Health Insurance to Cost Individuals Less, Taxpayers More
The Obama administration's Department of Health and Human Services released a report this morning touting health insurance "savings" resulting from last year's health care overhaul. Some families, a press release declares, can even save up to $14,900 annually! For visual learners, there are even bar graphs. Interestingly, those so-called savings just happen match the taxpayer-funded federal subsidies the law will provide to families in order to purchase health insurance. At Forbes, David Whelan explains:
Check out the one called "Family Health Insurance Premiums in 2014." For a family that makes less than $33,525 the report shows that for a health insurance premium that costs $11,300 in 2014, the family will pay only $1,400 and will receive $9,900 in savings. Of course the savings are no more than the subsidy that the government will pay toward the same $11,300 policy. A family making just over six figures qualifies for "savings" of $2,300.
Remember: CBO estimated that, under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the cost of individual market health insurance policies (i.e.: the policies that the law subsidizes) would rise by about 10-13 percent due to a number of factors. The reason that the Obama administration can tout savings is that, starting in 2014, federal dollars will subsidize a big chunk of the purchase price of those policies. The price isn't going down. Taxpayers are just paying a share.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I love being in the position where I won't get any savings out of these programs since I have employer-subsidized healthcare, yet my taxes will go up to pay for other peoples health insurance, and my premiums went up to cover the same problem from the Insurers end.
Thanks Obama!
Obviously you're a Bourgeoisie exploiter, just like me.
Don't you know that we deserve it?
Yeah, I suppose that even though I make less than $55K a year and work 50-60 hours a week I'm part of the rich and I need to "pay my fair share".
It's patriotic, according to Biden. That makes me like Captain America, or something.
Tman, I guess you'd rather pay ever increasing premiums and doctor bills, until your employer must either cut your benefits or your pay increases. I mean, God forbid the lobbyists and the insurance CEOs miss out on their millions! Certainly the insurance carriers have YOUR best interests at heart, right?
Listen Tim, I JUST TOLD YOU that my premiums and taxes have gone up thanks to Obamacare.
If Obamacare didn't pass my insurance company wouldn't have had to raise my premiums to begin shoring up costs for the new requirements of Obamacare. Same with my taxes.
You keep wanting to play this "EVVUULLL INSURANCE COMPANIEEEEEESSS, MANNN" game and you just sound like a 19 year old Ivy league trustafarian.
I'm giving you hard numbers not rhetoric. Obamacare HAS RAISED MY HEALTHCARE COSTS. PERIOD.
That was a good one...your taxes went up on your 55k salary...also, a pony.
Good luck with that. When you are back in reality, let us know.
Would you prefer to continue paying for all the treatment given to people without insurance in the form of higher fees? The party of NO doesn't think things through, they just keep signing the same old song.
Would you prefer to continue paying for all the treatment given to people without insurance in the form of higher fees?
These "higher fees" of which you speak are CHEAPER than what I have now. Your argument is hollow. So yes, I would would prefer to continue paying for all the treatment given to people without insurance in the form of higher fees, because said higher fees cost ME LESS.
Is this really that hard to understand?
Are you the only person on the planet who is unaware that medical costs are escalating way higher than the inflation rate?
Compared to how my cost increases went prior to Obamacare, it's not even close.
The last five years my premium costs went up AT MOST 8% a year. This year they DOUBLED.
Are you the only person on the planet who doesn't realize the cause and effect?
I find it really amusing that people who are rightly concerned about the inflation of medical prices don't grasp that every aspect of Obamacare is tailor made to continue that and exacerbate it. Subsidies and transfer payments can redistribute the rising costs so that certain groups don't clearly see them, but the costs are most definitely there.
One of the things I can't handle about people who are so ignorant of economics is their tendency to fail to understand that when the government takes over paying for something, that thing doesn't suddenly become "free".
The reason why is that people like Tim think that it's the insurance companies who are the reason for the expanding costs alone. Insurance companies are by no means innocent in the argument, but they exist for one reason and that is to turn a profit, and therefore they are only "guilty" of behaving like any other company. Insurance company profit margins aren't any higher than any other industry.
What Tim wants to see is the holy grail of "single payer healthcare" where the evil insurance companies are taken out of the equation. What he fails to realize is that by doing so we will only accomplish two things; much MUCH higher costs than what we have now and wayyyy less quality of care and services.
I have already experienced the first of the two as we inch towards single payer. Tim won't be happy until I have to wait for a year to get a MRI for a migraine.
Tim, if you're reading, EQUAL OUTCOME INSTEAD OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ONLY MEANS WE ALL SUFFER EQUALLY.
Dumbass.
I'm not a fan of insurance companies in general - but mostly that is because I'm not a fan of government-protected cartels.
But I am a fan of the idea of insurance, and I'd be a big fan of insurance companies if they operated in a free market.
