<p>Do you have any data to support the statement “most states”? </p>
<p>I agree that in some states the premiums are higher, and in some states they are lower - I just haven’t seen any sort of state-by-state list or analysis.</p>
<p>Here’s a list with average ACA premium rates in all states, but it doesn’t have comparative figures from before (so hard to know whether it’s up or down in a given state):
[The</a> 50 States of Obamacare - Yahoo Finance](<a href=“http://finance.yahoo.com/news/50-states-obamacare-113318311.html]The”>http://finance.yahoo.com/news/50-states-obamacare-113318311.html)</p>
<p>[For</a> Congress, healthcare plans remain a notch above - latimes.com](<a href=“For Congress, healthcare plans remain a notch above”>For Congress, healthcare plans remain a notch above)</p>
<p>“He said a number of members he had spoken with were experiencing “sticker shock” at their new rates and benefits.”</p>
<p>“Many of the members were shocked at how much out-of-pocket costs they were going to need to assume,” he said. “It’s really the personal understanding of the fact that members of Congress have had a really sweet deal for a really long time.”</p>
<p>If you read the article, you will see they still have a sweet deal compared to their constituents in the new individual market.</p>
<p>“I haven’t talked to that many people who aren’t covered by their employers, but of the few I have, in every case their premium (unsubsidized) is going down, and their coverage (in theory) improving.”</p>
<p>I agree with you; you haven’t talked to that many people who aren’t covered by their employers.</p>
<p>I just asked my roommate what her experience was. She is a regional manager at a national fast food restaurant and is covered on an employer’s plan. Apparently, their rates are staying the same but the coverage is expanding (for example, they now have prescription coverage). Her employees (the ones working in the restaurant) do not qualify for insurance through the company and apparently most of them are uninsured. She says they’re about half and half about whether or not they’ll be getting a plan through the exchange (they would all qualify for hefty subsidies). She also said it’s almost exclusively along gender lines- women want coverage, men don’t. This doesn’t surprise me but I thought it was interesting. (Anecdotal- not offering it as evidence of anything.)</p>
<p>"She also said it’s almost exclusively along gender lines- women want coverage, men don’t. This doesn’t surprise me but I thought it was interesting.</p>
<p>That is interesting. I wonder why. Probably need to go to the thread about how men’s and women’s brains are wired differently to find out. Perhaps women like to plan more into the future? More worried about the what ifs? Or just a small group of people, too few to generalize about.</p>
<p>Not sure, bd. I almost wonder if it has to do with the fact that these are all women of childbearing age, who have had friends go through childbirth, and know how grossly expensive it is. </p>
<p>If I had to take a guess though it’s because we raise men to think that they’re strong and invincible (much more so than women). This is generally why young people don’t get insurance- right? They think they’re invincible? I suspect men are more representative in this category. </p>
<p>Total 100% shot in the dark.</p>
<p>Or young women are more used to getting regular medical care, because they need contraception and pap smears, and some will be thinking of pregnancy.</p>
<p>But I suspect that a lot of young men’s mothers will be urging their sons to get coverage, especially if it’s cheap, as it will be in the case of young restaurant workers.</p>
<p>Also a very good point, CF. </p>
<p>In my state, which does not provide any state programs to childless adults, there is a program called Plan First! for women which covers basic family planning for women and female gynecological services. Nothing similar for men.</p>
<p>I found this… wish I could find a better breakdown (ie the uninsured rate of childless young adults): [Uninsured</a> Rates for the Nonelderly by Gender | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation](<a href=“http://kff.org/uninsured/state-indicator/rate-by-gender/]Uninsured”>http://kff.org/uninsured/state-indicator/rate-by-gender/)</p>
<p>I’ve brought this up before – (in posts where I said that I thought that young women would want health care). I think it is largely because women tend to be regular consumers of health care from puberty onward. I don’t know what the fashion is these days, but when I was young we women also tended to choose a gynecologist as our primary caregiver. (I won’t get too graphic, but I’d say that in my experience, about 90% of the health care needs were in some way related to hormones, hormonal cycles, and the functioning of female organs).</p>
<p>It is curious. I wonder what these young people would say.</p>
<p>I personally would not have gotten health care just for women’s issues, would have just gone to PP and not worried about it. Now that I’m older, I couldn’t imagine going without.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why so skeptical? </p>
<p>Most docs I know are reluctant to take on the role of a social worker or insurance broker. And as a legal matter, it’s doubtful a doctor’s failure to inform a patient about insurance options would rise to the level of “negligence”; that’s just not within the scope of the doctor’s duties, which are medical in nature. In fact, I would think a doc would more likely be held liable if he started making recommendations on medical insurance and those recommendations weren’t fully informed.</p>
