Our premiums were $17,800 dollars last year. Two months ago We got a notice saying our annual deductable had doubled from $6000 to $12000. Before Obamacare it was $3000.

My husband and I have 13 months before we can drop Blue Cross Blue Shield, and sign up for Tri Care. We will no longer be part of the cohort that the democrats are trying to loot to buy votes from the other half. Still not voting for them.

The good news is that it appears that our retirement income should yield about the same amount take home, as working does, because the huge health care premiums stop, and the medicare taxes stop.

Now all we have to worry about is the feds stealing most of the rest through inflation.

There's nothing wrong with "catastrophic care" insurance, in fact, that's what most people (especially young people) should have. The thing is: catastrophic care insurance should be cheap. It *was* cheap, before ObamaCare.

Where, exactly, is all of this money going?

"The deductible," she said, "is so high that I have to pay for everything all year -- visits with a gynecologist, a dermatologist, all blood work, all tests.

Hell, someone has to pay for it.

"There's nothing wrong with 'catastrophic care' insurance,"

You're absolutely right. But now people are paying through the nose for monthly health insurance that functions as extremely expensive catastrophic care.

Had I known that Obama would ruin our medical care system, I would not have paid for care for all these years at the rate I did. I did that because I thought I needed to get "in" at my HMO when I was young and healthy. I would have just gotten a dirt cheap catastrophic care policy.

And Jeff (hi!), what she means is that she is paying this ON TOP OF a high rate, which -- in my case -- means not getting care. It's hard to figure out what something even costs, which also keeps people from getting care. This may mean that a small problem that would have been caught develops into a big problem, causing both agony for the person with it and high costs for the system.

How come no one blames the greedy insurance companies for high premiums?

Because they had better control of the marketplace prior to the ACA, and now that they are being forced to bow down to these new regs, they have to try and stay afloat - plus they're still interested in trying to turn a profit. Their pools have increased, but so has what they're required to pay out for people in poorer health. It's a mess, and I was one who never went uninsured, until obamacare. I've gone two years without health insurance because I figure if I'm going to end up paying the ridiculously high monthly premium and then (like Ham) paying for nearly all of my visits out of pocket anyhow because of the $11,000 deductible, it's cheaper to pay the tax and pay for visits, labs, and meds as I go.

How come no one blames the greedy insurance companies for high premiums? ~ JoJo at November 4, 2016 5:57 AM

Your question is based on the premise that insurance companies are all greedy, and betrays your bias and lack of objectivity.

Insurance companies collect premiums into a pool. From that pool, they pay health care providers for the care the insured receive. They save and invest some of it for future and/or catastrophic care for the insured (e.g., automobile accident, stroke, cancer, etc.).

When the pool of insured people consists mostly of heavy users of healthcare, insurance companies must raise rates in order to pay for the healthcare being used. ObamaCare required the insurance companies to cover more heavy users of healthcare, as if the insurance companies had some magic pool of money from which to pay the added expenses. Remember, healthy employed people (and their employers' financial contributions) were supposed to be added to the pool of money from which healthcare costs are paid, but the Obama administration delayed the employer mandate several times.

Even someone with a casual knowledge of economics could see that ObamaCare was unsustainable. Even a dim bulb like Sarah Palin saw that when she spoke of healthcare rationing (the infamous "death panels") resulting from a scarcity of funds and an abundance of need for healthcare among the covered.

Where, exactly, is all of this money going?

To subsidies for other people. And to the insurance providers.

And graft. Because with the new system, there were more opportunities for graft and cronyism.

How come no one blames the greedy insurance companies for high premiums?

Well, it isn't exactly their fault, per se. The IRS doesn't have an effective enforcement mechanism for the penalty. Thus healthy young people who can do math realize that there's no downside to not having insurance. They pretty much would have to pay out of pocket anyway, so save on the premiums and put that money in their pockets.

This skews the insurance pool into a (much?) higher risk pool. That's simply more expensive, and that expense is passed on.

It bears repeating: a business that can not price its costs into the price of the good or service will not be a going concern for very long.

It's hard to figure out what something even costs, which also keeps people from getting care.

You should check out what concierge medicine providers are local to you. Prices also become more plain when you express to your provider that you will be paying with hard yankee dollars, and not insurance.

