It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Obamacare Will Boost Individual-Market Premiums 41% on Average

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 07:44 PM

The individual mandate was an ignorant idea. But it was dreamed by the Heritage Foundation so everyone should have known it was going to be a failure.

It is well documented that Obama flip-flopped over the mandate, being opposed to it before he supported it (voiciferously, in fact... going before public calling it "not a tax" and "Constitutional" before going before the courts calling it a "tax" so he could pass it as being "Constitutional.")

So what we're left with is another example of the lying and manipulative Democrats who voted for this piece of crap alongside the president who signed it into law.

I'm a bit confused as to exactly what you're trying to defend here as you, yourself, have openly supported the ACA here on ATS but are now admitting that it is an abject failure. Are we to just continue throwing good money after bad? Is that sustainable?

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 08:05 PM


Yes they were. The individual mandate was an ignorant idea. But it was dreamed by the Heritage Foundation so everyone should have known it was going to be a failure.

That old study was actually an indication of what NOT to do ...

as we can clearly see.

It worked effectively in Massechusetts, and it will work effectively nationwide. The Manhattan Institute study was never intended to allow meaningful comparisons to be drawn. It deliberately compares cheap, shoddy policies that deny access based on preexisting conditions, cut off insurance when you get sick, and have massive deductibles to Obamacare policies that do none of those things- of course it's more expensive to buy insurance that will actually help you out when you get sick, rather than leaving you high and dry. It's like comparing the price a Yugo to the price of a Mercedes as if they were remotely similar. What a laugh.

The individual mandate is what makes those things possible, as the Heritage Foundation proposal clearly understood decades ago. Without the individual mandate, the popular features of obamacare (no denial for pre-existing conditions, No lifetime limits, No dumping people when they get sick), would cause an out of control death spiral in the insurance market with prices skyrocketing as healthy people left the system.

It's also compatible with what used to be considered a conservative value: individual responsibility. Society has constructed a health care system of hospitals and medical professionals that will not turn you away when you come to them, on death's door. The trouble is, this system has encouraged legions of people to free-ride on the system by not getting insurance, and getting treatment on everybody else's dime when their number comes up. Grown ups take responsibility for their healthcare by buying insurance. That's all the individual mandate says.

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 08:13 PM
reply to post by buster2010

You are right on the money


Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $2,736,536,143
Insurance $1,917,937,669

Electric Utilities $1,798,769,183
Business Associations $1,566,710,966
Computers/Internet $1,500,422,588
Oil & Gas $1,473,325,316
Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $1,253,512,679
Education $1,249,411,486
Hospitals/Nursing Homes $1,161,400,581
TV/Movies/Music $1,137,803,605
Securities & Investment $1,091,004,285
Civil Servants/Public Officials $1,089,990,427
Real Estate $1,061,515,651
Health Professionals $1,033,651,263
Air Transport $975,803,645
Misc Issues $834,389,251
Automotive $791,736,213
Telephone Utilities $760,260,329
Telecom Services & Equipment $755,669,991
Health Services/HMOs $715,824,792

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 08:56 PM

There was no good reason for the insurance companies to raise their rates. Because whatever changes the ACA made to the system the companies would more than make up the difference with all the new policies they would be getting.

Sure there was a good reason: A whole slew of new drains on the pool of available money. Did anyone seriously believe that the abolishment of pre-existing condition rules wasn't going to result in everyone else paying for those poor saps to be insured? They suddenly added millions of Americans with very expensive ailments to treat onto the insurance logs. Since the law only allows rate discrimination against current tobacco users, they had to come up with rates high enough that everyone would offset the expenses of the sick. That's simple economics.

