<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely!!! When I was working for two big companies we would get a printout each year during open enrollment. It listed all the weighted costs associated not only with the HS they were providing me but, in one case, also the cost of the of office space, training, vacation, PTO. It showed my full weighted cost to the company. It was a ‘shut up and sit down’ moment each year. Oh, and that was 18 years ago.</p>
<p>GP, you said "Whether you did anything or not after you were sent this letter, you were INVOLUNTARILY moved from the plan you liked to a plan you didn’t like. " Do you now admit that this was hyperbole, because if you cancelled your insurance, you were not INVOLUNTARILY moved to any plan at all? And if you were able to find another plan that you liked from your old insurer, and chose that plan, you were not INVOLUNTARILY moved to a plan you didn’t like? So there were in fact two things you could do in response to the letter that would result in your not being INVOLUNTARILY moved from the plan you liked to a plan you didn’t like?</p>
<p>Approaching age 60 in New Hampshire: unsubsidized premiums range from $462/mo with a $5,750 deductible (and sizable co-pay even after the deductible) to $760/mo. with a $1,000/year deductible.</p>
<p><a href=“http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-79767546/”>http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-79767546/</a></p>
<p>The rates better be good… </p>
<p>Wow dodgersmom, there is a big difference between Maryland and New Hampshire rates. I am 59 and my unsubsidized premium is $298 a month. For $700 a month, I could get a zero deductible plan. </p>
<p>CF, are you deliberately choosing to not comprehend what I am saying or is there some other problem I am not aware of. I want you to read the next sentence VERY SLOWLY. There were no plans on the individual market that were nearly as good as the plan that was yanked away from me. NONE.</p>
<p>Re the dingleberry who was “INVOLUNTARILY” moved to a different plan by his insurance company: He obviously ignored the notice they sent him last fall which explicitly told him they would do that if he didn’t sign up for something else. </p>
<p>Good news though. He could STILL cancel that and sign up for a plan more to his liking. But he might be one of those people who’d rather grouse about how Obamacare had ruined his life than use Obamacare to improve his situation. </p>
<p>I need to move from NJ. Rates for a 59 year old range from $571 for a Bronze EPO HSA to $1188 for a platinum 0 deductible POS. </p>
<p>Rates in my part of California are about the same… I’m paying ~$680 for a Bronze PPO HS. At age 60, I’d do a lot better if I moved to NY. Based on DStark’s posts, I think I might switch to Kaiser next year. 
</p>
<p>Calmom, your experience may vary. ;)</p>
<p>Minneapolis is the place to be. The cheapest Bronze for a 59-year-old is $235. The most expensive Platinum is $480.</p>
<p>However, I do not live in Minneapolis, but in the SF Bay Area. The cheapest Bronze I could get would be about $500.</p>
<p>I agree that plans were cancelled involuntarily, GP. But apparently you forgot that you said that people were INVOLUNTARILY moved to another plan they didn’t like, no matter what they did. And no amount of capital letters will make that true. People who had been buying super-expensive insurance because they had pre-existing conditions would like their new, cheaper plans better. People who cancelled their plans because they were moving to cheap exchange insurance wouldn’t have been INVOLUNTARILY moved at all, because they wouldn’t have been moved by the insurance company at all.</p>
<p>Some people, but not all people, are unhappy.</p>
<p>Wow…thank you everyone. It is eye opening to see the differences between states. Frankly, our personal situation is such that we were given a 12 month reprieve…get to keep current plan with current rates. Frankly, my decision (as manager for our small group which = H and I ) was to pull the water proof tarp over our heads and hunker down while the storm settles in. I promise to spend some time after the March 31st ‘deadline’ and researching available CA plans and will post the info.</p>
<p>As an aside, the rate differential between States begs the question of WHY!!! The decision to no allow interstate competition was obviously…well…obviously WHAT???</p>
<p>dstark
</p>
<p>Good point…same of course goes for all categories. Good thing the real cost to society is ‘clearly’ shown in documents most will never read nor attempt to evaluate.</p>
