Obamacare: Affordable Private Insurance Is Already Available 22 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
According to a recent study by America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), "Individual Health Insurance 2009: A Comprehensive Survey of Premiums, Availability, and Benefits":
In the summer of 2009, America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) conducted the latest in a series of comprehensive surveys of member companies participating in the individual health insurance market. The data on premiums and benefits are based on nearly 2.6 million policies in force during May or June 2009, covering approximately 4.2 million people.
Nationwide, annual premiums averaged $2,985 for single coverage and $6,328 for family plans in mid-2009. For single policies, annual premiums ranged from $1,350 for persons under age 18 to $5,755 for persons aged 60-64. For family policies, premiums ranged from $2,573 for policies covering children under age 18 to $9,952 for families headed by persons aged 60-64 (see chart above).
MP: Do we really need Obamacare with a public option when individuals under 40 can buy private insurance right now for about $200 per month or less (see chart above), and families in the group below 45 years old with up to 3.5 average members per family can get private insurance right now for less than $500 per month ($142 per family member)? We keep hearing how expensive health insurance is for the average person, but private insurance seems pretty affordable according to the data from AHIP, about the same (or less) as a monthly car payment.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 22 comments:
Even the numbers you quote look a little steep compared to average wage rates, and they are prohibitive when viewed in the context of the minimum wage.
There is something wrong here and it needs to be fixed. Whether the current health-care reform legistlation will fix it is another question entirely.
This one says:
"For family policies, premiums ranged from $2,573 for policies covering children under age 18 to $9,952 for families headed by persons aged 60-64"
The second article (Fixing Obamacare with Retail Healthcare) says:
"Consider: 27 million people are covered by health insurance purchased directly, i.e. outside employer-based plans. The average cost of an insurance policy with family coverage in 2009 is $13,375."
This author is not to be taken seriously.
Obama is a retarded socialist. There is nothing that the govt. can do better than private enterprise.
My tab for my wife and my basic BC/BS coverage comes to an astounding $12,000/year with a $500 deductable and without pre-existing conditions. If this is affordable, then the author has received his healthcare far too long as state of Michigan employee.
Try working for a living Mark and then with good conscious state that $12,000/year for healthcare is AFFORDABLE!
On Nov 09 07:45 AM Tom Armistead wrote:
> Mark, I live in CT and am in my early 60's. The last time I had to
> look at individual health insurance premiums they were higher than
> what you quote, even with high deductibles. They further came with
> exhausitve questionaires and the cheapest premium company undertook
> to sell me a policy with a rider that took out coverage for my entire
> gatro-intestinal system.
>
> Even the numbers you quote look a little steep compared to average
> wage rates, and they are prohibitive when viewed in the context of
> the minimum wage.
>
> There is something wrong here and it needs to be fixed. Whether the
> current health-care reform legistlation will fix it is another question
> entirely.
My husband and I run a small business. We can only afford personal health insurance for our family of five. Our premiums are $7,000 a year. To afford this "low" rate, we $15,000 deductible health deductible, a $1,000 prescription deductible, no wellness coverage, and the best our insurance will ever pay out is 80%.
In order to "qualify" for our plan, we have to hide our son's pre-existing condition which requires medication. We have learned the hard way that if we don't, OUR WHOLE FAMILY is disqualified from receiving insurance.
Because we hide our son's condition, we have to outsource his medication overseas. We pay completely out-of-pocket for this, which amounts to $4,000 a year.
So, Mr. Perry, get out your calculator, here we go: we pay $11,000 in total medical insurance expenses - BEFORE ANY OF US EVEN HAS A SNIFFLE. We then have to shell out $16,000 before our insurance even kicks in. If we get really sick or have an accident, we will have to pay $27,000 BEFORE INSURANCE PAYS A DIME.
All this, and we risk policy rescission by doing what we can to cover our son with some sort of catastrophic policy.
STOP POSTING about health care until you've walked a mile with those who suffer from the UGLY end of our free market health care system. Only then will your posts make any sense.
On Nov 09 08:32 AM CLH wrote:
> Its a fact that American health care is the best in the world. No
> one goes to Canada or England for an operation. It may be slightly
> more costly but our care is worth it.
>
> Obama is a retarded socialist. There is nothing that the govt. can
> do better than private enterprise.
