4 ms·
> Not only was that happening, but further cost increases were easily hidden by terms and conditions that reduced actuarial value for policies at the same premi
by kobeya 10y ago
> Not only was that happening, but further cost increases were easily hidden by terms and conditions that reduced actuarial value for policies at the same premium. The ACA prohibits that practice; if the broader narrative about ACA was true, you'd expect even steeper price increases because insurers have fewer ways of hiding them. But we don't see that.
We are seeing higher deductibles instead.
- tptacek 10y agoThat's not what you said. You said that since the ACA, we'd been seeing 3x%+ premium increases.
- tyingq 10y agoThey aren't at odds, really. You see the 3x%+ increase for your existing plan, and downgrade because of it.
- tptacek 10y agoBut the data does not show those increases. And again: 30% YOY is enormous; any plan you'd purchased prior to the ACA that had experienced that kind of growth would be absurdly expensive today. What's the most expensive plan on your local exchange now?
- kobeya 10y ago$1500/mo. It was $440/mo five years ago for them same plan but with 1/3 the deductible.
- tptacek 10y agoWhich plan?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- tyingq 10y agoYou have this habit of quoting what the data says, without showing a source. Then, when challenged, you reveal some new nuance to the data. I agree that it's not a sustained 30% YoY increase for several years. I would believe double-digit plus at least one year with 30+%. But, as I mentioned earlier, it's hard to get facts. The data is flawed in a few ways, mentioned earlier, with the flaws depending on the source. There are sources of many types...not just the one you're using. The stats I've looked at hide things, not on purpose, but mostly because businesses aren't dumb...they will find ways to stem the insanity.
- tptacek 10y agoI don't understand what's so hard about the data here. You raised concerns about tax credits, employee share, and subsidies. But none of these have anything to do with the raw insurance premiums charged by insurers. If you've found that there was a year in which premiums grew by 30+%, say so. I'm not saying I think the data will say things; I'm saying: the data says things.
- tyingq 10y agoThey are issues with some sources of data. Perhaps not your source. I stated the issues, then you found one source that did not have some of the issues. There are sources that, for example, are based on employer reported costs/expenditures, not premium. And, your source does have issues. One example is that it wouldn't show a plan downgrade..only the end premium. So a radical plan downgrade looks like "flat year over year".
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]