There are no choices after January,Tatin. Open enrollment ends Jan. 31.
I read an article this morning that confirmed North Carolina’s premiums (and therfore subsidies) are 3rd highest in the nation, behind only Alaska and (for some strange reason) Wyoming. They can’t seem to figure out why North Carolina is so high.
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/business/article118956598.html
Before ACA, professional groups were able to cherrypick healthy individuals and sell them insurance that had caps, leaving sick individuals out in the cold. Now all people on the individual market have access to the same insurance at the same price. Opinions vary about whether this is more fair, or less fair.
Some people believe that a person who was born with type I diabetes, or got cancer when they were 11, deserves to pay more or to not be able to get insurance at all, while people who aren’t sick should be rewarded by paying less. Others disagree.
Before ACA a husband and wife could qualify as a small group. These small groups were aggregated into a big group. All benefits of group coverage we extended to these small family units. Group plans did not have any preexisting condition exclusions.
The ACA has made it so that H and W can no longer be considered a group for health insurance purposes. One has to have a non-family member who receives W2 wages. The ACA threw these small businesses - who were much to busy just making it all work to be great political activists - under the proverbial ’ we have to buff up the individual market’ bus.
Sigh. The solution to all of these problems is just so obvious.
And what were those benefits of group coverage? How were they obtained? Why are those benefits not available in individual plans, which, after all, are bigger groups?
I was referring to Jan. 20, not Jan. 31… But I don’t want to close the thread.
I want a catastrophic only plan. I will hop on it if something like that is offered.
Nothing is going to happen on Jan 20 which will give you new options, Tatin. That’s 3 years down the road, last I heard.
How catastrophic is catastrophic?
There are policies now available with $5000 deductibles. Let’s say the definition of a catastrophic policy is a $15K deductible. I regret to say, the difference in cost between a policy with a $5K deductible and a policy with a $15K deductible is small.
If you were willing to buy a catastrophic policy with a $100K deductible, you’d get real savings. But for most people, the catastrophe arrives much sooner than $100K.
Of course, one might save on super-catastrophic plans ($100k deductible) because of adverse selection. People wouldn’t buy a policy with a $100K deductible unless they were pretty sure they weren’t going to incur $100K of costs. I personally find nothing admirable about seeking and searching ways to not cover the costs of sick people.
One can disguise it this way and that way-- group plans, catastrophic plans, whatever. But if your goal is to do nothing about high health care costs for sick people except make sure you don’t have to pay them, well, that is not a goal I admire.
Insurance company wants and lobbying activities :
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/business/health-insurers-obamacare-republicans.html
^^ Here’s a summary:
[Insurance Industry OK With Repealing Obamacare As Long As We Don’t Actually Repeal Obamacare](Insurance Industry OK With Repealing Obamacare As Long As We Don’t Actually Repeal Obamacare – Mother Jones)
Also, the Medicare plan proposed by the incoming powers-that-be is exceedingly strange, considering that the incoming powers-that-be detest Obamacare so much:
Sure sounds like Obamacare to me, except that it’s better for consumers in a couple of particulars (access to traditional Medicare; increased subsidy for sicker recipients). So the guaranteed issue/individual mandate/marketplace framework which is a complete “disaster” for the individual market will somehow be just perfect for vulnerable seniors. Maybe you repeal-and-replace fans could explain that to me.
^ There is a reason it sounds just like ACA.
I think people who have individual health insurance plans need to really start saving their money bigly - as it looks very possible there will be no insurance companies willing to sell in the Indy market after the delay part comes into play.
Well, it is rather too late to “start saving money bigly” if one is already in the situation of being in the individual market (or will be in the near future), unless one has already been doing so for a while or is at Wall Street plutocrat levels of income and wealth.
“Well, it is rather too late to “start saving money bigly” if one is already in the situation of being in the individual market (or will be in the near future), unless one has already been doing so for a while or is at Wall Street plutocrat levels of income and wealth.”
Well, they are going to have to pay for 100% of their health care when there is no individual market anymore. If not for starting to save immediately and saving a lot, how are they going to be able to pay for their medical needs?
For many people, there may be no realistic way to self pay if they get some expensive medical condition in the next decade or few.
I think eb knows that, ucbalum. She was making the point that if Obamacare is repealed, but implementation is delayed, it’s very possible there will be zero insurers in the individual market for the interim. Meaning that people who don’t have insurance through work will have no insurance at all until a (probably inferior) replacement is implemented. That in turn means little or no medical care for tens of millions of people, since you’re correct that most people cannot possibly pay out of pocket for complicated medical treatments. In fact – we on CC tend to forget this – millions of people can’t afford even the most basic medical care, including routine exams and preventive care.
Can’t save what you don’t have.
Re: #576
Yes, that is exactly what I was saying. The only point of disagreement is that I wrote that it is unrealistic that most people can save enough starting now to be able to self-insure large medical expenses that may occur in the next few years, unless they have already been doing so for years or have Wall Street plutocrat level income and wealth.
Exactly, ucb, although even decades of savings could be wiped out with one illness, especially when you consider that most of the people who’ve been helped by Obamacare aren’t exactly rich folks in the first place and, as LF points out, have little or nothing to save after basic living expenses. The plutocrats are going to be OK no matter what; I don’t worry much about them.