Posted on 12/09/2013 7:29:02 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
In the latest in the Paper of Record’s recent series on their gradually creeping realization that There Is No Such Thing as a Free Lunch: ObamaCare Edition, the NYT has a story out this morning that hones in on the Obama administration’s desire to tout premiums that sound as gloriously low as is humanly possible — even if that means deliberately obfuscating the ways in which insurance companies are now looking to make up the increased costs of the overhaul in other, less immediately obvious areas.
The Obama administration will herald what appear to be “affordable” premiums available to so many lucky Americans through ObamaCare all day long, “but as consumers” [and, evidently, the NYT] “dig into the details, they are finding that the deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs are often much higher than what is typical in employer-sponsored health plans.” There’s plenty of cushion on behalf of ObamaCare in the piece, but the overriding message I’m reading is that ObamaCare is not the wondrous and automatic cost-saving measure officials are touting it as, and that a lot of people, if they’re ineligible for ObamaCare’s more blatantly redistributive effects, are going to have to pay for all of the added “benefits” they now have no choice but to include in their plans somehow:
Until now, it was almost impossible for people using the federal health care website to see the deductible amounts, which consumers pay before coverage kicks in. But federal officials finally relented last week and added a “window shopping” feature that displays data on deductibles.
For policies offered in the federal exchange, as in many states, the annual deductible often tops $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a couple. …
Mark A. York, a 60-year-old freelance writer in Hailey, Idaho, said he began shopping after he received a letter saying that his current insurance policy would be canceled because it did not meet the requirements of the health care law. In the exchange, he said, he found policies with premiums similar to what he is now paying, $440 a month, but “the deductibles were so high — $4,000 to $6,000 a year — that it defeats the purpose of having insurance.” …
Federal officials often point to premiums as evidence that the health care law has made insurance affordable. “Nearly six in 10 uninsured Americans can pay less than $100 a month for coverage in the health insurance marketplace,” Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, has said.
Except that those miraculously low premiums aren’t really much of a favor if they’re accompanied by much higher deductibles, co-payments, and drastically limited provider networks, are they? There’s been a sizable and obviously deliberate lack of straightforwardness going on with this law, and those aren’t the only hidden and/or “unexpected” costs that consumers might now find themselves facing, as the WSJ reported the other day:
Americans with chronic illnesses—who are expected to be among the biggest beneficiaries of the health law—face widely varying out-of-pocket drug costs that could be obscured on the new insurance exchanges.
Under the law, patients can’t be denied coverage due to existing conditions or charged higher rates than healthier peers. The law also sets an annual out-of-pocket maximum of up to $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families, after which insurers pay the full tab.
But depending on the coverage they select, some patients on expensive drug regimens could reach that level fast. Some medications for conditions including hepatitis, rheumatoid arthritis, HIV and cancer can retail for thousands of dollars a month, and some plans require patients to pay as much as 50% of the cost.
Well, another possibility is that the Obama-ites who wrote the law just took the cost-shifting too damn far in one fell swoop. You can only pluck so much off the goose before it squawks.
TANSTAAFL!
Dont forget the few #s of doctors in network.
Obama said they would offer affordable premiums, not that the insurance would actually pay your medical bills.
But dont forget the free birth control and no pre-existing conditions. No longer can insurance companies take your Obamacare away. No lifetime caps.
When does that start?
Right now they are crying out for Dems to be recalled,
Where's the polls saying Americans trust Dems to impose single payer?
And that penalty money is money that is coming out of the private sector so the economy will slow even more. The Opportunity Costs on Obamacare are horrific. The Democrat party - A culture of lying, thievery, death and incompetence.
So the ACA was based on the premise that it is possible to allow people who didn’t have any health insurance, let alone health insurance that paid most of their health-care expenses, to get such insurance; that people with high expected health costs could have others pay them; that monetary costs of health insurance would go down; and that no one else with prior insurance arrangements would have to give up anything. I suppose this was supposed to come out of some magic box full of outrageous insurance-company profits and “administrative waste.” How did we get to be such a credulous country?
Why would single payer system lower costs?
I can show reasons why the costs would be much higher.
So you think the Democrats care about lowering costs?
You really need to add "economic ignorance" to your laundry list of Demo-lib attributes.
Single payer is about controlling your life, it's not about costs and it's sure as hell not about healthcare.
I'm not sure who said it but they were absolutely right: our forefathers would've been shooting long before where we are now.
CC
Both parties don't care about lowering costs. The Reps (Paul Ryan) are about to cut a deal with the Dems that eliminates the sequester spending cuts. Both parties support big government, big spending, and big taxes. They just use different language to disguise what they want.
Even a single payer plan won’t change the economy of the situation. You can’t add 40 million people, tons of new benefits, and waivers galore without it affecting the costs.
Zeke told us, though, that you CAN keep your doctor.
You’ll just have to pay a whole lot more.
“cost” has to be defined.
Obama is just responding to his corporate paymasters, the same ones who are pushing amnesty and this:
Obama Faces Backlash Over New Corporate Powers In Secret Trade Deal
Even if we went to single payer, the insurance companies would still profit. For example, nine out of ten Medicare (single payer system) recipients have supplemental insurance.
So the gays get socked hard by Obamacare?
Oh Dear...
“How did we get to be such a credulous country?”
We’ve been Kardashianed.
If you argue with the people on the left side of the Bell Curve (Democrats and leftists) they are not prone to using logic and reason. They just want their free stuff.
I saw that. It was amazing.
He called that capitalism, if you want the good doctor that you had before then you must pay through the nose for him under Obamacare.
He said that no one said we would have an unlimited choice of doctors, that apparently includes our own
He clearly communicates that Americans are stupid for having such expectations that Obama gave them with his promises.
Zeke is a gift to the GOP, how can they miss such slow easy pitches.
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.