Average premium increases more than halved from 1999-2004 - 2004-2009, but then only dropped by 24% from 2004-2009 - 2009-2014.
When you consider the trend, the numbers in that chart suggest that the ACA has indeed increased the cost of premiums, which in my mind has no doubt happened. I mean, we're covering more people, and we're covering people who are extremely costly to cover...obviously that's going to impact the price of premiums.
We are talking about percentage increases, no one is saying premiums didn't increase. Guessing you weren't a calculus major.
Average premium increases more than halved from 1999-2004 - 2004-2009, but then only dropped by 24% from 2004-2009 - 2009-2014.
When you consider the trend, the numbers in that chart suggest that the ACA has indeed increased the cost of premiums, which in my mind has no doubt happened. I mean, we're covering more people, and we're covering people who are extremely costly to cover...obviously that's going to impact the price of premiums.
We are talking about percentage increases, no one is saying premiums didn't increase. Guessing you weren't a calculus major.
That's fine. I realize I'm not discussing exactly what you two were arguing. I just wanted to use your chart to point out that the ACA has made premium costs higher than they would have been had the ACA not been passed. You know, so nobody gets the wrong idea.
Average premium increases more than halved from 1999-2004 - 2004-2009, but then only dropped by 24% from 2004-2009 - 2009-2014.
When you consider the trend, the numbers in that chart suggest that the ACA has indeed increased the cost of premiums, which in my mind has no doubt happened. I mean, we're covering more people, and we're covering people who are extremely costly to cover...obviously that's going to impact the price of premiums.
We are talking about percentage increases, no one is saying premiums didn't increase. Guessing you weren't a calculus major.
That's fine. I realize I'm not discussing exactly what you two were arguing. I just wanted to use your chart to point out that the ACA has made premium costs higher than they would have been had the ACA not been passed. You know, so nobody gets the wrong idea.
That chart is a bit dishonest as well. It doesn't factor in the rapid rise in deductibles and out of pocket maximums. That *sleight of hand was used to disguise the true rise in premium costs. If you compare premiums for plans people actually want, the rise in premiums has been stunningly unsustainable, which is contributing to the "why" so many for profit and "not for profit" carriers have pulled out of the exchanges.
Average premium increases more than halved from 1999-2004 - 2004-2009, but then only dropped by 24% from 2004-2009 - 2009-2014.
When you consider the trend, the numbers in that chart suggest that the ACA has indeed increased the cost of premiums, which in my mind has no doubt happened. I mean, we're covering more people, and we're covering people who are extremely costly to cover...obviously that's going to impact the price of premiums.
We are talking about percentage increases, no one is saying premiums didn't increase. Guessing you weren't a calculus major.
That's fine. I realize I'm not discussing exactly what you two were arguing. I just wanted to use your chart to point out that the ACA has made premium costs higher than they would have been had the ACA not been passed. You know, so nobody gets the wrong idea.
That chart is a bit dishonest as well. It doesn't factor in the rapid rise in deductibles and out of pocket maximums. That slight of hand was used to disguise the true rise in premium costs. If you compare premiums for plans people actually want, the rise in premiums has been stunningly unsustainable, which is contributing to the "why" so many for profit and "not for profit" carriers have pulled out of the exchanges.
Yup. It's like having a chart that shows the price of a box of Triscuits (or Wheat Thins if you're one of those fags) over time, without taking into consideration the fact that the box size has decreased.
And what really pisses me off about the ACA is that "It won't make your health insurance cost more" and even "It's going to reduce the cost of insurance" were reasons constantly stated as why we should be okay with it, and now those same people (at least the ones who realize that costs have gone up) are saying "well, yeah, but come on it's worth it, dude."
And what really pisses me off about the ACA is that "It won't make your health insurance cost more" and even "It's going to reduce the cost of insurance" were reasons constantly stated as why we should be okay with it, and now those same people (at least the ones who realize that costs have gone up) are saying "well, yeah, but come on it's worth it, dude."
And what really pisses me off about the ACA is that "It won't make your health insurance cost more" and even "It's going to reduce the cost of insurance" were reasons constantly stated as why we should be okay with it, and now those same people (at least the ones who realize that costs have gone up) are saying "well, yeah, but come on it's worth it, dude."
We were all just Lucky Obama ramrodded this act through Congress at all.
And what really pisses me off about the ACA is that "It won't make your health insurance cost more" and even "It's going to reduce the cost of insurance" were reasons constantly stated as why we should be okay with it, and now those same people (at least the ones who realize that costs have gone up) are saying "well, yeah, but come on it's worth it, dude."
We were all just Lucky Obama ramrodded this act through Congress at all.
Comments