News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Affordable Care by Retric on Friday January 13, 2017 @01:41PM (#13393355)
That's apples to oranges. Some family plans used to also have higher deductibles I know of someone that had a 30+ grand deductible per year. It was cheap, they where healthy, having insurance meant many procedures cost less, and they had enough money that a low risk for a 30k out of pocket was just not a big deal.

So yea, for a tiny slice of the population ACA did make things worse, but frankly the tiny minority that where negatively affected don't really care about the new premiums either. Because, for most families having a 30k deductible is approximately the same thing as not having insurance.

PS: The ACA allowed some people without insurance because of health issues to get insurance. But, it also added a lot of young healthy people that would not have had insurance. The net gains and losses depended significantly on age. https://www.valuepenguin.com/how-age-affects-health-insuranc... So, people looking back on cheap insurance also look back when they where younger. New York and Vermont do not permit any use of age as a factor when determining health insurance rates, so younger workers do significantly subsidize older workers. Masschusetts limits cost increases to 2x so there is a significant subsidy.

Re:Affordable Care by bzbarsky on Friday January 13, 2017 @01:54PM (#13393521)
What's apples to oranges, exactly?

For my hypothetical family with the ages I listed, insurance cost about doubled in the last two years in the state of Maryland for an equivalent (PPO) plan. Deductibles also rose significantly. I know a specific family like that, and they are _very_ unhappy about it.

> but frankly the tiny minority that where negatively affected don't really care about the new premiums either

Really? You think people don't care about $25k/year in premiums instead of $12k/year in premiums?

What makes you think this is a tiny minority? What I listed is a basic baby boomer family with one child still in college.

> The net gains and losses depended significantly on age.

Sure. I'm aware of all that. The upshot of the ACA is that people with preexisting conditions are _much_ better off (which is good), but people who are relatively healthy, independent of age, are generally worse off. This is almost a tautology, of course.

I should note that the price cited at your link is way too low for the states I know of, in the "64" age range, assuming you want a PPO. For an HMO, it's perhaps doable.

Re:Affordable Care by Retric on Friday January 13, 2017 @02:15PM (#13393776)
What's apples to oranges, exactly? (single vs. family) also (HSAs 'high deductible' vs. actual high deductible).

HSAs are from 2003 and it's overloading a reasonable definition with a new a silly one. You can see people in the mid 90's talking about high deductible and meaning something very different. ACA also capped out of pocket so you need to compare everything about a plan not just it's deductible.

PS: Find me a family plan with a 50k deductible under ACA. They used to exist.

Re:Affordable Care by bzbarsky on Friday January 13, 2017 @02:19PM (#13393812)
That's fair. I agree there is nothing like that on the market now; instead we have plans with $25k premiums and $14k out of pocket maximums. Which is less than $50k, sure, but not by much, and is a _guaranteed_ $25k cost...

We may be violently agreeing here. ;)

Re:Affordable Care by maxerickson on Friday January 13, 2017 @02:32PM (#13393963)
My brother's work calls their $1500 deductible option the "high deductible" plan.

The limits are more sane than they used to be, but a lot of people that are getting subsidies aren't going to have an easy time coming up with $10,000 more in a given year. It's high enough.