Skip to comments.Insurers predict 100%-400% Obamacare rate explosion
Posted on 05/13/2013 7:02:31 PM PDT by Nachum
Internal cost estimates from 17 of the nation´s largest insurance companies indicate that health insurance premiums will grow an average of 100 percent under Obamacare, and that some will soar more than 400 percent, crushing the administration´s goal of affordability. New regulations, policies, taxes, fees and mandates are the reason for the unexpected "rate shock," according to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which released a report Monday based on internal documents provided by the insurance companies. The 17 companies include Aetna, Blue Cross Blue Shield and
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Thanks Barry! You da man! Now KMA!!!
Actually it’s more like, “Planned” rate shock.
I thought this was the plan, creating a “hugh” and cry for single payer.
All according to plan. Federal government to the rescue. There will be no repeal. Just more taxes and less money for other functions of government. America is dying.
All part of the plan..
The Rats will blame GOP Congressional obstructionism and Republican governors. They will then offer full government, single payer, health care to save the day and 2014 will be the battleground to see if the big lie and destruction of US health care will be a winning election strategy.
That’s why they call ‘em Useful Idiots, ‘cause you can plan on stupidity.
especially the pregnant woman target
Single payer, then single provider since most private hospitals will be put out of business by that single payer.
That's all that matters.
Is this the old spike or a brand new one? /s
The whole law is a death to private heath care by a thousand small slices. A slow, suffering death
We got notice today from HR to expect 104-116% increase...
In a sane world, this would mean politcal death at mid-terms.
It is what a majority of voters said they wanted.
It's gonna create Henry Bowmans.
My Aetna EPO plan for myself, wife and one child is $16,800 per year. That’s through my employer. Last year it was $11,000 and the year before that it was $8500. And now it is not 100% it is 90/10. I went for the “cheap” PPO; that’s only $8,000 a year and it’s 80/20.
Just gets better and better.
I was always doubtful of the claims which were made that simply covering the formerly un-covered would achieve great savings through getting people to stop making emergency room visits for removal of splinters or treatment of the common cold. The other component of justification was that covering everyone would give great benefits to the system as a whole, since folks with chronic and largely avoidable long terms problems (e.g., diabetes) are much cheaper to treat preventatively (e.g., $2,000/year for $40 years, vs. 150K/year for last 4 years of life.) These arguments are intuitively appealing, but may not hold in application. In fact I doubt they will. There is a vast uninsured population today, which, given free or heavily subsidized health care tomorrow, will consume an enormous amount of it. Which will drive costs through the roof.
No Republicans voted for Obamacare. They need to resist the temptation to make corrections or mid-course fixes on this disaster. Let it crash and burn, and make sure you say “I told you so!” This needs to be a painful object lesson to the low information voters.
>> 100%-400% Obamacare rate explosion
Nice going, ya’ Marxist douche bag.
And the IRS will play a huge roll in all of this.
I don’t know who I hate more, Obama or John Roberts on the SCOTUS.
I have never understood the math on this. 100% is 1... If your premium is 1000, then 1000*1 is still 1000. If they mean it will double, why don’t they just say that, or 204% - 216%?
I get that they say it is increasing by that much, it just seems as though it would be more succinct to say that your premiums will be 2.04 to 2.16 times greater than they are now.
Maybe I’m looking at this the wrong way...
I hear your cynicism, but rat voters had no idea that the liberal congress critters they love and trust, would put a plan in place that would raise their health care rates 100 - 400%.
The Dems and Obama sold them on the idea that this act would make their health care more affordable. Now they get to "see what's in it", and boy, are they going to be pissed.
new_premium = old_premium + (old_premium * percent_growth)
$16000 = $8000 + ($8000 * X)
$8000 = $8000 * X
1 or 100% = X
I get the way you state it and what is meant, I guess it seems an imprecise way to state it. I still think it would be much easier to state an increase of 2X (old premium is 8,000, new premium is x2 or 8,000*2= 16,000) - after all, it is at least doubling.
Does this also mean that an increase of 400% would then mean an 8,000 policy would actually now be 40,000 (8,000 + (8,000*4))?
That would be more simply stated as “new premiums will be 2-5 times greater than they currently are”.
Like I said, this might just be a funny hang-up of mine as to how things of this nature are stated and the intent of the statement.
Affordable health care means it will cost absolutely the most you can possibly afford except for those who get horrible care for free.
DIMocRAT voters deserve every bad consequence they get. Bwaaaaaahahaha! Morons.
No doubt! I also get that the operative word in the equation is increase, I just don't like the method of conveyance I guess - again, it's my hang-up.
Yes, a 400% increase would be 5 times the original premium.
Or you might say premiums would quintuple. You could state it several ways. More often you use percentages for smaller amounts. If your premium went from $8000 to $10000, you probably use “premiums increased 25%” rather than “premiums increased by 1.25”.
Purely my dislike of the method of conveyance here and the idea that items of this nature are "normally" conveyed by stating smaller increases as a percentage and larger increases (100% and up) as a multiple. What can I say, I'm a bit odd that way, maybe old fashioned in a sense.
“Unexpected.” Where have we heard this before?
Yeah - what do they mean “PREDICT”!!???
Just looked in early 2009 it was $328/mo ($3936/yr) for a family of five, bare bones coverage.
Now it is $1048/mo ($12,576/yr) coverage, still bare bones, high deductible. That’s over 3x as much. Never get to the deductible.
Although we are covered now for abortions, so there’s that.
My husband attended a training session today that talked about Obamacare. He said that employers will no longer have to include spouses in health insurance coverage, just children. Spouses will not be considered to be dependents.
Looks like another way to force moms into the workforce. I am “Grandma on call” and haven’t worked for years. How could I ever find a full-time job with benefits now? This is scary stuff.
Premera Blue Cross currently offers individual plans for 21-year-old non-smokers at a monthly cost of $325, with a deductible of $1,800. In the exchange, that same person in King County could purchase a similar Premera plan with a lower deductible at a rate of $276 a decrease of 15 percent.
Some could face larger increases: A 60-year-old under a LifeWise plan with a $2,500 deductible would pay $674 a month an increase of 29 percent compared to a current LifeWise plan with a similar deductible. However, that person would get added prescription drug coverage under the newer, more expensive plan.
Naturally, I am almost 60 and so will get the "up" rate.
Front door asset search and seizurre by the Bailout Babies of 2008, Aetna is NOT as “health” insurance company, it IS a Life Insurance Company, and all of the so called “financial instruments”.
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.