Obamacare Individual Premiums Would Rise 20% Without Insurer Subsidies: CBO

By | August 16, 2017

  • August 16, 2017 at 8:10 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 6
    Thumb down 12

    Calculations’ Biased Organization.

    The 20% rise might be LOWER than what could happen for some classes, and that would be played up by the Liberal Mainstream Media as additional abuse by insurers, to try to build greater resentment for Republicans who repeal ACA or TrumPresident for ending the subsidies via EO.

    Stay tuned for more biased info from CBO!

  • August 16, 2017 at 8:11 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 9
    Thumb down 10

    Where was the CBO when ACA increases were WELL ABOVE 20% when Obama was still in office?

    • August 16, 2017 at 10:21 pm
      GoldC says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 1

      If it was so great, why does it keep spiking in both premiums and government funding??

  • August 16, 2017 at 8:14 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 12

    I’m searching for an article by the Liberal Mainstream Media that points out MOST people will experience premium decreases once ACA is repealed and replaced with a FREE MARKET solution. I think my search is in vain.

    • August 17, 2017 at 4:22 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 5

      Still no such report by the Liberal Mainstream Media. They’re too busy slanting the Charlottesville VA story one way and ignoring many details that don’t fit their agenda.

      Perhaps the Liberal MSM doesn’t understand the basics of insurance pricing?

  • August 16, 2017 at 1:25 pm
    FFA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 0

    Like they aren’t going up 20% anyways.

    • August 16, 2017 at 2:27 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 1

      FFA, in many cases in many states, they saw increases of 40-70% and Arizona had one instance of 116% increase. How are the rates in Wisconsin?

  • August 16, 2017 at 1:35 pm
    I'm so confused says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 0

    Wait…What? I’m confused. The federal deficit will go up by $194 billion from 2017 through 2026 if they DON’T spend 7 billion a year on these payments? So….we’re saving money in the future by spending money we don’t have today? How does that work exactly?

    • August 16, 2017 at 6:09 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 2

      It’s liberal politician-speak. Get it now?

      • August 17, 2017 at 9:29 pm
        LittleDonnieBoneSpur says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 0

        It’s called investment. You invest now so that you can be better off in the future.

        • August 18, 2017 at 11:04 am
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 1

          Nope. That’s not it. Try again.

    • August 17, 2017 at 1:45 pm
      bob says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      Read the CBO report. It’s pretty clear as to why.

      https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/53009-costsharingreductions.pdf

      A lot of work needs to be done by all sides.

  • August 17, 2017 at 9:22 am
    Captain Planet says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 1

    I’m so old, I remember my premiums going up upwards of 50% and averaging about 15% – 20% every year prior to the PPACA. I’ve actually seen flat and even, yes, even one year a decrease since this law was enacted. This administration’s threats, all of the Republican run states who did not create their own exchange, and all of the Republican obstructionism over the last several years is to blame for rising costs now. The Democratic party didn’t even get what they wanted when this law was enacted, which was the public option. #so sad

    • August 17, 2017 at 1:43 pm
      bob says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      ht tps://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2016/07/28/overwhelming-evidence-that-obamacare-caused-premiums-to-increase-substantially/2/#3a7fffce1670

      Point one, this is simply not the case in the individual market, which has seen the biggest changes.

      Point two, the only possible way your plan has decreased that much is if you are A: Very old or B: Have horrible health (not blaming you on that one) however, it is unfair to those in good health, to have to pay significantly more, which is the only possibility in either of those scenarios for you to pay less.

      This explains it best. Most charts showing decreased premiums paid, include subsidies. How about those that don’t receive them? The goal of this plan is to make those who aren’t eligible for aid, as poor as those who do, it seems. And that on it’s own is enough to destroy economic output planet. Look at these numbers from just 2008 to 2016. Average deductibles doubled for these people, in the case of families it went up by 4 times! Premiums went up by 3! In 8 years! This is certainly immoral, and is not ok. You can’t rob this much from the middle class and claim you’re helping the poor, as long as you claim some people benefit in the poorest section of society. I postulate that giving the poor a million dollars will benefit them. Now, who will it harm? That is the part of the equation you don’t get.

      htt p://news.ehealthinsurance.com/news/average-individual-health-insurance-premiums-increased-99-since-2013-the-year-before-obamacare-family-premiums-increased-140-according-to-ehealth-com-shopping-data

      Point three: The areas that allegedly have decreased in cost, have been due to the global condition, and even democrats have agreed here. However, despite this, it is simply not true that premiums are going flat, unless you’re trying to factor in subsidies that insureds receive, or not factor in what the government is paying to insurance companies, which is not in affect premiums going down. If you don’t include the later, you may end up having health costs double, and then double again, and then the government cannot pay those subsidies, and then everyone is in trouble, like Greece.

    • August 17, 2017 at 4:52 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      Your experience, nor that of any one particular person offered by supporters of ACA, doesn’t extrapolate onto the whole population of health insurance risks. Thus, I can find another person with a horrifically high rate increase, for most recent years. Then, which scenario is the dominant one? None. The whole pool of risks must be considered in any price or profit measurement.

    • August 21, 2017 at 9:19 am
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Yes, your INDIVIDUAL situation applies across the board to ALL US citizens. (sarcasm)



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features