Posted on 05/22/2015 10:55:38 AM PDT by ThethoughtsofGreg
While premium filings aren’t expected from the federal government until next month, a report from The Wall Street Journal released Thursday provides a snapshot of preliminary 2016 rate filings from health insurance market leaders in 11 states. The figures represent average increases in premiums proposed by the largest carriers in each state that has made requests public.
A separate report from the Associated Press notes that the largest carrier in South Dakota has proposed a 42.9 percent increase in premiums in the individual market. Increases are subject to review by the states and will be finalized in the fall.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanlegislator.org ...
Probably the states that have had the lowest premiums are getting clobbered.
Joe Wilson had it right.
Obammy lied.
I have no sympathy for those who support Obamacare, no matter how much harm they suffer from this immoral law. Anyone accepting federal subsidies who sees 40% and more increases in their medical bills deserves to suffer. Those who are willing to use government force to steal from those who produced that wealth deserve to lose whatever this terrible law costs them.
Natural consequences of government theft are our only hope for repealing this terrible law. Repeal is our only hope for restoring medical progress. I pray daily for this law to die, and if we cannot trust the Supreme Court to do their job properly, we have to count on market forces to prove Obamacare so terrible that even democrats will admit the obvious truth.
that giant sucking sound you hear ...
Actually, no. No one who works to retirement (as opposed to social security disability), not even those who live to 100, will collect more than a trivial return on their social security payments (adjusted for inflation and the present value of a future stream of payments). It's not socialism to accept that rare small return on an involuntary savings plan, and I don't see any logic in the comparison.
not so. Those paying in the minimum get many times back their contributions. SS is extremely socialized or progressive. Look at the SS calculations - there are 3 tiers. The lowest tier uses 90% of the amount paid in, the 2nd uses 32%, the last 15%. Then, there is a minimum payment that if one’s AIME is below a certain indexed number, they get the minimum payment no matter how little they paid in. And of course, the linger one lives the more they collect.
You are completely ignoring the calculations and facts. I find a lit of conservatives, especially those collecting SS refuse to see what a ponzi scheme SS is. If you were right, it wouldn’t be bankrupt. No wonder politicians are afraid to touch it.
I only did the numbers for my own income, and I lose a lot on social security. Adjusted for present value, I’d still lose even if I lived to age 100.
And they're still going broke.
Yes, you probably are, because you are a hardworking conservative!
I started looking into it because my husband was adamant he’d work until 67 to ‘max out his Social Security.’ I found out he’s only maxing out his payments in, not what he receives! Those that work the hardest and pay the most in get the least return on their dollar.
So I started looking at what l’d get and it made no sense. I only worked 1/3 of the number of years he did, and made about the same amount he did for those first years - but would get 1/2 of his SS payment. So for working 3 times as long and paying in much more in those latter years due to promotions, he only netted a 100% increase over my measly contribution.
So I looked at the real calculations to get the story, not just the online calculators. That minimum payment showed up. AND one spouse is also eligible for half of their spouse’s payment - even if they never paid in a penny. Those two giveaways affect a lot of people!
Sorry to make you madder about the unfairness of SS on such a beautiful day! This, along with an unethical boss and a job dealing with the fascism if big government, convinced hubby to go Galt.
Looks like we’re meeting in different threads!
Sorry to sound like I’m lecturing you. We pretty much agree. I’ve just spent a lot of time looking at the calculations of SS and Obamacare- maybe to get myself even more irate, LOL! So I like to pass along what
l’ve discovered because the truth is even worse than I thought.
Oops, sorry, I thought we were chatting on another thread too.
It gets even crazier. If you are married for at least ten years, even if you divorce, the surviving spouse gets the deceased spouses social security if it is higher.
So a guy who marries a bride who isn’t even a citizen and is married to her for at least ten years gets his social security. I think if he had two wives, one divorced and one still alive and married to him, BOTH wives get his social security - even if neither of them paid in a dime.
When social security was first enacted it was supposed to be a safety net, not a pension. It was supposed to be voluntary too.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that rule too. There are SO many add-ons that are breaking the bank.
So in this day and age, it’s not even far fetched that a man that married 4 times in his life, each for 10 years, could be making the government pay out FIVE social security payments.
My step-dad, who is 83 now, said when he first started working the SS payment was 1/2%! Can you imagine? And then it grew and grew, out of control. Isn’t there a quote about nothing has longevity like a government program? Good example here. Obamacare will be next - as if that could get any worse!
Thanks for the reminder ;(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.