It's easy to take money. It's more expensive to have someone on payroll to process insurance claims.

"Well, it isn't exactly their fault, per se."

Well, I kind of think it is. Why? Most of the insurance companies lobbied heavily in favor of the ACA. Their execs are mostly finance-industry types who are Washington cronies. They saw in the ACA a crony's dream: a market in which everyone is compelled by the government to buy your product! Plus direct subsidies! They knew (or should have known) that the ACA provision for first-day coverage of existing conditions, a provision that was necessary in order to pander to the Democrats' voting bloc, would cost them a lot of money. But they were assured that the subsidies would cover those losses, plus some. Well, you know what happens when you make a deal with the devil.

Everybody thinks that all of what's happening now was intended all along, in order to clear the way for the government to nationalize the system and institute socialized medicine. I think that's almost right. I think that, given the temperament of our "betters" now, what is more likely to result is a fascistic system where a few companies that survive Obamacare will be given regional monopolies, with the government guaranteeing their profits. Lots of graft to go around between the executives, and their "associates" in government and the political consultants.

jojo wrote:

'How come no one blames the greedy insurance companies for high premiums?

Well, the Democrats do that, of course - but that's because they either don't understand the numbers, or (much-more-likely) they understand the numbers perfectly-well, but hope that you don't, and that you will therefore buy their 'greedy insurance companies' story.

Profit margins across the health-insurance industry are typically 3-4%, which is fair enough but not exactly extortionate. It's reliably-estimated that most health insurance companies actually lose money on the straight premiums-to-payments ratio - in other words, if they put all of the premiums into a bank vault in $20 bills, and paid all claims out of that vault, they'd run out of money at about 97% of claims. The only thing that keeps the balance sheet black is that they invest premiums into a variety of short-term instruments, the profits from which fill the gap.

As others have noted, the insurance companies planned premiums based upon predictions of participation, which assumed that large numbers of younger, healthier people would sign up. Those people pay premiums that exceed their claims costs, with the excess covering the additional costs incurred by older, sicker participants. Participation rates have not followed those predictions and the system is becoming ever-more-heavily weighted towards older, sicker participants with claims costs that continue to significantly-exceed the premium contributions. This is also known as the 'death spiral'. It has nothing to do with greed - it's simple math. The insurance companies are haemorrhaging money as claims continue to rise and premium income does not. The only dial they have to turn is to raise premiums - but they cannot raise premiums fast enough to counter their increasing losses. No Democratic administration will apply meaningful enforcement to the tax/penalty that is supposed to compel people to buy insurance, so millions are ignoring the mandate and not paying the premiums that the system requires to have even a hope of staying solvent. This can have only one outcome.

Which was the desired goal all along.

When the system finally implodes, the Democratic line will be that it was all the fault of the 'greedy insurance companies'. Having gotten large parts of the non-tax-paying public used to the idea of health insurance at little or no cost, they will have no trouble persuading them to vote for a Government-run single-payer healthcare system, funded out of general taxation - which people will not be able to avoid paying. Job done.

llater,

llamas

Where, exactly, is all of this money going?"

To people who do not treat you, who are also employed all year.

Drive through any major metropolis, and you will see a very large building housing these people. They don't build MRI machines or blood pressure cuffs; they don't so much as take your temperature.

This all started because some people could not pay for the medical attention they got. Remember?
When did it become some cake-with-icing gift from the Federal government? How did we get so phenomenally stupid that we thought we should pay for something we DO NOT GET?

Spit the Kool-aid out!

And Jeff (hi!), what she means is that she is paying this ON TOP OF a high rate ...

You are right, I hadn't thought of it that way.

(Full disclosure: I'm the beneficiary of employer provided -- and funded -- health coverage. Which should be taxed as in lieu of income, but isn't, because unions.)

But they were assured that the subsidies would cover those losses, plus some. Well, you know what happens when you make a deal with the devil.

As I recall, there's a slush fund set aside to keep insurers afloat if the subsidies aren't adequate.

Yeah, when you shake hands with the devil, you should count your fingers afterward. Of course, it could be worse: https://youtu.be/9Qap2U1WjWw

The slush funds aka risk corridors are supposed to end this year. As I understand things they are already out of money and not everyone is getting paid what they are owed.

"How come no one blames the greedy insurance companies for high premiums?"