So that's how it goes, insurers will:
- Insure the client for a premium for something that he is likely to never suffer (premium money in, likely zero money out)
- Do not insure the client for something he is likely to suffer (don't want to see the money go almost for sure)
- For the rest, insure at a premium that statistically guarantees a margin, basing on client data/life expectation and mediating on a big number of insured clients.
That is.
And this "report" comes from a health insurance industry shill group... why am I ever surprised by the depths this guy will go to distort the truth?
Damn, the number of formerly healthy minds this guy must have poisoned at U Michigan... that's if they ever allow him to be in a classroom with students.
Oh, wait, he's on "sabbatical" from U Michigan and serving as a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, that freedom loving organization which boasts such luminaries as John Bolton, Lynne Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Newt Gingrich... yah, now there's a bunch of folks who are unbiased when it comes to health care!
On Nov 09 08:32 AM CLH wrote:
> Its a fact that American health care is the best in the world. No
> one goes to Canada or England for an operation. It may be slightly
> more costly but our care is worth it.
>
> Obama is a retarded socialist. There is nothing that the govt. can
> do better than private enterprise.
This AHIP research piece is well done (unlike the one they asked PwC to do). However, it tells us nothing about how comprehensive the individual policies were. It also tells us nothing about how many people were denied policies due to health status.
As many as 25 million people are underinsured, according to the Commonwealth Fund. They define underinsured as spending over 10% of family income in premiums or out of pocket payments (or 5% if they were poor), or as having a deductible equal to 5% or more of family income. A lot of the individual insurance policies being sold today will leave you underinsured. A lot of them will vary in what conditions they cover; for example, a study by the Center for American Progress found that even among Bronze tier plans in the Massachusetts insurance exchange, policies differed a lot in how much of expected expenses they covered for breast cancer or diabetes. Consumers should not have to have that type of surprise.
I'm not certain how you're defining 'Obamacare'. I have to wonder if you're using it as a scare word. In any case, we definitely need the health insurance market reforms, including giving up health status rating, guaranteed issue, a mandate and subsidies in order to get people insured. I think we could get the system reformed without a public plan, although I would prefer one.
If the term "blood sucking vampire squid" weren't already taken, I'd suggest using it for the "healthcare" insurance industry.
In the US we pay about twice as much for healthcare as other developed countries do, with poorer results. We don't live as long or as healthily as Europeans and Japanese with their government-paid care, BUT WE PAY TWICE AS MUCH. That's collectively, not individually; that includes people who can't even get insurance Most of the difference can be accounted for by the 30+% sucked out of the system by insurance companies; most the rest is probably increased administrative costs to doctors and hospitals who have to deal with complicated and recalcitrant insurers.
Yes, these are the companies we should trust to inform us as to the best way to spend our money, and, especially, as to how to regulate them. Or so Mr. Perry believes.
On Nov 09 03:13 PM Alan Young wrote:
> There's nothing like an industry-sponsored "study" for getting an
> objective viewpoint, is there?
>
> If the term "blood sucking vampire squid" weren't already taken,
> I'd suggest using it for the "healthcare" insurance industry.
>
> In the US we pay about twice as much for healthcare as other developed
> countries do, with poorer results. We don't live as long or as healthily
> as Europeans and Japanese with their government-paid care, BUT WE
> PAY TWICE AS MUCH. That's collectively, not individually; that includes
> people who can't even get insurance Most of the difference can be
> accounted for by the 30+% sucked out of the system by insurance companies;
> most the rest is probably increased administrative costs to doctors
> and hospitals who have to deal with complicated and recalcitrant
> insurers.
>
> Yes, these are the companies we should trust to inform us as to the
> best way to spend our money, and, especially, as to how to regulate
> them. Or so Mr. Perry believes.
Furthermore he is not a Socialist. You don't know anything about Socialism and probably think it is Communism. It is Super Capitalism that got us into the financial mess in the first place. We are a country that is a mix of capitalism and socialism and that is what is needed to keep the wealthy from taking over. For the people who gave you a plus, they also should be ashamed of themselves.
Maybe you are a Nazis? See how easy it is to put labels on people when you don't have any proof, or hide behind the cyber net. I might also label you a racist? My point is don't call people names or label them when you don't have any proof that would stand up in court of law.
On Nov 09 08:32 AM CLH wrote:
> Its a fact that American health care is the best in the world. No
> one goes to Canada or England for an operation. It may be slightly
> more costly but our care is worth it.
