boston bean
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 11:08 AM
Original message |
Anthem Blue Cross is allowed to move ahead with rate hikes |
|
State regulators find that the firm's proposal meets the requirement that 70% of premiums go for medical care. As a result, they can't stop the increases, which average 14%. Blue Shield also is cleared to raise its rates. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-insure-rates-20100826,0,7225011.storywho could of seen this coming :eyes:
|
mzteris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 11:14 AM
Response to Original message |
1. We had to drive to the next state to find |
|
an oral surgeon who would take Anthem for my son's wisdom teeth surgery. Not one here would take them - and wanted $2000 UP FRONT for the surgery!! As it was I had to pony up $650 - doable, but it's made getting through the month impossible. I had to "borrow" the money from my son's change jar ($120) to get through the month. :( His dad finally gave me his half a few days ago so I should make it to September. Of course, I had to postpone a number of August bills to pay in Sept, so that means double bills in Sept so that means . . . basically if I don't get a job soon, I am royally screwed. (sorry for the offtangent rant)
|
boston bean
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. I know things are really tough. I'm sorry it's happening. |
|
The number one complaint which had to do with the PO is that there were no cost controls.
The excuse given was that a certain percentage had to be spent on healthcare.
Well, who could have forseen the rising cost of health care?
|
zipplewrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Took me a long time to figure it out |
|
In the end, and I'm not sure it started out this way, Obama's HCR became all about saving the federal government money. In the end they did exactly that, they reduced the rate of increase the federal government will experience over the next 10 years. Alot of that came through medicare and medicaid adjustments. But the CBO calculate that the feds will save a boat load of cash.
However, for the rest of us, the vast majority anyway, are still on the same train wreck of a path towards health care costs that none of us will be able to afford. There was little to nothing to control the costs that are the prime driving force behind the costs of health care.
|
Nite Owl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. You hit the nail on the head |
|
the whole saving money part was thought to be US saving money on premiums etc. All the while they were talking about the government and the health care industry saving money. Everything has a read between the lines clause when they speak.
|
zipplewrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
8. I still can't figure out the mandate |
|
It just doesn't add up. They don't really seem to need it. So I'm not sure why it's there, especially considering all the hate and acrimony associated with it. It seems to be an interest in creating a revenue source, except all the estimate are that it's not going to generate alot of revenue. It's too small to actually coerce anyone who can't/won't afford insurance to choose to buy any. I've talked to several that are already planning on just paying the fine instead. There is even a strong belief that more people will qualify for the exemption than even the CBO estimated (which is a fair number to begin with). The population of people that will wait until they need it to buy it isn't all that different with or without the mandate, so the insurance companies must know that there isn't any real payoff for them. The only thing that makes sense, and even I have trouble believing it, is that it is in effect a "trojan horse", where as they can constantly modify the fine and the exemption (or lack thereof) until it truly does become coercive. But in the end, because of the cost of the subsidies, that will cost the government alot of cash in the long run, because they'll have to cough up the subsidies or exempt them from buying it.
|
Recursion
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
10. It's a way to keep insurance companies from going bankrupt |
|
Without a mandate but with the requirement that insurance cover all comers, the fear is people would wait until they get some hugely expensive condition and then get insurance, which now can't deny them coverage for that condition.
Of course, to sane people like us the answer is to expand Medicare to everyone. Though that would take a Medicare premium mandate too for the same reason (there is more expense to Medicare than just the levies).
|
otohara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 12:01 PM
Response to Original message |
5. We Could Very Well Lose Our Anthem |
|
the small business my husband works for could very well cancel our insurance and this increase will be the reason given.
|
boston bean
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. I hope that doesn't happen. |
Fumesucker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 12:04 PM
Response to Original message |
6. As they say on a blog I sometimes frequent: Hoocoodanode? n/t |
jtrockville
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-26-10 01:01 PM
Response to Original message |
9. Of course they'll raise rates. They got HIPPA. |
|
Health Insurance Profit Protection Act
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 12:46 AM
Response to Original message |