Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

  • (14 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »

205 Replies - 6680 Views - Last Post: 09 November 2013 - 09:04 AM

#1 farrell2k  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon

Reputation: 849
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,585
  • Joined: 29-July 11

Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 12:07 AM

We Americans are only two days away from "Socialism" with the Federal healthcare exchanges (Obamacare) set to open on Monday, October 1st. I have an interest in this, and am excited to see how it all works out in the coming year. My state, PA, being Republican controlled, obviously declined the medicaid expansion under the law and will not be creating its own exchange, so we Pennsylvanians are relying on the Federal government exchange for our state. The good new is that prices estimates are in and it looks like we're going to be paying some of the lowest prices in the nation, around $282 per month for a family of four earning $50k/yr for the silver plan, which I think is a 30/70 coinsurance plan. I assume that price is after any subsidies.

So, how is your state doing? Did you set up a state exchange, and how are prices looking?

Is This A Good Question/Topic? 0
  • +

Replies To: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

#2 Lemur  Icon User is offline

  • Pragmatism over Dogma
  • member icon


Reputation: 1372
  • View blog
  • Posts: 3,472
  • Joined: 28-November 09

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 12:42 PM

Considering my place of work prides itself on reinventing healthcare, they've matched or made a better offer than whatever government plan is available. It does give a sense of warm fuzzies though knowing that the code we work on is improving healthcare.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#3 NecroWinter  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular

Reputation: 37
  • View blog
  • Posts: 320
  • Joined: 21-October 11

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 02:36 PM

I still want a public option.
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#4 farrell2k  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon

Reputation: 849
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,585
  • Joined: 29-July 11

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 03:10 PM

View PostNecroWinter, on 28 September 2013 - 09:36 PM, said:

I still want a public option.


Yep. Me too. The great thing about the public option is that it was an option. There was no individual mandate.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#5 rgfirefly24  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon


Reputation: 267
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,477
  • Joined: 07-April 08

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 04:19 PM

I'm getting screwed by this entire thing. My health insurance is taking yet another 10% leap after taking a 10% leap in February and is scheduled to make an even bigger jump next October, and It is all thanks to the mandates of the new Health Care laws. I am currently trying to get my employer to look into either a private health care exchange or SHOP so that maybe I can get cheaper insurance. Currently I pay ~750 a month for a family of 4 with 30 dollar co-pay for doctors/250 for hospital and 1k Deductible. Unless by some miracle prices start to come down I'm projected to pay between 900-950 a month starting in October of 2014. If it wasn't for the fact that I had a family to think about I'd drop my insurance all together and pay the penalty.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#6 macosxnerd101  Icon User is offline

  • Self-Trained Economist
  • member icon




Reputation: 10596
  • View blog
  • Posts: 39,259
  • Joined: 27-December 08

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 04:47 PM

My dad is a small business owner. I'm pretty sure insurance premiums for the employees (those that are young enough to be on the plan) jumped 10%, and that was only because my dad signed up early. Otherwise, if he had waited until the end of the cycle to renew, it would have gone up 30% due to Obamacare. He shopped it as well. I'm not a fan on that front.

Also, there is an article on some of the impacts of Obamacare. The sparknotes version is that Obamacare relies on healthy young men staying in the public system to balance things out. That same demographic is staying on their parents' plans for longer, which is affecting the parents' employers negatively and driving up the costs of the premiums.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#7 farrell2k  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon

Reputation: 849
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,585
  • Joined: 29-July 11

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 06:13 PM

View Postrgfirefly24, on 28 September 2013 - 11:19 PM, said:

I'm getting screwed by this entire thing. My health insurance is taking yet another 10% leap after taking a 10% leap in February and is scheduled to make an even bigger jump next October, and It is all thanks to the mandates of the new Health Care laws.


Yeah, it sucks, but it's not all because of the mandates. Health care costs have been rising every year, regardless. Blaming it all on Obamacare is disingenuous. The individual mandate is a terrible Republican idea from the 90s that should never have been implemented. The public option would have been the second best thing to do, behind Medicare for all, but Republicans whined and moaned about how private insurers would not be able to compete with it (which is a good thing in my eyes), so we got the individual mandate instead.

I am not a fan of employer health benefits. Why should your employer shoulder the burden of being in the health care business just because it chooses to do business in the United States? If I were an employer of < 50 workers, I'd immediately stop offering any health care benefits and force my employees to the public exchanges where a family of four can still get subsidies with an income of $94k. It's probably cheaper for them, and would definitely benefit me.

