Medical premiums on the rise - per architect of Obamacare

Fred Bear wrote: And that's just the tip of the iceberg.....the plans to dramatically increase government spending are in place....supposedly to help spur on the economy. WHEN HAS THAT EVER WORKED?

It got us out of the great depression, and government spending on WWII really spurred the economy....so yeah, it has worked in the past.

archer wrote:

Fred Bear wrote: And that's just the tip of the iceberg.....the plans to dramatically increase government spending are in place....supposedly to help spur on the economy. WHEN HAS THAT EVER WORKED?

It got us out of the great depression, and government spending on WWII really spurred the economy....so yeah, it has worked in the past.

OK, let's start another war then (not entirely serious here)? We've already had a couple and what good did that do? The government spending on the stimulus clearly failed to obtain anywhere near what the Obama administration projected. And I saw a couple of articles today saying it will take until 2018 things to improve, not that it really will. Can we still blame Bush after 10 years of failed programs?

Even in 2018, that would barely bring the deficit into a range that credit-rating firms view as tolerable, for the US to maintain a strong rating on its public debts. It would leave the nation vulnerable if the economic performance doesn't match Mr. Obama's expectations over the next few years, or if, as many forecasters expect, the cost of health-care entitlements grow quickly after 2018, as the baby-boom retirement wave gathers momentum.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/0213/Does-Obama-blueprint-reduce-budget-deficit-fast-enough-video

And I predict the cost of the health care bill will contine to go way over what the Obama administration projected. That's just my opinion, and we'll see (I think sooner rather than later).

You can guess all you want what it would of been otherwise. But it's just a guess as well. Unless you have evidence to support what you said which I'd be willing to consider.

pineinthegrass wrote: And I predict the cost of the health care bill will contine to go way over what the Obama administration projected. That's just my opinion, and we'll see (I think sooner rather than later).

You can guess all you want what it would of been otherwise. But it's just a guess as well. Unless you have evidence to support what you said which I'd be willing to consider.

That was basically my point....thanks for reinforcing it. We don't know how much, or how little, health insurance premiums would be going up without the healthcare reform, so how can anyone claim that the reform isn't working? I haven't been able to find any study or source that has delved into the numbers, so I asked where the information came from to back the claim that Obama's healthcare reform was raising health insurance premiums beyond what they would have gone up normally. I think we all know that those premiums have been rising steadily for years.

archer wrote: We don't know how much, or how little, health insurance premiums would be going up without the healthcare reform, so how can anyone claim that the reform isn't working?

Or is.

archer wrote:

pineinthegrass wrote: And I predict the cost of the health care bill will contine to go way over what the Obama administration projected. That's just my opinion, and we'll see (I think sooner rather than later).

You can guess all you want what it would of been otherwise. But it's just a guess as well. Unless you have evidence to support what you said which I'd be willing to consider.

That was basically my point....thanks for reinforcing it. We don't know how much, or how little, health insurance premiums would be going up without the healthcare reform, so how can anyone claim that the reform isn't working? I haven't been able to find any study or source that has delved into the numbers, so I asked where the information came from to back the claim that Obama's healthcare reform was raising health insurance premiums beyond what they would have gone up normally. I think we all know that those premiums have been rising steadily for years.

So we spend near a trillion dollars each for the stimulus and the health care bill and have no idea what good it does?

My problem is the Democrats are basically in denial of the issue. They won't address the problems with Social Security and Medicare costs exploding, and as I said I'm convinced the costs of the health care bill will also go way over what was predicted.

I'm not a Republican, but at least they have other ideas to consider. Bush's Medicare drug plan was irresponsible in that it was not funded (neither was Obama's stimulus, so far as I know). But at least seniors got something very popular with the Medicare drug plan where unemployment continued to rise under Obama's plan.

The Dems predicted few insurance companies would sign up for it, and that costs would be way over projections. But the fact is the Medicare Part D plan has exceeded all expectations (other than it wasn't funded). We used to hear all kinds of talk about seniors having to get Canadian drugs, and that's much more quiet now. Many insurance companies have signed up and the plan has cost much less than projected.

The idea was to make insurance companies compete with each other to qualify for that specific plan. Yes, insurance companies compete now, but their plans are all over the map, and many policies are near useless.

