3 ms·

You have a low rate in the first place because they've decided there's a low chance they'll have to pay out a lot of money for you. Most likely, your premium is

You have a low rate in the first place because they've decided there's a low chance they'll have to pay out a lot of money for you. Most likely, your premium is all or nearly all profit. Better to keep your profitable premiums than to lose you to a cheaper state exchange. It'd only make sense to force you into the newer rate immediately if you had no other option -- but the exchanges are all about giving you more options.

JonFish85 13y ago
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I imagine that a big percentage (maybe majority / plurality) of people jumping into the insurance markets are going to be people who otherwise couldn't get insurance (pre-existing conditions, whatever--high-cost clients, essentially). The only way to balance the books is to make the healthy people pay more. I expect the young-and-healthy category to pay even more than the 15-50% extra in the article. It's going to be ugly, from a dollar perspective.
- dangrossman 13y ago
  About 17% of the US workforce is officially "underemployed"; that's a very large number. I would think a large chunk of that are young, healthy people who work one or more part-time jobs without benefits. They're to be forced into the health insurance marketplace as well, with government assistance if they can't afford it -- essentially, there will be a tax dollar transfer to insurers that could absorb much of the extra cost of also insuring people with pre-existing conditions. It really is hard to predict how it will play out.
basp 13y ago
The insurance companies selling through the exchange are the same insurance companies who'd be "losing you", so I don't think that's it. Since businesses aren't subject to being excluded for pre-existing conditions, group plans already have that risk factor built into their pricing. Difference being they discriminate more based on age (55-65 year olds pay 4-5X what a 25 year old pays) than they will be allowed to in January (I think the cap is 3x).

JonFish85 13y ago

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I imagine that a big percentage (maybe majority / plurality) of people jumping into the insurance markets are going to be people who otherwise couldn't get insurance (pre-existing conditions, whatever--high-cost clients, essentially). The only way to balance the books is to make the healthy people pay more. I expect the young-and-healthy category to pay even more than the 15-50% extra in the article. It's going to be ugly, from a dollar perspective.

dangrossman 13y ago
About 17% of the US workforce is officially "underemployed"; that's a very large number. I would think a large chunk of that are young, healthy people who work one or more part-time jobs without benefits. They're to be forced into the health insurance marketplace as well, with government assistance if they can't afford it -- essentially, there will be a tax dollar transfer to insurers that could absorb much of the extra cost of also insuring people with pre-existing conditions. It really is hard to predict how it will play out.

basp 13y ago

The insurance companies selling through the exchange are the same insurance companies who'd be "losing you", so I don't think that's it. Since businesses aren't subject to being excluded for pre-existing conditions, group plans already have that risk factor built into their pricing. Difference being they discriminate more based on age (55-65 year olds pay 4-5X what a 25 year old pays) than they will be allowed to in January (I think the cap is 3x).