OT: Health insurance cost

[all]

I’m so happy with the effects of the recent health insurance reform that I have to share my joy with anyone who would listen. Or read.

Our Small group HMO policy came up for renewal and Aetna is asking for 55% more money. The only thing that changed on our end is that everyone got one year older – no new hires, no layoffs.

We decided to go with a different plan and no increase in premium. Instead the copay is $40 (vs $20), hospital day is $750 (vs. $200), infertility treatment lifetime cap is $2K, etc. And for the mandatory insult that goes with the injury – I was just told that I have to wait one month to see a specialist for my foot injury.

This incremental improvement is just awesome, I can’t wait for the next increment.

[blahblahblah]

Soon everyone will stop going to the doctor. See, health insurance reform has made everything better!

[blahblahblah]

Soon everyone will stop going to the doctor. See, health insurance reform has made everything better!

[blahblahblah]

Soon everyone will stop going to the doctor. See, health insurance reform has made everything better!

[blahblahblah]

Soon everyone will stop going to the doctor. See, health insurance reform has made everything better!

[blahblahblah]

Soon everyone will stop going to the doctor. See, health insurance reform has made everything better!

[SK in CV]

Interesting that you should bring this up today. My small group just renewed Aetna for another year. But I had similar experience. The plan that most employees were on was discontinued and replaced with a plan with lower coverage, a higher co-pay and a 35% increase in premiums. We changed to a partially self-insured plan combined with a high deductible plan to cover the excess.

Unfortunately, this years increase was not exceptional. It follows last year’s increase of 35%. It was the 6th time since 2003 that annual increases were 25% or higher, the 3rd time the increases were more than 30%.

We had a $15 co-pay policy. Changing to a $40 co-pay policy, the premiums would still have been 9% higher than the previous policy. Even with the change to the partially self-insured plan, my premium rates are now 332% of what they were in 2002.

None of the parts of the new law which may help stabalize rates have taken effect, and won’t for a couple more years. But if HCR had any effect on this rate increase, it was only to gouge us as much as they can before the new law takes effect. But given what has happened over the last 10 years, it’s hard to prove HCR has had any effect at all. They get what they can, when they can.

[SK in CV]

Interesting that you should bring this up today. My small group just renewed Aetna for another year. But I had similar experience. The plan that most employees were on was discontinued and replaced with a plan with lower coverage, a higher co-pay and a 35% increase in premiums. We changed to a partially self-insured plan combined with a high deductible plan to cover the excess.

Unfortunately, this years increase was not exceptional. It follows last year’s increase of 35%. It was the 6th time since 2003 that annual increases were 25% or higher, the 3rd time the increases were more than 30%.

We had a $15 co-pay policy. Changing to a $40 co-pay policy, the premiums would still have been 9% higher than the previous policy. Even with the change to the partially self-insured plan, my premium rates are now 332% of what they were in 2002.

None of the parts of the new law which may help stabalize rates have taken effect, and won’t for a couple more years. But if HCR had any effect on this rate increase, it was only to gouge us as much as they can before the new law takes effect. But given what has happened over the last 10 years, it’s hard to prove HCR has had any effect at all. They get what they can, when they can.

[SK in CV]

Interesting that you should bring this up today. My small group just renewed Aetna for another year. But I had similar experience. The plan that most employees were on was discontinued and replaced with a plan with lower coverage, a higher co-pay and a 35% increase in premiums. We changed to a partially self-insured plan combined with a high deductible plan to cover the excess.

Unfortunately, this years increase was not exceptional. It follows last year’s increase of 35%. It was the 6th time since 2003 that annual increases were 25% or higher, the 3rd time the increases were more than 30%.

We had a $15 co-pay policy. Changing to a $40 co-pay policy, the premiums would still have been 9% higher than the previous policy. Even with the change to the partially self-insured plan, my premium rates are now 332% of what they were in 2002.

None of the parts of the new law which may help stabalize rates have taken effect, and won’t for a couple more years. But if HCR had any effect on this rate increase, it was only to gouge us as much as they can before the new law takes effect. But given what has happened over the last 10 years, it’s hard to prove HCR has had any effect at all. They get what they can, when they can.

[SK in CV]

Interesting that you should bring this up today. My small group just renewed Aetna for another year. But I had similar experience. The plan that most employees were on was discontinued and replaced with a plan with lower coverage, a higher co-pay and a 35% increase in premiums. We changed to a partially self-insured plan combined with a high deductible plan to cover the excess.

Unfortunately, this years increase was not exceptional. It follows last year’s increase of 35%. It was the 6th time since 2003 that annual increases were 25% or higher, the 3rd time the increases were more than 30%.

