The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-09-2011, 12:17 PM   #2626
BigV
Goon Squad Leader
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 27,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary View Post
To date there are none of these Exchanges that exist in the form propsed. None. The thought that competition will in some way lower costs is false as evident by the run away increases occuring everyday since Obamacare was first imposed on the people. So basically this whole plan is based on an unproven premise and assumption that it will work. So far no good.
Whose costs are you talking about?

One party's costs is another party's benefit.

To reduce an insurer's costs, you have lots of options, like any business. Competition is not one of them. As a for profit going concern, their reason to exist is to make money, as in profit. Reduced costs, everything else being equal, mean increased profit. Since profit is the primary motivation for the insurer, this is some incentive for them to decrease costs. But there are other ways to decrease costs, one very direct way is to reduce claims payments. This is not in my interest if it means I don't get the care I feel I'm entitled to. The aspect of the PPACA I mentioned earlier that some large base percentage of the insurer's cash flow must be dedicated to patient care will provide a check against such arithemetically easy but unfair "cost reduction" measures.

To reduce the consumer's costs, there are also a lot of options, and chief among them is competition. If two companies are vying for my business, a lower price to me is a strong factor influencing my decision. These exchanges represent a good way to present the products and information about the consumer's "costs". The insurance companies are still going to have customers, but they'll now be able to communicate their offer to the consumer, not just to the employer.
__________________
Be Just and Fear Not.
BigV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 12:33 PM   #2627
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
According to F&B's chart, since 2000,

the employee contribution has increased +6%

while the cost of insurance has increased 213%
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 12:40 PM   #2628
Fair&Balanced
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by classicman View Post
According to F&B's chart, since 2000,

the employee contribution has increased +6%

while the cost of insurance has increased 213%
Huh?

Employee contributions have more than doubled since 2000.
From $1,534 in '99 to $3,997 in '10

Last edited by Fair&Balanced; 06-09-2011 at 12:51 PM.
Fair&Balanced is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 12:50 PM   #2629
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
Thank you - I was wrong -
It increased less than 4% as a percentage of the total cost
Do the math -
2000 total cost - $6438 ee contribution $1619 ... 25.14%
2010 total cost - $13,770 ee contribution $3997 ... 29.02%
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 12:53 PM   #2630
Fair&Balanced
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by classicman View Post
Thank you - I was wrong -
It increased less than 4% as a percentage of the total cost
Do the math -
2000 total cost - $6438 ee contribution $1619 ... 25.14%
2010 total cost - $13,770 ee contribution $3997 ... 29.02%
Employee contributions increased by 128% as opposed to the total premium increase of 131%
This just addresses premiums.

Many employers have tried to keep employee share of premiums from increasing more dramatically by cutting benefits, making it more costly for employees on the other side-- higher deductables, higher co-pays, etc.
Fair&Balanced is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 12:53 PM   #2631
infinite monkey
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,002
Quote:
Thank you - I was wrong -
It increased less than 4% as a percentage of the total cost
Do the math -
2000 total cost - $6438 ee contribution $1619 ... 25.14%
2010 total cost - $13,770 ee contribution $3997 ... 29.02%

You know how on old cartoons some character will get hit on the head with a shovel or an anvil or something and its head will be all flat and then it makes that funny noise and shakes its head really really fast and its head reinflates?

I just did that.
infinite monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 01:03 PM   #2632
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
Could you please explain where mine was incorrect?
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 01:05 PM   #2633
Fair&Balanced
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
Think of it this way.

On average, employees are paying more than twice as much in premiums today ($3515 in '09) as they were 10 years earlier ($1543 in 99) AND also paying higher deductables, higher co-pays (my Rx co-pay has gone from $2 to $30 in the last 8-10 years), more limits or exclusions.....
Fair&Balanced is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 01:06 PM   #2634
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by classicman View Post
Could you please explain where mine was incorrect?
Do not start adding all the rest in - You quoted numbers in your chart - I converted to %'s -
Lets try again - Could you please explain where my math was incorrect?


ETA - for years 1999 to 2009 the % DECREASED .3 % as a percentage of the total cost
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 01:11 PM   #2635
Fair&Balanced
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
I dont know you want to hear.

Average employee premium contributions have more doubled in the last 10 years.

As a percentate of total contributions, they have not increased as much as overall premium cost as a result of employers limiting increases on the employee side by reducing beneifts instead.

I dont know any other way to say it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by classicman View Post
ETA - for years 1999 to 2009 the % DECREASED .3 % as a percentage of the total cost
I'll try again.

Employee share has been relatively contained by employers finding benefit reductions on the other side...even as employee premiums costs doubled in that 10 years.

Average employees are paying a helluva lot more for their insurance (higher premiums, higher co-pays, higher deductables,...) than 10 years ago.

Last edited by Fair&Balanced; 06-09-2011 at 01:17 PM.
Fair&Balanced is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 01:28 PM   #2636
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by classicman View Post
Could you please explain where mine was incorrect?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced View Post
I don't know you want to hear.
for 2000 compared to 2010
Employee contribution as a percentage has only increased 6% in a decade.

or for 1999 compared to 2009
Employee contribution % DECREASED .3 % as a percentage of the total cost

Compare that to the price of milk, food, gas and a million other things...
Lets see how they stack up.

My point is that the employee contribution as a % is relatively static/moderately increasing.
Your lil chart has no relevance other than to disprove or distract from the actual problem.
The real issue is the FUCKING OVERALL COST!
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 01:31 PM   #2637
infinite monkey
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,002
ffs
infinite monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 01:32 PM   #2638
Fair&Balanced
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
I give up.

I see a classic digging in of the heels and a "Syrian Lives Are Worth Less" argument again.
Fair&Balanced is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 03:20 PM   #2639
infinite monkey
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,002
That's never going to change.
infinite monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2011, 04:03 PM   #2640
Fair&Balanced
Operations Operative
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 495
I honest dont know if he doesnt get it or is just being obstinate but there certainly is a pattern after the Syrian lives fisasco, in which 4-5 tried to explain it to him.

The average cost that workers pay out of their pocket or paycheck for health insurance premiums has risen by 127% in the last 10 years.

The average cost of those "other things" he mentioned - food, shelter, clothing, household good - as measured by the Consumer Price Index has risen an average about 2--3%/year over the last 10 years -- no where the 127% increase in health care premiums, not even close.

In any case, I would suggest a double helping of
should be on the classic menu tonight, particularly for one who calls others out about eating crow.
Fair&Balanced is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:37 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.