While many try to when profits are fixed by law (all overhead including profits must be less than 20%) then the argument doesn't really work. Insurance profits just aren't a significant factor.

How come no one blames the greedy insurance companies for high premiums?

How do you blame the whip for the actions of the overseer?

No Democratic administration will apply meaningful enforcement to the tax/penalty that is supposed to compel people to buy insurance,

Even if they did, those funds wouldnt even make a dent, and the costs of recouping those penalties would probably cost more than the amount collected as well

Conan: Your question is based on the premise that insurance companies are all greedy,...

They are.

That's the problem with insurance; it's a business and businesses are not altruistic. Their compelling interest is in the bottom line.

They have entire offices dedicated to finding loopholes to avoid paying you if you get sick. The executives of insurance companies are not living modestly, recognizing that their compelling interest is in the health and well-being of their clientele, not lining their pockets.

They aren't altruists, Conan. They weren't drawn to the health insurance industry out of a burning desire to help their fellow man. They believe, like all executives believe, that they should be living high on the hog. And that means taking in as much money as possible and paying as little as possible.

Patrick,

Yes the managers at health insurance companies are just as greedy as those at auto or life insurance companies. But their profits are capped by law. At least 80% of premiums must be spent on medical care, period. The only way to increase profits is to reduce overhead. Raising the premium doesn't lead to increased profits. They have to write you a check if they don't spend enough on health care (I actually got one before I dropped out).

Rising prices are solely due to the Obamacare death spiral. They have to charge the same for men and women, sick and well. There is a limit to how different they can charge between young and old. What services they cover is set by law. There really isn't much left for the insurance company to do other than come up with an accurate price. Everything is set by law. So managerial greed doesn't matter. Everything is decided by the federal government.

That's the problem with insurance; it's a business and businesses are not altruistic. Their compelling interest is in the bottom line. ~ Patrick at November 5, 2016 2:24 AM

That's true for any business or even a non-profit. All organizations engaged in commerce or dependent upon a revenue stream must take in enough revenue to cover their operating costs ... or die. They do that by increasing revenue or decreasing costs.

Health insurance companies compete with other health insurance companies for business. If one of those companies gains a reputation for letting people die because of loopholes, it loses business to other companies and goes out of business.

Sometimes a claim must be rejected to avoid a torrent of similar claims that would bankrupt the company or raise premiums to a level at which people could not afford them. Earthquake insurance is a prime example. If your homeowners insurance covered earthquake damage, you'd pay thousands every month in premiums because the amount of damage in the rare event of an earthquake is in the millions. One earthquake could wipe out the company. And then, the guy who has a kitchen fire finds he gets nothing 'cause the company went bankrupt. A balance must be struck. Not all claims can be paid; and that's not so the CEO can get a new yacht, that's so the company can afford to pay for Little Suzy's diabetes treatment and Suzy's parents (and their employers) can afford the premiums to provide insurance for her.

Health insurance (or, really, any insurance) is a statistical analysis. How likely are you to develop a debilitating disease? How likely are you to suffer a crippling accident? How much is care for your condition likely to cost in the long run? How do we pay for the claims out of the money we've raised? How much should we charge to be able to cover the expected claims?

They aren't altruists, Conan. They weren't drawn to the health insurance industry out of a burning desire to help their fellow man. ~ Patrick at November 5, 2016 2:24 AM

You don't know that. Some of them may have altruistic motives. Some may not.

Like any endeavor, there are always some who are in it for themselves. Even a charity like Habitat for Humanity has those who genuinely want to build homes for the destitute and those who just want a line on a college application or a resume.

They believe, like all executives believe, that they should be living high on the hog. And that means taking in as much money as possible and paying as little as possible. ~ Patrick at November 5, 2016 2:24 AM

And, again, you demonstrate that you've never worked with or known executives at any level and you knee-jerk assign them en masse the basest of motives. Keep going, you'll get that class warfare specialist first class badge before you know it.

Insurance company executives are not a bunch of Scrooge McDucks sitting in their money vaults cackling as people die.

I do not want to hear a goddamn word of complaint about Obamacare from anyone voted for Obsma or who is going to vote for Hillary.

We on the right told you what would happen, and all we got was condescending crap from you arrogant fools.

Pay the hell up.