<p>BTW…I personally prefer the FAFSA methodology to the CSS-Profile. One could qualify a Pell grant while making 200K + real spendable dollars. (yes, I know real examples and I will not identify specifics because the info is obviously available to anyone who wishes to research the available documents and laws). So, the cost to the student is the cost to the student…and any one who questions the honesty of the given ‘facts’ should just spend the time to research the details…</p>
<p>Ahh…finally we agree on something :)) </p>
<p>Dietz, what good would it do you to buy one of those cheap Minneapolis plans? If you get a heart attack, are you going to go to Minneapolis to get it treated?</p>
<p>Health insurance is cheap in the places where health care is cheap. Why health care is cheap some places and not cheap other places is another question, but those Minneapolis insurers wouldn’t be able to offer the same cheap insurance to Californians if the Californians wanted to be treated in California.</p>
<p>CF:
</p>
<p>Where, exactly from where (and I am not interested in the CBO ‘accounting speak, not for average consumption report’) will the magical $$$ be obtained?</p>
<p>And…if the ACA is a country wide program…why oh why would the rates between Minneapolis and San Francisco differ?</p>
<p>CF: What possible reason is there to not have the entire country in one huge risk pool? I know there are certain things (like what other counties do) which are off limits…but really…why was interstate competition protection kept in place? Butt really, the collective ‘we’ differs much more than other collective ‘we s’ and yet here we are…all thrown into one pool (as far as the law goes) but not in the same pool… Hmmm…separate but equal…yeah…let’s go back to that plan.</p>
<p>Yes… an over whelming YES, CA and MN are different. Our populations are different, our …um…borders…are different…our SES is different…so yes…we are different…But ACA make the same rules for everyone. So, either we are all the same, or we are all different. Either States run their own system based on each of our 50 different needs and wants, or we don’t. But you can’t have one system for all, why saying all are different.</p>
<p>ACA is not a “country wide program” – it is a law that was set up to impose uniform requirements, with flexibility for each state to implement on their own, and preserving the authority of each state to regulate the sale of insurance within its borders. </p>
<p>Calmom: Uniform requirements are country wide…so…it is imposed on each and every State. And, if uniform requirements are imposed on each and every State, pretend to leave authority to each State as far as implementation? (if State A wants to offer plan B which doesn’t include ACA mandated C - it CAN"T) Either States are able to offer plans without coverage 'C" or they are not. If they are not then why not pool all States? Why can’t I - in CA - buy a BS plan from a broker in MN if it makes personal and financial sense?</p>
<p>Dietz, good question. This is a crucial distinction if you want to understand the ACA.</p>
<p>Everybody has to buy insurance. Let’s say you and your entire neighborhood all buy the same insurance policy, and your neighborhood is the entire risk pool for that insurance company. Then the healthy people have to pay more than their health costs, so the sick people don’t have to pay as much as their health costs. In that sense, the healthy people are subsidizing the sick people. That’s how insurance works.</p>
<p>It used to be that the people who were already sick couldn’t buy insurance. Naturally, that made the insurance a lot cheaper for the people who were healthy-- because they didn’t have to subsidize all those sick people. But now, insurers can’t just sell insurance to healthy people. They have to sell it to everyone. And that’s making insurance cost about $1000 more per family per year (or whatever the amount is; I think $1000 is a low estimate).</p>
<p>OK, so that’s the subsidy the healthy pay to the sick. Now let’s turn to premium subsidies.</p>
<p>Everyone is required to have insurance. But we’ve just seen that insurance for a 60-year-old costs $6000 a year in some areas. There’s no way someone who makes $20K a year can afford $6K just for insurance. So we subsidize that person’s insurance premiums. And those subsidies come from general revenues, from all taxpayers, just like, for example, the earned income tax credit or Medicare.</p>
<p>So, your insurance premium is “subsidizing” sick people (if you are lucky enough to be healthy). And all taxpayers are subsidizing low-income people.</p>