<p>As for people with pre-existing conditions getting no care, I’m sure it happens all the time. A pre-existing condition could be something as simple as obesity/overweight, underweight, high blood pressure, or elevated blood glucose (whether or not diagnosed as diabetes). I’m sure people were denied insurance coverage all the time for such conditions and didn’t seek medical treatment, ignoring warnings that, untreated, such conditions could lead to stroke, heart attack, kidney failure, blindness, amputations, and on and on. It’s often only when the “warning signs” develop into the full-blown serious diseases that medical insurers wanted to avoid paying for that such people end up in the medical system.</p>
<p>According to the Centers for Disease Control, about 1/3 of adult Americans have hypertension, but only half of those are taking active steps to manage it. No doubt that includes a lot of people with health insurance who are not taking their medical condition seriously. But it surely also includes tens of thousands who were denied medical insurance and are clueless about what alternatives might have been available to them, at least in states like Minnesota that operated large state high-risk pools.</p>
<p>Well, it’s broader than just the gynecological. When I was a teenager, I asked my mom to take me to a dermatologist to help with my acne-- a generation later, my daughter also made an appointment with her doctor to discuss that issue. My son’s acne was much worse than we ever had, but he had no interest whatsoever in talking to a doctor or doing anything about it. This is just anecdotal of course, but it seems to me that a lot of guys will shrug off issues that women find more distressing.</p>
<p>I made my son use Proactive. Its 19.99.</p>
<p>If I stayed with BCBS, my plan would change and the rates go down- looks like $20-30/month. In the new plan, deductible goes up a bit, OOP comes down, as do Rx costs. Comparable enough.</p>
<p>My bigger question is still the exchange HSA with lower cost, ded and cap, versus the next more expensive plan with flat fees for doc visits and ER, higher ded and cap. More about that another time. I have a sit down with the exchange, later this week.</p>
<p>ps. my young neighbor’s pre-existing condition was that she sees a psychologist once every 3-4 weeks. That pushed her into a higher rate category. No other physical conditions.</p>
<p>Good article in the NY Times about hospital costs, including extensive focus on California Pacific in San Francisco (which I referenced in [post</a> 6129](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/16643880-post6129.html]post”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/16643880-post6129.html): </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/health/as-hospital-costs-soar-single-stitch-tops-500.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/health/as-hospital-costs-soar-single-stitch-tops-500.html</a></p>
<p>^ That’s interesting to me, cal </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My recent gall bladder removal came out to a lovely 35k (hospital bills). The “amount approved” (or what BCBS believes is reasonable to charge) came out to $0 for most of the billing categories. Hmm… :rolleyes:</p>
<p>^wow. I feel pretty lucky that my gb removal was “only” 13k. Perhaps that was BCBS’s “discount” rate 
Then again, that was 2 years ago…maybe the internists have all gotten a raise :)</p>
<p>Cartera, the Maryland phenom fascinates me. Are there detractors/any clear downsides to the system? Following maryland’s example would sooooo resolve the narrowing network issue…but it makes me wonder, what’s the catch? Why haven’t other states followed suit? </p>
<p>And Romani, mcson just checked the UMS system because our local doc is MIA (leave of absence and we actually suspect its AcA inspired as he was a major opponent.) I don’t think you’ll have any problems network-wise with BCBS, at least from his calls to date.</p>
<p>And re gender divide and healthcare…I think its because women tend to outlive men and don’t want a legacy of medical bills :)</p>
<p>Calmom, that link from the NY Times…WOW!!!</p>
<p>It is pretty clear that the free market does not work in the medical field. The consumer gets the shaft. I am not a socialist but in the medical field, competitors buy each other up until there is no competition. Hospitals buy each other. Insurance companies buy each other. Economies of scale do not apply. After mergers, prices rise.</p>
<p>Sutter is going into the HMO business starting in Sacramento. Then they can control the hospitals and the insurance. Great win for Sutter. </p>
<p>I hope those with employer health insurance coverage read calmom’s link from the NYTimes. You guys are going to be affected… Big time.</p>
<p>UC Berkeley dropped 2 local hospitals. It wasnt because of ACA. It was because of Pricing.</p>
<p>Charity care is so low. </p>
<p><a href=“http://mobile.nytimes.com/images/100000002582125/2013/12/03/health/as-hospital-costs-soar-single-stitch-tops-500.html?from=health[/url]”>http://mobile.nytimes.com/images/100000002582125/2013/12/03/health/as-hospital-costs-soar-single-stitch-tops-500.html?from=health</a>
While society is arguing about Obamacare, society is getting RIPPED OFF.</p>
<p>bclintock,</p>
<p>Wow, that is sad if doctors are “afraid” or unwilling to inform their sick patients about the existence of high risk pools that might allow them to get life-saving care. </p>
<p>As for sick people who refuse to seek out care for themselves, no amount of marketing or subsidized programs can force them to go to the doctor.</p>