*******ACA Commentary******* (parties, health care, premium, Obama)
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.
Insurance increased due to the requirements of the ACA and what they must cover and whom (high risk).
My part of the premiums (21% employee conribution, as it has always been and is still) went from $240. to $465 a month.
Who pays $12.00!?!
Just to add another tidbit.
Another consequence of the ACA jacking up rate even if you have employer coverage is this
If you have dependents. And your employer premiums went up 93%. Even if they subsidize you 79%.
They may subsidize your dependents 50%? 30%? Worst case is offer your dependents coverage with 0% subsidy. Regardless you will feel major effect. Cause your monthly premiums snowball even more the more mouths you have to feed.
Even if you make less than 400% of poverty you cAnnot qualify for subsides on the exchanges just because your employer doesn't cover enough of your kids premiums.
My premium difference is a 93.7% increase with the same exact plan as this year.
That is with my employer paying the same 79% of it that they have paid every year.
Tit for tat we break even.
$1000 x 79% = $790 (rather generous)
$1939 x 79% = $1415 (quite a bit better than tit for tat)
Quote:
Where are all of the news reports of the dancing in the streets?
Everyone is too busy looking at the fine print for the errors...
and/or getting out of the way of the other shoe that hasn't fallen yet.
$1000 x 79% = $790 (rather generous)
$1939 x 79% = $1415 (quite a bit better than tit for tat)
Everyone is too busy looking at the fine print for the errors...
and/or getting out of the way of the other shoe that hasn't fallen yet.
Something does not sound right here. The old policy was below what typical employer polices cost. The new one is in solid platinum territory. Something is not passing the sniff test here.
Last edited by Ponderosa; 11-20-2013 at 06:24 AM..
To most American's, those numbers are nowhere near "affordable."
Then you had better start getting behind socialized medicine. Medical costs are enormous and insuring against them is going to be expensive, especially with a profit oriented insurance system. There is no free lunch here. I have been paying more for health insurance than my mortgage or cars for several years - about $15000 per year. I guess people who have employers picking it up for them had no idea until now what it actually costs.
"As he told the President, Mier says anyone self-employed and those with pre-existing conditions owe it to themselves to check out Obamacare."
That's a quote from the article.
I've stated numberous times why did Obama have to change the entire system over a very small (probably 1-3 million ) on the individual insurance market. It would hAve a lot less headache addressing those without access to affordable care on the individual market as opposed to making all these vast manadates.
So Obama ends up making 50% plus of the people angry by really trying help 1-3 million with pre existing conditions on the individual market. He can raise taxes to pay for expanded medicaid. But the mandate of essential benefits on everyone is where he went way too far.
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.
