Health insurance companies around the country are seeking rate increases of 20 percent to 40 percent or more, saying their new customers under the Affordable Care Act turned out to be sicker than expected. Federal officials say they are determined to see that the requests are scaled back.
Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans — market leaders in many states — are seeking rate increases that average 23 percent in Illinois, 25 percent in North Carolina, 31 percent in Oklahoma, 36 percent in Tennessee and 54 percent in Minnesota, according to documents posted online by the federal government and state insurance commissioners and interviews with insurance executives.
NYT
Now, who could have foreseen that this would happen? I mean, after "getting to keep our Doctors"......we've been led to believe that the federal government requiring citizens to purchase a private commodity, wouldn't engender any adverse conditions........
/sarc
Exactly. Proof that we should have gone the Single Payer route. Unfortunately Obama believed that if he adopted the Conservative/Heritage plan he could get some Republican votes. As for Obama saying that you could keep your plan if you liked it, Obama told the truth. The ACA grandfathered in these plans, so long as the HC insurers did not significantly change them. The HC insurers did change them, thus disqualifying them from grandfathering (on purpose... so they could cancel them and then steer people into more expensive plans... and blame the ACA). HC insurer duplicity is to blame for this "lie", not Obama.
ReplyDeletePartially correct. If we were to utterly overhaul the insurance industry in this nation, the only Constitutional course of action would have been to go single payer.....instead of forcing the citizenry to purchase a private commodity and then re-label it a 'tax'.
DeleteThe rest of your screed is from the script.
Single payer would eliminate the insurance cartel and usher the ultimate monopoly: the government itself.
ReplyDeleteMore competition, not less, is what would bring down prices and improve quality.
But more competition means less control by the State....some parties couldn't abide by that.
DeleteState = The People = more democracy. Some people can't abide by that.
DeleteCorrect. When the State = two major parties who actively exclude any competition, in their quest to gain and maintain power, at the expense of the liberty of the citizen.....I can't abide by that. If you can, then you're not the "people"....you're the sheeple.
Delete"State = The People = more democracy. Some people can't abide by that."
DeleteDemocracy = Two Wolves and a Sheep voting on what to eat for dinner. If the majority decides that a minority must pay for their healthcare (and many health problems are preventable through personal responsibility), then that is not freedom. When backed with the physical force of the state, it becomes slavery.
"I can't abide by that. If you can, then you're not the "people"....you're the sheeple."
DeleteThere's that too. Democracy can also fail when the useful idiots are no longer useful to those they elect, and Democracy becomes Oligarchy.
Democracy becomes Oligarchy.
DeleteThe Libertarian utopia.
You clearly do not know what libertarianism is.
DeleteHeh....you should see him on 2nd Amendment rights.....
DeleteOf course they're going to blame the ACA.
ReplyDeleteYou think they're going to point the finger at they're own profits and ask just what purpose the profits serve to deliver health insurance.
Are they talking about the money pissed away in the Aetna/Humana merger to generate an even tighter monopoly.
There is nothing in the health insurance system to restrain costs so you are being a little naive assuming ACA ever intended that costs would do anything but rise as they have for the last several decades.
Right. When Lieberman killed the public option the possibility the ACA could restrain costs disappeared.
DeleteDescribing democracy as slavery is more proof that Libertarians hate it. How much liberty you have in a Libertarian world depends on how much money you have. More money = more liberty. And rich people as slaves (by way of taxation) is pure idiocy IMO, given our reality of working people being (wage) slaves to the oligarchs.
Democracy is rule by majority, with no consideration for the minority. Mob rule.
DeleteLiberty in a mob can be described as "freedom of speech, as long as you agree with us."
Lieberman killing the so-called "public option" (which was a back door for complete state control) kicked one of the major fangs off of the extreme ACA, and made it a lot less extreme. It also cut down the cost of the ACA a lot.
DeleteSon said: "Democracy is rule by majority..."