@Mac, health insurance has always relied on the young and healthy subsidizing the sick. Same for any insurance, really. Good drivers subsidize the bad ones, until their insurance companies decide they're too expensive to keep.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#8 no2pencil  Icon User is online

  • Admiral Fancy Pants
  • member icon

Reputation: 5358
  • View blog
  • Posts: 27,315
  • Joined: 10-May 07

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 08:53 PM

My understanding is that it requires 100+ employees, so small (very small) businesses are not effected.

I didn't figure you (farrell2k) would be against Socialism & Obama Care as you were for higher minimum wage.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#9 farrell2k  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon

Reputation: 849
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,585
  • Joined: 29-July 11

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 10:44 PM

View Postno2pencil, on 29 September 2013 - 03:53 AM, said:

My understanding is that it requires 100+ employees, so small (very small) businesses are not effected.

I didn't figure you (farrell2k) would be against Socialism & Obama Care as you were for higher minimum wage.


Well, I don't consider it Socialism, and I am not against it, but I was a supporter of the public option. "Teh Socialism" was all tongue-in-cheek. That being said, we need a lot more of what those on the right in the U.S. call Socialism...

This post has been edited by farrell2k: 28 September 2013 - 10:45 PM

Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#10 macosxnerd101  Icon User is offline

  • Self-Trained Economist
  • member icon




Reputation: 10596
  • View blog
  • Posts: 39,259
  • Joined: 27-December 08

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 28 September 2013 - 10:48 PM

Quote

@Mac, health insurance has always relied on the young and healthy subsidizing the sick. Same for any insurance, really. Good drivers subsidize the bad ones, until their insurance companies decide they're too expensive to keep.

My point was that many of these young, healthy people (particularly males) are being allowed to stay on their parents' plans. It's a more appealing option than the exchanges, which causes the exchange premiums to be higher (because of this Obamacare mandate). The article and my last post talked about some of the impacts of this. It seems a bit like the bill is working against itself.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#11 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is online

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7807
  • View blog
  • Posts: 13,204
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 29 September 2013 - 12:05 AM

It does amaze me that one of the biggest forced transfers of funds from citizens to private enterprise in the history of mankind is being objected to as "socialism". I mean, this is right in the anarchists' wheelhouse. This is what they love most of all: take your money and give it to their donors. The only reason they're complaining about it is because they know it's going to pass and they want to make some hay while the sun is shining. They're getting their way, and they also get to bitch about Obama, while he's doing their work for them? Great!

I'm still baffled as to why we don't just implement the known solution. I mean, we have people today going from America to Poland to get medical work done. Poland, of all places, can do this better than we can, and for less money. That alone should tell you that we can't afford to keep diverting American paychecks into insurance company bank accounts any more. That isn't working, and it won't work, and doing more of it won't help. We know what works, and we need to do that, and if the anarchists whine about it, we need to tell them to get stuffed, learn to do some math, and go to hell until they can be Americans for a change.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#12 farrell2k  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon

Reputation: 849
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,585
  • Joined: 29-July 11

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 29 September 2013 - 02:04 AM

View Postjon.kiparsky, on 29 September 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

It does amaze me that one of the biggest forced transfers of funds from citizens to private enterprise in the history of mankind is being objected to as "socialism". I mean, this is right in the anarchists' wheelhouse. This is what they love most of all: take your money and give it to their donors. The only reason they're complaining about it is because they know it's going to pass and they want to make some hay while the sun is shining. They're getting their way, and they also get to bitch about Obama, while he's doing their work for them? Great!

I'm still baffled as to why we don't just implement the known solution. I mean, we have people today going from America to Poland to get medical work done. Poland, of all places, can do this better than we can, and for less money. That alone should tell you that we can't afford to keep diverting American paychecks into insurance company bank accounts any more. That isn't working, and it won't work, and doing more of it won't help. We know what works, and we need to do that, and if the anarchists whine about it, we need to tell them to get stuffed, learn to do some math, and go to hell until they can be Americans for a change.


You can't even mention single payer, Jon. It's like gun control, evil....
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#13 rgfirefly24  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon


Reputation: 267
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,477
  • Joined: 07-April 08

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 29 September 2013 - 09:55 AM

View Postfarrell2k, on 28 September 2013 - 08:13 PM, said:

Yeah, it sucks, but it's not all because of the mandates. Health care costs have been rising every year, regardless. Blaming it all on Obamacare is disingenuous.