Based on the Part D plan, it seems the competition is working to reduce cost. Ryan's proposal for Medicare is based on this. Yes, it involves vouchers and having to make decisons for seniors. But Medicare has already had the requirement of making decisions for many years. You have to decide if you want Part B, Medigap policies, Medicare Advantage policies, Part D policies, etc.

Anyway, something has to be done. I'm not saying the Repubs have the answer. But I don't see anything at all from the Dems.

Ryan doesn't have a clue about how the health insurance industry works. he wants to give seniors vouchers to buy their own health insurance. OK......how much do you think it would cost for a 70 year old man with cancer and heart disease to get a policy? Considering that at the time I went on medicare my own insurance was $12000/year.....I suspect that a decent policy that covered what medicare does now on the open market would be about $20,000/year, if you could get a company to even write you a policy. So what? you want the government to dictate what the insurance company can charge for a senior's policy? Should the government require them to provide a senior a policy even with pre-existing conditions? Will the government forbid the insurance companies from dropping seniors who get sick? If you are going to need so much government intervention into the health insurance for seniors, maybe it would be better for the government to do it itself.....voila! medicare.

Oh...and part D is a joke. It needs reform....badly. the insurance companies were handed a gift with that legislation, and now they are making huge profits on it.....but seniors are getting the short end of it. Even with the promised help with the "donut hole" expenses (who's bright idea was that?) more and more expense is being passed onto seniors....this year my co-pay for 2 of my meds went from $43 to $63....that's a pretty hefty increase....I would change to a different plan, but another med is covered better by this company than most of the others. It is so needlessly complicated that most seniors just pick one and stick with it....and the insurance companies count on that.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

archer wrote: This is awful....medical insurance premiums never went up before these reforms.....did they?

President Obama said “As a consequence of the Affordable Care Act, premiums are going to be lower than they would be otherwise; health care costs overall are going to be lower than they would be otherwise.”

He lied... period. Oh I know... "and a President has never lied before"?

GOPtwin, I don't think any thinking person actually believed that this program was going to bring down costs. It is literally impossible. Could it have a net positive effect, it could, but I also don't think so. Any govt program costs more money, that is what they do, they take money and spend it. Anti murder programs in a city don't save money either, they save lives. A health insurance mandate wont save money, it will get people more insurance, perhaps not even more care.

My point is that this is not news and anyone who believed it is just ignorant of basic math....but on the topic of math, your weak point. and those that lie. . . . there is a difference between being wrong and telling a lie. If Obama believes what he says then he is wrong, just like much of the stuff you post here (not this one IMO, but much other stuff). Like when you calcultaed something that should have been around 10 as 0.09, and then asserted it again, you were wrong, you did not lie. Now if I had said you lied, I would look about as silly as you now. You called yourself out as a writer, and I feel, as a non professional writier (makes me a reader), that pro writers should be able to choose their words better, use better writing to make their point vs. shock like a novice like me.

But in principal I agree, we don't need to take more of the money that Americans already don't have because of all the other mandated uses of our money we cannot do without. I personally predict the country is going to have a massive setback financially as 100,000's of workers are fired or have their pay reduced to cover these costs.....

....because.....as I have said many times and it can barely be argued....

.....the only people that really ever pay for anything is customers and employees, not companies and owners unless they fail....and since we will be emptying the wallets of the customers, this will fall and hit employment (which I hear is not good these days for those depending on bosses for jobs and survival, ouch)....and then a few weeks/months after it his employment, what few customers there were left, will be limited again.

If you think about it, right now it is very important to either be weathy or more realistically sell products and services to the wealthy, because poor and average folk spending is going to plummet. Does the industry you work in serve the average man and woman, then this health care program puts your survival at risk. We are all so worried about the primary consequences, it is the 2ndary, tertiary etc. we need to worry about....for most of you that is you not doing well in the future and your kids downright suffering, and agian though I disagree with most of how he goes about things, GOPtwin is right on this one, and correct. He just did not lie, he had too much faith (anyone else?). Interestingly enough, just like the last 5 years, the economic downturn that will come of this program will greatly reduce incomes, which greatly reduces taxes unless rates are jacked. So when taxes go down, we need to reduce other govt programs and so we are also going to be trading this health insurance mandate for other programs that already exist, it would be wise to start now in deciding what we are going to give up so that we can pay the health insurance companies more by mandate. And since we have a fed govt that cannot decide anything, esp budget related, we can now look forward to much time being wasted on this question, what else to cut, no don't cut anything, hey they had riots in greece when the govt did this so I predict that this health care program gets us more rioting....which then will give GOPtwin so much to post about because rioters will actually act the way that he thinks OWS acts. Then I have to respond to him and thus we really need to stop this health insurance program for the health of 285bound. The cascading consequences are endless.

Want more novice advice, since most of you don't invest locally and when you can, send your money to wall street....the consequence of the health insurance mandate will hit wall street based on the perameters above. Essentially, sell Wallmart and buy some company that serves fancy people...or if you really want to make a difference invest your retirement locally, but that is nuts, right?

archer wrote:

Fred Bear wrote: And that's just the tip of the iceberg.....the plans to dramatically increase government spending are in place....supposedly to help spur on the economy. WHEN HAS THAT EVER WORKED?

It got us out of the great depression, and government spending on WWII really spurred the economy....so yeah, it has worked in the past.

Out of control social program spending didn't help lift Greece out of recession. In fact, the economy is now in tatters and people are rioting. Of course, the cost of health insurance was going to rise, obamacare added so many extra demands to policies.

archer wrote: Ryan doesn't have a clue about how the health insurance industry works. he wants to give seniors vouchers to buy their own health insurance. OK......how much do you think it would cost for a 70 year old man with cancer and heart disease to get a policy? Considering that at the time I went on medicare my own insurance was $12000/year.....I suspect that a decent policy that covered what medicare does now on the open market would be about $20,000/year, if you could get a company to even write you a policy. So what? you want the government to dictate what the insurance company can charge for a senior's policy? Should the government require them to provide a senior a policy even with pre-existing conditions? Will the government forbid the insurance companies from dropping seniors who get sick? If you are going to need so much government intervention into the health insurance for seniors, maybe it would be better for the government to do it itself.....voila! medicare.

Oh...and part D is a joke. It needs reform....badly. the insurance companies were handed a gift with that legislation, and now they are making huge profits on it.....but seniors are getting the short end of it. Even with the promised help with the "donut hole" expenses (who's bright idea was that?) more and more expense is being passed onto seniors....this year my co-pay for 2 of my meds went from $43 to $63....that's a pretty hefty increase....I would change to a different plan, but another med is covered better by this company than most of the others. It is so needlessly complicated that most seniors just pick one and stick with it....and the insurance companies count on that.

Everything you said about Ryan's proposal also applies to Obama's health care plan. Just change the age of 70 to a person 60-64 (or even younger in many cases). Those policies are hugely expensive too. They may also have pre-existing conditions. Insurance companies won't be allowed to drop people who get sick under Obama's plan either. Why do you think Obama's plan will work but Ryan's won't? The main issue I saw with Ryan's plan was that cost increases were not indexed the same as now, but the idea was costs wouldn't increase as much as now due to the competition among insurance companies similar to what's happened with Part D. And again, Part D has cost much less than projected. If you have data to prove otherwise, please inform me.

But yes, either way costs will continue to escalate. But the fact is with Part D you are far better of with it than you were before. And a donut hole is not a unique concept among Republicans. I've seen Dems propose one (not officially as a party) for Social Security payments. And Obama's own budget proposal has a donut hole of sorts where he proposes millionaires pay an effective 30% tax rate. Why does that kick in all of a sudden (not that I'm against taxing the wealthy more in tough times, but the "Buffet" rule is pure politics)?

popcorn eater wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

archer wrote: This is awful....medical insurance premiums never went up before these reforms.....did they?

President Obama said “As a consequence of the Affordable Care Act, premiums are going to be lower than they would be otherwise; health care costs overall are going to be lower than they would be otherwise.”

He lied... period. Oh I know... "and a President has never lied before"?

GOPtwin, I don't think any thinking person actually believed that this program was going to bring down costs.

[snip]

My point is that this is not news and anyone who believed it is just ignorant of basic math....but on the topic of math, your weak point. and those that lie. . . .

[snip]

How in the hell can you claim that I am weak on math? Did I post any "math" from myself? If anyone is weak on math, it's the President, his advisors who penned the foundations of the health care bill, the Democrats who build out the body of the health care bill and Pelosi, Ried and Obama who presented this wonderful unicorn to the public. Maybe I'm wrong claiming that the President lied. As Pelosi said "we'll know what's in the bill after we pass it" (paraphrase).

I shouldn't have attributed lying to the administration, I should have said they were all f'king stupid.