We had a $15 co-pay policy. Changing to a $40 co-pay policy, the premiums would still have been 9% higher than the previous policy. Even with the change to the partially self-insured plan, my premium rates are now 332% of what they were in 2002.

None of the parts of the new law which may help stabalize rates have taken effect, and won’t for a couple more years. But if HCR had any effect on this rate increase, it was only to gouge us as much as they can before the new law takes effect. But given what has happened over the last 10 years, it’s hard to prove HCR has had any effect at all. They get what they can, when they can.

[SK in CV]

Interesting that you should bring this up today. My small group just renewed Aetna for another year. But I had similar experience. The plan that most employees were on was discontinued and replaced with a plan with lower coverage, a higher co-pay and a 35% increase in premiums. We changed to a partially self-insured plan combined with a high deductible plan to cover the excess.

Unfortunately, this years increase was not exceptional. It follows last year’s increase of 35%. It was the 6th time since 2003 that annual increases were 25% or higher, the 3rd time the increases were more than 30%.

We had a $15 co-pay policy. Changing to a $40 co-pay policy, the premiums would still have been 9% higher than the previous policy. Even with the change to the partially self-insured plan, my premium rates are now 332% of what they were in 2002.

None of the parts of the new law which may help stabalize rates have taken effect, and won’t for a couple more years. But if HCR had any effect on this rate increase, it was only to gouge us as much as they can before the new law takes effect. But given what has happened over the last 10 years, it’s hard to prove HCR has had any effect at all. They get what they can, when they can.

[SD Transplant]

this recent article is just icing on the cake:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

“In 2007, health spending was $7,290 per person in the United States, more than double that of any other country in the survey.

Australians spent $3,357, Canadians $3,895, Germans $3,588, the Netherlands $3,837 and Britons spent $2,992 per capita on health in 2007. New Zealand spent the least at $2,454.

This is a big rise from the Fund’s last similar survey, in 2007, which found Americans spent $6,697 per capita on healthcare in 2005, or 16 percent of gross domestic product.

“We rank last on safety and do poorly on several dimensions of quality,” Schoen told reporters. “We do particularly poorly on going without care because of cost. And we also do surprisingly poorly on access to primary care and after-hours care.”

NETHERLANDS RANKED FIRST OVERALL
“

[SD Transplant]

this recent article is just icing on the cake:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

“In 2007, health spending was $7,290 per person in the United States, more than double that of any other country in the survey.

Australians spent $3,357, Canadians $3,895, Germans $3,588, the Netherlands $3,837 and Britons spent $2,992 per capita on health in 2007. New Zealand spent the least at $2,454.

This is a big rise from the Fund’s last similar survey, in 2007, which found Americans spent $6,697 per capita on healthcare in 2005, or 16 percent of gross domestic product.

“We rank last on safety and do poorly on several dimensions of quality,” Schoen told reporters. “We do particularly poorly on going without care because of cost. And we also do surprisingly poorly on access to primary care and after-hours care.”

NETHERLANDS RANKED FIRST OVERALL
“

[SD Transplant]

this recent article is just icing on the cake:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

“In 2007, health spending was $7,290 per person in the United States, more than double that of any other country in the survey.

Australians spent $3,357, Canadians $3,895, Germans $3,588, the Netherlands $3,837 and Britons spent $2,992 per capita on health in 2007. New Zealand spent the least at $2,454.

This is a big rise from the Fund’s last similar survey, in 2007, which found Americans spent $6,697 per capita on healthcare in 2005, or 16 percent of gross domestic product.

“We rank last on safety and do poorly on several dimensions of quality,” Schoen told reporters. “We do particularly poorly on going without care because of cost. And we also do surprisingly poorly on access to primary care and after-hours care.”

NETHERLANDS RANKED FIRST OVERALL
“

[SD Transplant]

this recent article is just icing on the cake:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

“In 2007, health spending was $7,290 per person in the United States, more than double that of any other country in the survey.

Australians spent $3,357, Canadians $3,895, Germans $3,588, the Netherlands $3,837 and Britons spent $2,992 per capita on health in 2007. New Zealand spent the least at $2,454.

This is a big rise from the Fund’s last similar survey, in 2007, which found Americans spent $6,697 per capita on healthcare in 2005, or 16 percent of gross domestic product.

“We rank last on safety and do poorly on several dimensions of quality,” Schoen told reporters. “We do particularly poorly on going without care because of cost. And we also do surprisingly poorly on access to primary care and after-hours care.”

NETHERLANDS RANKED FIRST OVERALL
“

[Author]

Posts