I do feel slightly compelled to point out that, actually, insurance companies' profit margins are in general rather below average. It's always funny to me how much profits are blamed for high costs in health care, when in fact profits are very low (3-5%), and in industries like software companies are sporting 50-70+% margins, and prices have dropped dramatically over the years.
And uh, I second the notion that Tim is a dumbass.
Obviously this is the same ol' topic, some people think they are cheaper and some that are expensive... truth is, politicians always lie 🙂
Damon from Best of Craigslist
Preview fail.
It's just like that one cigarrette that can kill you.
Insurance cost vary enormously from state to state. No doubt affected by many factors.
That family lives in a state that has "helped" them in several ways.
* For instance, by larding every conceivable treatment into the required list. Because we all know that families struggling to make ends meet with 2.5 low skill jobs really need insurance which covers IVF.
* By prevented the issuer from attaching the kinds of limits and conditions that could have trimmed the cost.
* Possibly by having an excessively plaintive friendly medical malpractice regime.
And there is the small matter of the "no denial because of pre-existing conditions" thing (but don't suggest that this is like be allowed to buy fire insurance after your roof is ablaze, health is different).
I DON'T WNAT NO SAVINGZ! I WNATS FREE HEALTHCAREZZ!!!11!!!
It's a human right.
You're a racist pig.
How is that racist? I've seen people write like that on the internet, and I'm not talking about on purpose. I, for one, never thought one way or another about what their race might be, but if I had to make a guess, I would have a thought it was a white person, or in some cases, someone whose first language was not English.
Some people spell poorly because they are lazy or don't give a fuck or are stupid and poor spellers. Those things all cross racial divides.
Typical Republican BS-- No Heath care for everybody, save it for the rich only.
How is driving up costs helping "everybody" get health care?
Why can't people see the hugely wasteful and inefficient machine that government is?
I think all the closet racists are those who "feel sorry" for "poor people" and want to "take care of them" in the costliest, most inefficient means possible, almost guaranteeing them a long life of being poor and "less fortunate".
(Sorry about the excessive quotation marks there, but I can just hear someone whining the quoted phrases in the last pharagraph, all the while looking down their nose.)
A. Not even close to being a "Republican"
B. Health care was never, and isn't currently "for the rich only", no matter what hyperbolic bullshit spin you'd like to engage in.
C. The cost of providing health care in the current environment has been rising substantially ever since the government has started meddling in, paying for, and mandating restrictions on the health insurance/care industry.
Tim... Please read, and take note: http://findarticles.com/p/arti....._13834930/
Government has been taking over more & more of our health care decisions for most of the last century, and they have only succeeded in substantially raising the cost for everyone.
And the new legislation just makes that problem a thousand times worse, and people with minimal understanding of the history or current state of corporatized health care in the US, and even less understanding of basic econ, will fail to grasp this point.
So, maybe I should say, "Typical Democrat/liberal BS -- Abysmal, unaffordable health care for "everybody", save the good stuff for people rich enough to engage in medical tourism."
Fail, Tim. Fail.
Cost individual less and taxpayers more.. net net, id say its probably going to cost more, period.
I'd say that if you net it out, it's going to cost the tax payer more.
I just heard it on the radio that "Wise Health Insurance" can offer health insurance for just $1 a day any one aware of this ? have anyone purchased insurance through them. I did search for them and found them online.
what a echt article is! Thanks for the ripe accumulation , I am benefited from it really overmuch!
Trust to get many assemblage and noesis from you in the prospective life, I testament e'er hold you!every indication I feature your articles,which leave devote me a assail! the articles are always stabilizing for me!I get author and horse substance and popularity from your articles,so that I can protect up with the steps of the society!
I am overeager to get author and statesman fashionable substance from you, comic that you can percentage with me selflessly in the rising days!Impart you rattling such!
I think what the government should work on to is trying to go back to the outskirts and simple communities. If the government will be able to highly train health care personnel in its basic form and be applied even in the lowest areas, high costs on health care services will not be attained. http://www.writessay.com
I think it will be best if the government will retrain its health care workers to provide the basic health needs in the simplest community. In this case, promotive and preventive actions will be provided meeting health needs at the fastest way possible. This will strip out the need for high costing health care insurances.
I was really amazed to read that post. Excellent
This just in: healthcare continues to rise in cost.
If any of you hypocrites were ACTUALLY concerned about it, we're ready for single payer. Otherwise, STFU about shit you could care less about.
If the private market quadrupled the price, you wouldn't give a shit as long as the government had nothing to do with it.
Find something you actually care about to complain about.
PS. If it was good enough for Ann O'connor....excuse me, "Ayn Rand" as you know her, its good enough for the rest of you, right?
Give me the same socialized medicine she begged for and we'll call it even.
The point is who and how will we pay for it. I can buy a $100,000 car and drive it. But if I can't afford it, well...eventually, I lose the car!
Interesting! I just now printed Coupons of my Favorite Brands for free, search for "Printapons" I highly recommend them