DeleteYou will notice that those who defend an extreme version of democracy do so at the expense of the rights of the ruled. They downplay any need for any sort of 'firewall' to protect the people from the ravages of the rulers.
Yes. And they have the gall to accuse libertarians of being slave masters. "Do as I (we) say, not as I (we) do."
DeleteLieberman killing the public option (which was a back door for greater control by The People) kicked one of the major fangs off of the already industry-friendly ACA, and made it a lot more favorable to the parasitical health insurance companies. In doing so it pumped up the cost of the ACA a lot (see CI's post for proof of this).
DeleteAlso, you will notice that those who defend the extremism of corporatism/Libertarianism do so at the expense of the rights of the ruled. They downplay any need for any sort of 'firewall' to protect the people from the ravages of the rulers/oligarchs.
Corporatism is the merger of corporate and government power and was originally called Fascism. It is distinctly different from the free market and opposed by libertarians. But I am assuming you are even vaguely familiar with the concept.
DeleteThe Libertarian movement began with the first Libertarian think tank, the Foundation for Economic Education, which was funded/put together by a coalition of large corporations. "Libertarian corporatism" describes the belief that corporations should be allowed to do their thing without government "getting in the way". In this instance government did not get in the way of a number of recent health insurance company mergers. Which is resulting in higher prices, because, according to the American Academy of Family Physicians, "seldom does consolidation result in reduced costs for consumers. Bigger insurance companies mean increased leverage and unfair power over negotiating rates with hospitals and physicians". This is the "free market" Libertarians love so much at work (mergers/consolidation leading to monopoly and rising prices).
DeleteIsn't it precious when an avowed opponent of an ideology attempts to define said ideology? It only illustrates the lack of education on political science. Heck, I even gave him a couple of book titles to read......
DeleteThe people versus Industry.
DeleteDemocracy versus Capitalism.
Us versus Them.
Love and Hate
Black and white thinking is a typical sign of indoctrination.
One of the founding members of FEE was Henry Hazlit, a journalist and economist (his "The Failure of the New Economics" is a classic work which absolutely demolishes Keynesianism). Yes a lot of the funding came from the William Volker Fund but that group actually did a lot of solid philanthropic work before Volker's nephew took over. And even with FEE there is not one single solitary member of that organization who approves of the Bush/Obama crony capitalism or of the bailouts of 2009. Not one.
DeleteAnd how 'bout we take a gander at the Institute for Justice, a LIBERTARIAN legal fund that ONLY defends individuals and small businesses in their respective cases against the despotic government, 'cause that's what real libertarians do (as opposed to the cartoonish, 1970s wrestling caricature version of wd).............Yes, SOL, everything is black and white with this guy and his ideas have no unintended consequences, either.
DeleteI've been a longtime fan of IJ's work...and have donated well-deserved money.
DeleteIt's almost.....as if.....they've got the cue cards...right in their hands.....or a teleprompter......
ReplyDeleteIf the "they" you refer to are people opposed to the ACA (people such as yourself, I presume) then I agree.
DeleteNope. You're just confused....as usual.
DeleteIf the "you're" you refer to is Constitutional Insurgent (yourself), then I agree. You do seem confused.
DeleteAnd all you can do is invert arguments instead of offer anything original or objective.
DeleteThere's a companion and homemaker business in my town that used to employ hundreds of people (from 2 to 40 hours per week) and now they only employ 49 and often have to turn away business. Guess why.............And the reason that the rates have gone up is because of these idiotic mandates; pregnancy coverage for 60 year olds, alcohol and drug rehab coverage for Mormons, comprehensive policies for young people who only need catastrophic care, etc.. That and whenever the government gets involved in ANYTHING the cost goes up.............I also get amused whenever I hear people who claim to be against monopolies handing one on a silver platter to the state (the state, the most destructive institution ever invented by man; 266 million put to the sword - not counting war - and counting).
ReplyDelete