Some Truth About Those ACA Insurance Plan Cancellations

[Andrew D]

Donna received the letter canceling her insurance plan on Sept. 16. Her insurance company, LifeWise of Washington, told her that they'd identified a new plan for her. If she did nothing, she'd be covered.

* * *

Otherwise, she'd be automatically rolled over to a new plan -- and, as the letter said, "If you're happy with this plan, do nothing."

If Donna had done nothing, she would have ended up spending about $1,000 more a month for insurance than she will now that she went to the marketplace, picked the best plan for her family and accessed tax credits at the heart of the health care reform law.

The truth is here.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Oh my God!!!! Shopping around, what a concept.
Maybe Obamacare should have advertised about their great rates subsidies instead of just "failing to launch".

And crucially, she also discovered she would qualify for a federal tax subsidy that would knock her monthly premium to $80. Her daughter could enroll in Medicaid, at no cost to the family.

Someone has to pay. Who's picking up the difference?

Anytime I get an insurance renewal, I go shopping. The amount quoted in the renewal is never what I end up paying. If one just renews without questioning or shopping around, of course they end up paying too much. Companies (be it insurance or retail stores) want you to pay as much as possible for their item. It's up to the consumer to make the best deal they can. Caveat emptor

[dgs49]

Progressive definition of a "successful" program: More people dependent on government handouts.

[Econoline]

Wasn't everybody who was without insurance ALREADY dependent on "handouts" in the form of unnecessary but extremely expensive use of emergency room facilities? (Paid for by the government and/or everyone else who DID have insurance?)

[Crackpot]

But that was the American Way....

[oldr_n_wsr]

Wasn't everybody who was without insurance ALREADY dependent on "handouts" in the form of unnecessary but extremely expensive use of emergency room facilities? (Paid for by the government and/or everyone else who DID have insurance?)

And that is going to change, how?
The tax for not having insurance is much less than purchasing insurance. Those that would rather go without, still will. My guess is the only people who will sign up are those who had and still want insurance (but were cancelled) and those who have pre-existing conditions. New signups will still be sparse.
And I was reading in USA today where the "healthy" young'uns needed to support this Obamacare are not so healthy as they thought they were. Seems they now need a whole lot of mental health care which is covered which costs about the same (or more) than an older person with high blood pressure.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... h/3326533/

[rubato]

Those who would go without and pay nothing before will now pay something. Not enough to offset costs but it is a clear improvement.

And we were already paying the highest possible costs; when someone dies or is disabled due to a treatable condition they stop working, stop producing, and stop paying taxes. Their children become wards of the state and they go on welfare. If they lost their homes to medical bills and exhausted their retirement funds they are paupers on public assistance. They are no longer able to help do childcare for a neighbor or relative who is in a bind. Paying taxes to provide HC is the cheap option. As all of the rest of the G-20 has proven.

yrs,
rubato

[Andrew D]

And one still wonders why right-wingers don't just kill themselves ....

[Gob]

Strange thing to say?