>
> Obama is a retarded socialist. There is nothing that the govt. can
> do better than private enterprise.
I also hate the term "Obamacare" it should be called "AmericaCare" since most Americans are in favor of healthcare and Insurance reform. No pre-existing conditions, no recissions, no Health Insurance CEO making $50M a year (for doing what), more competition within states for health insurance plans.
If Health Insurance companies were smart, they would have dropped pre-existing conditions and recissions, develop an entry level coverage plan with higher deductibles for Doctor visits and tests but full coverage for hospitalization. They could have worked with the Government to set up a jointly funded program to defray their costs of covering someone like myself with a chronic illness - a catastrophic fund that is underwritten by the U.S. Government. For people with chronic illnesses that have a good income they would pay a higher premium for their plans or for Medicare but not 4 or 5 times as much. People with lower income levels would have a portion of their costs subsidized by the fund.
If the Insurance companies would have taken these steps five, ten years ago, we probably would not be having this discussion right now. They knew this was coming, but instead of being part of the solution, they spent their time, energy and money on trying to stop it. Well now, they don't get a vote!!
I'm not sure these numbers are that out of line. I pay about $1,500 per year for homeowners insurance with a $5K deductible -- been doing that for 30 years and have never had a claim. I own a small company (28 employees) and our plan (which we pay) costs about $240 per month per person. It is an HSA plan with a $3K deductible, but individuals can pay the $3K, if it is incurred, out of their HSA IRA -- so the feds effectively pick up somewhere between 20% and 35% of the deductible.
If you think health care is expensive now, wait until the government runs it.
If my house burns down, I am willing to take a fairly heavy risk in exchange for significantly lower premiums. But the premium difference between a $5K deductible on my house and a $15K deductible is negligible. On the other hand, the difference between a $500 deductible on the health insurance policy jse17 carries and the $3500 I carry works out to about $3,100 per year. That's huge.
Obviously, his coverage might be different from mine, but mine covers just about everything and there is NO DEDUCTIBLE for preventive care. In addition, I pay my deductible out of my HSA IRA, so the feds pick up about 28%.
I bet if jse17 switched to an HSA eligible policy (Health Savings Account) he would save a significant amount of money.
This is what I understand about you. You either work for a corporation which provides you a nice group health plan. Or you have no pre-existing conditions which exclude you from a personal plan.
Congratulations on your good fortune. This means you still don't get it.
Those on group plans have NO IDEA the pain those of us with pre-existing or personal plans go through. Those with good plans (group or government) and/or have no pre-existing have this perception that because my plan is good, therefore everyone's is good.
There is a world of difference between large group plans and those on personal insurance. The difference is bargaining power.
Those of us on personal plans have no bargaining power. We are just one person on one policy. Therefore, the insurance company does with us what they want.
Under the banner of "reasonable and customary", the insurers can pay 30% on a perfectly legitimate claim, whereas the policy may state 80%. They do so because we have no HR department which will take on the fight for us and hold the insurance company accountable.
Rates are raised on us disproportionately. My policy went up 20% this year, and we went to the doctor only two or three times last year, and have no ongoing prescriptions through insurance. How much did yours go up?
Those on personal insurance face daily the possibility of rescission. Insurance company statistics say 10 - 15% percent. More independent studies show the rescission rate is almost 30%.
All this, and we pay 20% more next year for the same treatment.
DO NOT tell me my policy is just fine. I know better. You don't.
On Nov 10 05:59 PM Paco6945 wrote:
> Only two commenters indicated what they pay for health insurance:
> YoYoMama and jse17. YoYoMama pays $7K per year for a family of 5
> - that's $1,400 per person per year with a $3,000 deductible per
> person and jse17 pays $3,500 per person per year with a $500 deductible
> per person.
>
> I'm not sure these numbers are that out of line. I pay about $1,500
> per year for homeowners insurance with a $5K deductible -- been doing
> that for 30 years and have never had a claim. I own a small company
> (28 employees) and our plan (which we pay) costs about $240 per month
> per person. It is an HSA plan with a $3K deductible, but individuals
> can pay the $3K, if it is incurred, out of their HSA IRA -- so the
> feds effectively pick up somewhere between 20% and 35% of the deductible.
>
>
> If you think health care is expensive now, wait until the government
> runs it.