<p>^ true, but not in all states…maybe the states should have been more proactive.</p>
<p>If they have all those mandates in California, I’m not surprised the ACA is working better there than in most other states.</p>
<p>The insurance companies are carnival hucksters. They will do what you let them do. And they aren’t going to offer the old plans at the old rates. </p>
<p>I expect to be offered my old plan at my new rate. :p</p>
<p>Individual plans in my state are terrible and I can’t wait until January 1st so that I can finally choose a plan that covers pre-existing conditions, medications, and maternity care. I hope that the “fix” announced by the president doesn’t give the insurance companies a way out of the ACA’s requirements. I do not know what individual plans are offered in California or any other states. But as for my state, the plans only make sense for healthy people.</p>
<p>Your post is a fantasy GP. Dont you read other posters? You didnt read Bclintonk’s post yesterday? Bclintonk is pretty darn bright.
My daughter works in the health insurance industry as you know. I have another relative who works in the industry. Policies are changed all the time. This occured pre-ACA. What you want is a fantasy. I am sorry but what you want is not going to happen. </p>
<p>My friend has a precondition. His premium was around 10800 a year. He has a heart murmur. :)</p>
<p>I think it can be argued that most people would keep their plans if they didnt qualify for subsidies AND their rates did not go up dramatically. </p>
<p>Originally you wrote 99 percent would keep their plans without a qualifier. Then you added
without subsidies. You need to add a rate hike qualifier too. Maybe a precondition qualifier. ;)</p>
<p>I am just having fun, but I am pretty sure I can bet with you and then take your side of the bet with somebody else while betting on a lower number than 99%. I would be partially hedged with you while having the potential to win both bets ;)</p>
<p>99 percent is a big number. </p>
<p>I dont really like to gamble.</p>
<p>My sister pays $1800/month in premium just for her and her H in New York. She thinks she will save about $600/month by going on the exchange for a similar plan. Very much looking forward to paying less.</p>
<p>I just talked to my Dd ( 28- year old,California) who said she hopes that whatever fixes they do that she’ll be able to keep her new plan. So there’s another one who is happy with the change. She doesn’t qualify for subsidies. </p>
<p>She will have to pay a bit more- about $40 a month, I believe. But, she’ll have benefits that will more than make up for the difference because the Silver plans allow you to visit the doctor for $45 a month, unlimited, without having to deal with the deductible. Her previous cheap plan allowed only two wellness visits before everything has to be applied to the deductible. Both deductibles were large, but if you can visit a doctor for a gyn visit, an antibiotic for an infection, a pain you don’t understand, etc., without having to pay the guaranteed $150 -200 visit fee because you haven’t reached your deductible, that’s a deal. She’s one of the healthy young people who will be paying more in their premiums, but expects it to even out in the end, and some years she’ll come out ahead. Also, her old plan didn’t cover mental health, where her new one does, should she need it.</p>
<p>As a parent, I like it because I’m tired of telling her “she should see someone about that” and her telling me that she already used “her two free visits.”</p>
<p>I like lerkin’s post and frugaldoctor’s post. </p>
<p>The posts are real…
And now there is moonchild’s and emilybee’s.</p>
<p>I am loud. GP, you are loud. You arent listening to those that benefit. There are more people that are going to benefit. Those that benefit are just a little quieter…</p>
<p>I’ll say this. If I can get my old policy back with the same network, I would jump at the chance. The super narrow network issue with the ACA plans offered in my state is my number one complaint. Yes, it cost more for the ACA plan but at this point, I’m willing to pick my battles and the network is my #1 issue.</p>
<p>Some insurers got out of the market. The fix will do nothing for their customers.</p>
<p>“My friend has a precondition. His premium was around 10800 a year. He has a heart murmur”</p>
<p>I think you said this friend has a wife. Where is he going to get an unsubsidized ACA plan for equal or less than this? How old is he?</p>
<p>Never included subsidized people in my bet. Since people are not always rational, I may want to lower the 99% number.</p>
<p>South bel. I think everyone agrees about the network issue. That’s one of the more challenging aspects of this.</p>
<p>poetgrl - I pray that’s the case. I checked out these EPOs they’re offering, initially thinking they were like PPOs. HA! Anything but. I know y’all are aware of my issue so I’m absolutely praying this gets me back the good network I had before.</p>
<p>ETA: There is that one PPO offered in my state. So there’s that. Yeah, count me in the camp that wants to have my old coverage back.</p>
<p>poetgrl, in Ca., insurers can’t drop sick people. They also can’t raise your premium because of your health status.</p>
<p>GP, you are misreading a lot of people. I know your rate hike stinks. I never said it didnt. </p>
<p>The 10800 was just for him.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know you weren’t specifically talking about my Dd here, but what’s not rational about her choice? There must be a lot of young people who had really crummy cheap plans who now can go to the doc when they need to instead of thinking it’s just too expensive and not worth it. For my Dd, there’s a big difference in $45 to see a doc about a problem compared to $150, which is about what doc’s in LA charge just for walking in the door.
And there’s almost always a follow-up apt. or two. You can make up that extra $480 a year really easily- especially if you’re a young woman.</p>
<p>Southbel, there are probably people out there who pay no attention to the provider network. It’s just not important to them. I’m with you: it is the single most important aspect of the plan other than the premium. An insurance plan with a very limited network is a pig in a poke.</p>
<p>Unless I’m missing something this so-called fix seems more like blame-shifting than fixing.</p>
<p>Moonchild, I am not familiar with silver plans. Is the deductible waived for all doctor visits or just preventative care (wellness) visits? In my existing plan, the deductible is waived for preventative care. I would refer you to my last post regarding my problems with ACA plans</p>
<p>GP- I do agree that the provider network situation is a problem. It was my major issue, and it would be if I were looking for insurance right now as I’m older and I have docs that I like and trust. I think younger people are less concerned about the networks because they don’t have established relationships unless they have had previous medical issues.
I brought up this issue when my Dd was scouting plans, and the one doc she has seen for a few issues is supposedly on her plan. She seems to feel that living in LA, she shouldn’t have to drive too far to find someone decent for other things when she needs them. Whether that’s true remains to be seen, but it would concern me if she had a lot of medical issues.
Doctors do need patients, so some of this will have to shake out as time goes on. I expect the networks to expand gradually as insurers, hospitals and doctors work out agreements.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>$40 a month is $480 a year. Let’s say that a doctor visit is $165 and she now gets them for a $45 copay. So she would have to go to the doctor at least five times each year to come out ahead on her new plan. If she goes to the doctor less than five times a year, she would be better off on the old plan saving $480 a year in premiums.</p>