Say you have 10 nonsmoking, insured people. Eight of them have "average" annual medical bills (let's say $1,000 per year, for example), One of them will have a child in the next year (That's $25,000 minimum), and one is suffering from a major ailment (Being ridiculously conservative here, that's $100,000 a year). That means those 10 insurance holders will account for $133,000 of medical outfalls in that calendar year. They've bucked up the deductable for most everyone to ridiculous levels, but let's presume that each of these plans are the Silver level with a $5,000 deductable. That leaves the insurance company to pay for $83,000, which they cover by premiums. Divide $8,300 per insurance holder by 12 months and get $692 a month! Under the previous system, that $100,000 a year drain wasn't placed on everyone else's shoulders.

Doing that math: 8 people at $1,000 a year, 1 lady bearing offspring at $25,000 a year = $33,000 for the year. Most plans had a $2,000 deductable, so you had an insurance company covering $23,000 in a year (the 8 folks were at $1,000 actually paid all out of pocket thanks to the deductable while the pregnant lady had to cover the full deductable) for a monthly premium of $213.

The previous system was actually a form of socialism in that everyone who was an "acceptable risk" was paying into a pot to cover their ass from disasterous loss due to a major accident or illness. Now the system demands that risk be completely removed from the equation, guaranteeing the presence of people who will be making massive drawdowns from the insurance system.

OF FREAKING COURSE THE RATES WERE GOING TO SKYROCKET!!! This isn't a fantasy world and the insurance COMPANIES aren't there to make Americans have warm fuzzies and feel all snuggly inside, they're there to fill a need and make a profit while doing so. On top of all of this, how in the blue hell would this failure not be even more complete if the individual mandate was removed from the equation? Guess what? Most of the country would still be uninsured by choice because only a damn fool is going to sign up for something that expensive while personally healthy themselves, just to cover the asses of a bunch of ill healthed people they don't even know. Without the mandate, but with the law preventing pre-existing condition discrimination, everyone would do the smart thing and not purchase a plan until they got sick... which would mean you'd have all 10 of the people above drawing a hundred thousand bucks a year from the system and the whole damn thing would implode on itself.

The ACA is broken and doesn't make economic sense. It is intrusive on individual liberty and it is unrepairable. ABOLISH IT!

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 09:50 PM
reply to post by buster2010

So, the crybaby excuse of rates going up is still because of the insurance companies?
Again, when will Progressives and and every head of the butt of 0bama supporter take responsibility?

So, govt mandates insurance to take everyone in, even with pre-existing conditions, and forces companies to get rid of certain types of policies. Then when premiums skyrocket, as many of us said would happen, all you Progressives look around as if it is the biggest surprise ever.

Are you clueless or willfully ignorant? It is either one or the other.

This has been stated it would happen, for a while now.

The insurance companies have to turn a profit, as that is what the business does, makes a profit.

Man, I swear......this is not that difficult to understand.

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 09:52 PM
reply to post by buster2010

I pontificated going to Mars when I was little.
So, I get credit for the project that sent the NASA equipment there.

Man, I love your logic. Guess I should be ready to receive my Nobel prize in science. Or did 0bama get that one as well?
edit on 5-11-2013 by macman because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 10:32 PM
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer

As it's much cheaper for people to NOT sign up, you're now seeing the beginning of the insurance death spiral. I did post an article laying the reasons for this out earlier in the thread.

And people were more or less happy with the policies they had before. Some of them even had specific and clear, sound reason for why they carried the so-called crappy policies they held. Who is Obama or Sebelius to suddenly determine that they know better for all of us?

This is the problem with central planning. It cannot adequately make decisions that fit every person's unique life situations, and while some people are indeed stupid, not all of us are. And it is unreasonable to assume control of everyone's life for the purpose of taking care of the idiots.

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 10:52 PM
reply to post by burdman30ott6

Exactly and should have adverted the hardships and almost bankruptcy that Romney mandated health care did, but no, Bush was nice enough to bail his insurance state out, then Obama keep the bailout because he wanted to model the ACA to Romney care.

The irony, people due have short term memories in the US.

The biggest complain under Romney care, people are force to buy insurance they can not even use because the deductibles and to this day nothing have been done about it.