The 10% leap it took in Feb was the standard inflation jump. This 10% jump is because like mac's father my employer opted to take an early renewal to fend off a major (Non-inflation based) hike in rates as long as they can. You can't honestly sit there and tell me that this new jump and the scheduled jump hanging over us for next October is not the direct result of the health care laws.

View Postfarrell2k, on 28 September 2013 - 08:13 PM, said:

I am not a fan of employer health benefits. Why should your employer shoulder the burden of being in the health care business just because it chooses to do business in the United States?


I actually partially agree with you here. I like the fact that my employer offers health care. What I wish they would do instead of forcing just two overpriced plans on us is give us a stipend like more then a few employers are currently doing. This then gives me the ability to shop around and get a better deal while still getting the benefit of employer paid insurance.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#14 farrell2k  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon

Reputation: 849
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,585
  • Joined: 29-July 11

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 29 September 2013 - 10:30 AM

View Postrgfirefly24, on 29 September 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

View Postfarrell2k, on 28 September 2013 - 08:13 PM, said:

Yeah, it sucks, but it's not all because of the mandates. Health care costs have been rising every year, regardless. Blaming it all on Obamacare is disingenuous.


The 10% leap it took in Feb was the standard inflation jump. This 10% jump is because like mac's father my employer opted to take an early renewal to fend off a major (Non-inflation based) hike in rates as long as they can. You can't honestly sit there and tell me that this new jump and the scheduled jump hanging over us for next October is not the direct result of the health care laws.



W don't know. It's just speculation to assume that the increases are due to the new health care law, seeing as the law isn't even in affect yet. WellPoint raised their premiums by 40% in 2009, a full year before Obamacare was even a twinkle in Barry's eye.

The one thing we know for sure that raises health insurance prices is plain old capitalism, the profit motive. Public companies are under pressure to make more money next quarter than they did last. The easiest way to do this is to ration care and increase prices, something insurers have been doing for more than 20 years, so I don't really buy that Obamacare is the reason for cost increases.
Was This Post Helpful? 2
  • +
  • -

#15 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is online

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7807
  • View blog
  • Posts: 13,204
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Teh "Socialism" is upon us...

Posted 29 September 2013 - 11:11 AM

*
POPULAR

View Postfarrell2k, on 29 September 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

Ww don't know. It's just speculation to assume that the increases are due to the new health care law, seeing as the law isn't even in affect yet. WellPoint raised their premiums by 40% in 2009, a full year before Obamacare was even a twinkle in Barry's eye.


Ten years ago I was a Teamster working in a TPA servicing insurance plans for unions in Portland. Health insurance prices were going up in huge leaps, and we had a hell of a time negotiating contracts that kept our staff covered without sacrificing on pay, hours, and benefits. This is not new.

Quote

The one thing we know for sure that raises health insurance prices is plain old capitalism, the profit motive. Public companies are under pressure to make more money next quarter than they did last. The easiest way to do this is to ration care and increase prices, something insurers have been doing for more than 20 years, so I don't really buy that Obamacare is the reason for cost increases.


There's more subtle forces as well. An unsurance company, by definition, is an enterprise that maintains a huge pile of ready money in order to make their payouts. Whenever you have a huge pile of ready money, you have an opportunity to make interest. This interest is actually a part of their profits, so they have a strong incentive to keep hold of that cash as long as possible. Slow claim payouts are not accidental, and they're not incompetence, they're part of the business model.

Also, an insurance company makes money when people buy insurance - this is obvious. How do people decide to buy insurance? If they're rational, they will consider, among other things, the cost of paying for health care out of pocket versus through a package deal. If out of pocket price go up, insurance plans look more attractive. Insurance companies are the largest players in the health care market: they buy in bulk, so they have the ability to negotiate from a position of strength. Another consideration is the simple ability to raise the cash to pay the bill: even if the out-of-pocket is the lower price, if you can't get hold of that out-of-pocket then you need insurance to cover it. Insurance companies are also in the interesting position where they negotiate the price, and they deliver the money, but they don't actually pay the bills. (you do, in the end) So putting all of this together, insurance companies have the motivation and the ability to raise health care prices. In fact, since they are in the business of "maximizing shareholder value", they have a positive duty to see to it that health care prices are as high as possible.

This is a massive case of perverse incentives at work: rising health care prices are exactly what you expect under a system of private insurers.

EDIT: "unsurance"? The best typo of the week, I'm leaving it.

This post has been edited by jon.kiparsky: 29 September 2013 - 11:12 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 5
  • +
  • -

  • (14 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »