retirees. This graphic is just bogus cherry picking of rates. We have been over this a hundred times, but you can't compare a plan that was not worth the paper it was printed on in terms of coverage to even the lowest tier of bronze coverage. Furthermore, it is ironic and hilarious that this chart was produced by the Heritage Foundation which also is the source of the Obamacare model in the first place. People need to quit looking at these politically motivated "comparisons" and go on the exchange or to eheathinsurance and find out what the rate will be for their circumstances and the level of risk they are willing to assume. Also, 85% of workers already have health insurance and these rates do not apply to them unless, like me, they can get a better deal on the exchanges than they can from their employer.
The amusing thing about Obamacare is -- the Ingrate in Chief is screwing the young more than anyone else. And the under 40's are the idiots who voted for him in the majority:
My co-workers with familiy coverage were paying over $600 a month for their mid-level coverage. Depends on the state. Also, more and more states are shifting the premiums to the teachers and staff.
The chart is BS too. In my area, a 25 yo pays $195 per month for a $0 deductible, $2000 maximum out of pocket, 20% coinsurance, $10 generics policy BEFORE ANY SUBSIDIES. It costs an old furt like myself $596 for the same coverage.
The cheapest policy for a 25yo is $133 and the catastrophic (but no subsidy with this) is $100. Which brings up an important point: the top level of platinum coverage is not all that much more than the cheapest bronze policy on a percentage basis.
This paper is meant to provide a necessary segue to HHS’s data summary, creating an apples-to-apples comparison of exchange data to what the costs are for individuals.
OK - "apples-to-apples comparison" - I like that. But I'm not finding it.
And:
Quote:
This comparison is different from others in that, rather than comparing specific plans, it is designed to capture the difference in premium levels between the exchange and what could be acquired in the market.
This I don't understand. If you don't look at specific plans, then what exactly makes up the "premium levels" noted above? Where do the numbers associated with the "premium levels" come from? Are they an average?
For example, the first group is adults age 27. We know that adults age 27 have a number of choices available to them via Obamacare: different levels of coverage (bronze, silver, gold), different types of plans (HMO, fee-for service, etc.), and so on. And I'm assuming that such individuals, purchasing health insurance coverage on the open market, would also have options to look at with regard to the type of plan, the coverage, and the cost.
So again, I come back to ... where are the numbers in the chart coming from, and what do they represent? There's no way of telling if what is being compared is the most expensive plan in Obamacare with the cheapest plan on the open market, or vice versa. And the article's section on methodology includes none of these details.
1. Not knowing what the plans are that are being compared makes the comparison meaningless.
2. Ignoring the impact of subsidies on the bottom-line cost of some of the Obamacare plans also makes the comparison meaningless.
3. This could have been a useful analysis. It's not.
The amusing thing about Obamacare is -- the Ingrate in Chief is screwing the young more than anyone else. And the under 40's are the idiots who voted for him in the majority:
My co.provided pre-medicare coverage has stayed the same cost since 2010. This year I received a credit the last 2 months of this year(2013) for a little over $700 due to lower costs Thanks ACA.
I don't believe anything coming out of the Heritage Foundation especially since their chart shows my average premium (Texas family of 4) going from $599 to $776 - but Healthcare.gov is offering me $402 for Bronze and $570 for Silver. (before tax credits), Heritage also forgets that most people are eligible for tax credits to reduce their premiums on both exchange and non exchange plans.
Looks like it goes down in New York, New Jersey, and Oregon goes up from very little to still very little in cost. Works for me, looks like ACA is a win for me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