But they have insurance, right . . . .

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 11:04 PM
A 41% increase in premiums is roughly 3 times what the nationwide annual increase has been since 2000. It's unfortunate, but you get much better coverage, including Maternity for both men and women, which adds $80 to $110 per month by itself. I'm sure post-menopausal women and sterilized men won't mind paying for younger folks to have and use this benefit.

The President says that only 5% of America has individual policies and will see this 41% premium increase. We have to keep in mind that the 47 million uninsured will see a 100% premium increase!

posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 11:46 PM
reply to post by carewemust

Sorry to tell you this but the bulk of the uninsured in the nation are not productive tax payer class but the poor and needy that will not even qualify for the program and neither the subsidies because they fall under the poverty line for them is expanded Medicaid.

Also why I have to pay for somebody care as a productive member of society when I do not qualify for anything, hell I do not agree with that, I already paying for Medicare, Medicaid and SS and pay for my own insurance under my husband policy and now I have to pay for somebody else? nobody asked me what I feel about giving my hard earned dollars away, I already pay taxes.

So yes I mind and mind a lot.

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 12:58 AM
reply to post by xuenchen

eventually, obamacare will lead to universal healthcare like those in Canada, Australia, Holland, England, and other developed countries

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:35 AM
If you want to know what a law is going to do after it is passed just reverse the name.

The Affordable Care Act is going to do just the opposite of it's name. Surprisingly this works on a lot of laws.

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 12:16 PM
reply to post by xuenchen

My state seems to be one with a high increase.

Right now, we are paying about $400 or so a month for our family- this includes a good plan (no complaints so far) with dental and great vision care.

While on the Obamacare site the other night, we found out that our plan would be anywhere between $700 -$1000+ monthly! From what I understand, we would not qualify for any subsidies. Are you kidding me?! Needless to say, I exited the site.

I also have read that vision and dental is ONLY going to cover children.. (am I wrong?) Quickly doing a little math and depending on the plan, we would be looking to pay roughly 16 -21% of our annual income to insurance instead of the roughly 8% we are paying now- not including out of pocket for much needed glasses for both me and hubs!

I thank God that we are not losing coverage right now, because we would not be able to afford this Obamacare.

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 03:38 PM


I thank God that we are not losing coverage right now, because we would not be able to afford this Obamacare. is the "Affordable" Care Act. It says it is affordable right in the title.

You must not get it then.

The title says it is affordable. You must either be lying due to your Neo-Con rabid tendencies or doing it wrong.

(sarcasm off)

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 06:37 PM
Who started the discussion of Obamacare anyways?
It did not start from Main street Liberals or Republicans.

It started from Washington DC Politicians and their cronies that are neither for Liberals or Republicans like the Big Banks.

How the government and their cronies play the games is, they say Lets Bail out the Banks, now main street Liberals and Republicans discuss it as if they were ever part of it to begin with.

Obamacare was bred from the Government and their cronies, not the common citizen.

I, and many other fellow citizens on main street never brought it up in the beginning. That would be the NEOCON's running the goverment.

The Healthcare Industry does not want to take a cut in pay like the rest of American's are and want everyone to pay for it.

If Government supported Medicaid, Medicare etc was abolished, and people would have to pay out of their pocket, you would see the Healthcare and Insurance Industry up in arms.

How could anyone afford 100,000 dollars for an operation out of their pockets that would cost only 2000 in another country.

In a time of ever dwindling pay and standard of living, Amercian's can no longer afford the outrageous expenses that healthcare charges and the solution is to let costs fall in accordance with market principles.

The Top lobbying Industry does not want that. They are Commies sucking up to the government tit like the big banks and they want everyone to pitch to prop it up.
edit on 6-11-2013 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 06:48 PM
It is no coincidence that the Healthcare Industry is the fastest growing industry when the government is there to prop it up along with an ever growing Wall Street also being pumped with funny money.

<< 1   >>

log in