quote:

Originally posted by keltoi:
When a hospital presents you with a statement there will be many add ons that the vast majority of people will not be able to decipher nor will the hospital explain adequately. You are paying for everyone that comes to that hospital without insurance that the hospital is Federally obligated to treat. That coupled with runaway costs. Obama Care did not address drug or hospital costs in the formula. The powerful drug and hospital lobby spends God knows how much in a concerted effort to not control costs. Go to the various Canadian on line drug companies and compare their drug costs vs those in the USA.

Yep. This is nothing more than back door communism. From each to each with an unaccountable elite class administrating.

I don't think anyone is actually working on how to deliver quality adequate care for cheaper, not the insurance industry, not the gov, not big pharma, not the hospitals.

At that really seems to be happening is a shell game, a blame game, and more of the same game, with rates that rise and fewer services for that money for most everyone.

Heath care has become uncoupled from market forces that incentivize competition and inovation. I have no idea how to fix it at this point other than let it collapse.

Edited to add a prelude that I decided to post the article to the President Trump topic too since the article below explains what President Trump cleverly did by cutting funding for the CSRs but not the premium subsidies. That will offer more people completely affordable health insurance premiums.

---

Following is in article from the Wall Street Journal partially explaining these high insurance costs. Your money is going to help subsidize insurance for people without employer provided insurance without relatively high income who use the health insurance exchanges.

What the article does not discuss are issues such as providers not being fungible commodities, the every narrowing "narrow networks" which would leave me (self-employed) with only 1 undesirable insurance company with contracts with undesirable providers if I maintain my residence in Washington in 2018, the problem mentioned earlier in this topic about insurance companies switching to a lower cost insulin, etc. (The WSJ is somewhat "left", but they did give President Trump some credit.)

I'll include the text, but the following link includes a useful interactive chart. And the surprising title of the article is:

More ACA Plans to Come With No Premiums in 2018 - Trump indirectly bolstered the federal subsidies that help consumers with their insurance premiums

For 2017, no-premium plans were available in many places for the very lowest-income enrollees, but for those at slightly higher levels, they were much more scarce. For instance, in 2017, a 60-year-old making about $36,000 could find free plans in about 300 of the counties.

That is what is different in 2018, said Kurt Giesa, a partner at Oliver Wyman. The zero-premium plans are “much more prevalent now than they were,” he said.

In California, which isn’t included in the federal data, there is a “huge increase from last year” in the number of people who are eligible for zero-premium plans, said Peter V. Lee, executive director of Covered California, the state’s ACA exchange. Covered California currently has about 1.1 million enrollees who receive federal-premium subsidies, and more than half of them will be able to buy a no-premium plan for 2018, he said.

The growing availability of no-premium plans is tied to the complicated dynamics of the 2010 heath law, as well as a recent move by the GOP president.

Under the law’s rules, subsidies that help pay for premiums are available to people making up to about $48,000 a year. Those subsidy amounts are linked to the cost of the second-cheapest silver plan in an enrollee’s location. So, when silver premiums go up, subsidies go up.

Earlier this month, Mr. Trump’s administration cut off federal payments to insurers for covering certain out-of-pocket costs for low-income enrollees in silver plans. In response, insurers raised premiums on their 2018 policies sharply to cover the extra expense, now coming out of their pockets—and in many cases, they loaded the extra boost only onto the silver plans.

Because the separate premium subsidies, which Mr. Trump didn’t cut, are linked to silver-plan prices, those subsidies are rising, too. In many states, the costs for cheaper bronze plans are going up much less rapidly than silver plans, so many more people will wind up being eligible for no-premium plans.

On the flip side, those who don’t get premium subsidies under the 2010 law may be responsible for the full brunt of steep rate increases, though they may be able to mitigate the impact by staying away from silver plans.

For those who can get free plans, the lure may be irresistible.

Medica, an insurer that is offering exchange plans in states including Iowa, Nebraska and Wisconsin, is running ads in some places that say “$0 premium plans for individuals who qualify.” It is also sending letters to some current exchange enrollees with bronze plans, who are likely to be enrolled with Medica in 2018, informing them that they can stop paying premiums next year. “That’s a nice letter to get,” said Geoff Bartsh, a vice president at Medica.

Jerry Dworak, chief executive of Montana Health Co-op, said, “of course we’re hoping that” young and healthy enrollees flock to the no-premium plans.

“If they see that it’s free, why not take it?,” he said.

Mr. Dworak said that a person making as much as $33,000 a year could get one of his company’s Idaho plans and pay no premium.

The plans may attract more older consumers than younger because premiums and subsidies rise with age, making free plans more available to older people.

And for some, the zero-premium plans won’t actually be the best deal, insurers and insurance agents say. The silver plans could be cheaper overall for people who use much health care, despite their higher premium costs, if these people are eligible for the health law’s cost sharing help.

According to HealthCare.gov, for instance, a 40-year-old man in Cheyenne, Wyo., who makes about $24,000 a year could get a zero-premium bronze plan, but he could pay as much as $6,650 over the course of 2018 in deductibles and other out-of-pocket charges. Or he could get a silver plan that would cost him around $125 a month, but cap his out-of-pocket costs at $2,450.

“There’s this trade-off,” said Michael Z. Stahl, a senior vice president at HealthMarkets, who said the company’s agents will walk through the pros and cons with clients.

Write to Anna Wilde Mathews at anna.mathews@wsj.com and Christopher Weaver at christopher.weaver@wsj.com

This message has been edited. Last edited by: rh,

What a mess. I am retired with Medicare and a Supplemental policy. For myself and wife health insurance cost us around $8000.00 per year. Together they cover 100%. I am able to switch my supplemental policy this year for a savings of $100.00 per month. Can't switch wife's because of recent back surgery. Maybe next year. Starting in 2020 supplemental policy's that cover 100% will no longer be sold. Government wants everyone to pay part of their health care.