5 ms·

Except that premiums have increased slower in the 5 years after ACA than the 2 5-year periods before [1] and the rate of expenditures, while not decreasing, is

by jonlucc 10y ago

Except that premiums have increased slower in the 5 years after ACA than the 2 5-year periods before [1] and the rate of expenditures, while not decreasing, is basically unchanged after ACA [2]. [1] http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2015/02/kff-chart.png http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2015/02/kff-chart.png [2] http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.PCAP?end=2014&locations=US&start=1995&view=chart http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.PCAP?end=2014&loc...

gleb 10y ago
Disputed at best, the opposite reality at worst (i.e. it bent the cost curve up): http://blogs-images.forbes.com/theapothecary/files/2016/04/Slide1.jpg?width=960 http://blogs-images.forbes.com/theapothecary/files/2016/04/S... It was the recession.
mgkimsal 10y ago
This was not my experience at all, at least as someone purchasing directly (not through an employer). Before ACA, our premiums went up ~5% per year - 8% one year - every year was under 10%. Since ACA, I've seen increases of 25%, 20%, 20%, 25%, then 11% then 13%. This is in NC with Blue Cross - the numbers possibly were different elsewhere (was in Michigan before that but wasn't paying as much attention, unfortunately). The price increases I was seeing seemed primarily in line with inflationary numbers pre-ACA; post-ACA they seem to have no correlation to inflation, and seem to have more to do with a much larger overall cost for the insurance company covering more people, no lifetime caps, more services covered, etc. EDIT: On, that factcheck chart - that looks to be showing premium increases for employer-provided health insurance. Employers cutting back their contributions to the premium would account for much/most of those increases. Effectively, it doesn't say anything about the actual insurance premium increases, only what employer-covered workers were having to pay - in my view, that's a big difference.

by jonlucc 10y ago

gleb 10y ago

Disputed at best, the opposite reality at worst (i.e. it bent the cost curve up): http://blogs-images.forbes.com/theapothecary/files/2016/04/Slide1.jpg?width=960 http://blogs-images.forbes.com/theapothecary/files/2016/04/S... It was the recession.

mgkimsal 10y ago

This was not my experience at all, at least as someone purchasing directly (not through an employer). Before ACA, our premiums went up ~5% per year - 8% one year - every year was under 10%. Since ACA, I've seen increases of 25%, 20%, 20%, 25%, then 11% then 13%. This is in NC with Blue Cross - the numbers possibly were different elsewhere (was in Michigan before that but wasn't paying as much attention, unfortunately). The price increases I was seeing seemed primarily in line with inflationary numbers pre-ACA; post-ACA they seem to have no correlation to inflation, and seem to have more to do with a much larger overall cost for the insurance company covering more people, no lifetime caps, more services covered, etc. EDIT: On, that factcheck chart - that looks to be showing premium increases for employer-provided health insurance. Employers cutting back their contributions to the premium would account for much/most of those increases. Effectively, it doesn't say anything about the actual insurance premium increases, only what employer-covered workers were having to pay - in my view, that's a big difference.