Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Survey: Health insurance costs surge in 2011

Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:01 AM EDT
us-news, business, us, health-care, care, premiums
Tom Murphy, AP Business Writer

This undated photo provided by the Kaiser Family Foundation, shows the CEO Drew Altman. The cost of employer-sponsored health insurance surged this year, snapping a trend toward moderate growth, but experts say these increases may slow again in 2012. (AP Photo/Kaiser Family Foundation, Robin Holland))

Advertise | AdChoices

INDIANAPOLIS — The cost of employer-sponsored health insurance surged this year, snapping a trend toward moderate growth, but experts say these increases may slow again in 2012.

Annual premiums for family coverage climbed 9 percent and surpassed $15,000 for the first time, according to a report released Tuesday by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research and Educational Trust. Premiums for single coverage rose 8 percent compared to 2010.

That compares to increases last year of 3 and 5 percent for family and single coverage, respectively. The study shows that premiums for both family and single coverage have more than doubled since 2001, while worker wages have risen 34 percent.

Kaiser CEO Drew Altman said a number of factors may have played a role in this year's percentage jump. He noted that health care costs continue to rise, and insurer profits and the health care overhaul also have some impact.

The overhaul, which Congress passed last year, aims to eventually cover millions of uninsured people. Kaiser said initial provisions of the law contributed between 1 and 2 percentage points to this year's premium hikes, which is about what many insurance analysts and benefits experts expected.

Companies and workers split premiums for employer-sponsored coverage, the most common form of health insurance in the United States, and employers generally pick up 70 percent of the bill or more.

Businesses likely reacted to these cost increases by giving a smaller raise or no wage increase to their workers, said Helen Darling, CEO of the National Business Group on Health, a nonprofit organization that represents large employers on health care issues.

"(Workers) basically are giving their pay raise to the health system," said Darling, who was not involved with the Kaiser study. "It's really bad news."

The annual study was conducted earlier this year and includes results from more than 2,000 companies nationwide. It also indicates that many more families than previously believed have benefited from a popular provision in the overhaul that allows young adults to stay on a parent's health plan until they turn 26.

Kaiser asked employers how many people were added to their insurance plans because of this provision and estimated that 2.3 million young adults enrolled. Last week the government had reported that the number of uninsured young adults had dropped by nearly 1 million since the law took effect, a finding independently corroborated by Gallup.

The difference isn't necessarily a contradiction.

The Kaiser survey may have counted young adults who were covered by a more expensive policy and switched to their parent's plan to save money.

Many workers are about to receive notices from their employers regarding health insurance coverage for next year. Altman said he cannot say whether this year's increase represents a bad omen for 2012 or if it is just a one-year blip.

Insurers have been saying for months that health care use is growing more slowly this year, something industry observers pin on a sluggish economy. Altman and other benefits experts say that could lead to lower premium increases next year, since insurers base their rates in part on how often people use care.

Benefits consultant Mercer said earlier this month an employer survey it did shows that 2012 health insurance costs will rise by the smallest amount since 1997.

The Kaiser survey shows a steady increase in companies offering high-deductible plans, which come with lower premiums but make consumers pay more out of pocket for care. This insurance is often paired with health savings accounts that let people save pretax for medical expenses.

Altman said he expects that trend to continue growing as employers try to control premiums.

"This is the main tool that employers have in the toolbox right now, so we're going to see more and more high-deductible plans with bigger and bigger deductibles," he said.

___

Associated Press writer Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar contributed to this report from Washington, D.C.

© 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Tom Murphy's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: Indianapolis
  • Public Discussion (68)
River-239955

I'm about to drop my health insurance. Found out this year that it really isn't such a great value.

  • 8 votes
#1 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:22 AM EDT
Tip4ya

River, I was at that point last year when my daughter was facing some serious medical issues. We were scratching our heads, wondering what it was we were paying for because our out of pocket expenses just about sunk us. It's ridiculous. Now we put off going to the doctor unless we feel we have no choice.

  • 6 votes
#1.1 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:59 PM EDT
Nick46

Not a great value until you use it. I recently had a grandson diagnosed with cancer. The first hospital (only) bill was $85K. Insurance paid $70K. Visits for chemo treatments once a week $80 co-pay. Treatment for the next three years.

Value what value do you put on a childs life?

  • 3 votes
#1.2 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:25 PM EDT
River-239955

Well, if I had a minor child, perhaps I would see it differently. And it has been nice having it handy. However, I'll still be sued for the co-pays I can't afford, so it's something of a catch .22 for me. Better off, if it's going to ruin my credit rating, to just let it all go there. At least I'll have the extra cash in my own pocket to cover the court costs !!!!

  • 4 votes
#1.3 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:38 PM EDT
Nick46

Better off, if it's going to ruin my credit rating, to just let it all go there. At least I'll have the extra cash in my own pocket to cover the court costs !!!!

I understand. But it's people like you that drive healthcare costs up. We pay for your care indirectly. Will you crawl in a hole and die when the time come or will you go to the hospital for that $200K end of life finale?

  • 3 votes
#1.4 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:49 PM EDT
River-239955

Um, no, it is not people like me who drive costs up. It is the overpriced care of the medical industry to begin with that drives them up. If you are paying for my care, then why am I being sued for it?

Duh......

Will you crawl in a hole and die when the time come or will you go to the hospital for that $200K end of life finale?

Now, that's really and truly none of your business, is it?

  • 5 votes
#1.5 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:52 PM EDT
Z1P2

Now, that's really and truly none of your business, is it?

I think his point is that everyone dies sometime, and if you die of old age, what you'll really be dieing of is septic failure... the end of life care (hospital bed for weeks/months and lots of drugs) for septic failure is pretty expensive... if you don't have insurance nor the money in your estate to cover that debt, then it drives up the costs for everyone else.

That being said, that is but a tiny fragment of the truely over-priced healthcare system... If you really wanted to drive down the costs of healthcare, start by limiting what medical schools can charge for tuition, then, after a decade or so has passed (so that those who paid higer tuition have a chance to repay their student loans), limit the amount that doctors can charge both patients and hospitals. Combine that with tort reform that limits punitive damages to $0 (punitive damages can not financially impact doctors anyway, thanks to malpractice insurance, so only real damages and pain and suffering should be awarded), but combine that with reducing the amount that malpractice insurers can charge doctors. All combined you'd see costs drop. Of course, that's about as socialist as it gets, too.

  • 1 vote
#1.6 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:17 PM EDT
Chris-382117

River,

The health care distributions system, as a whole, is what is broken; not just insurance alone. The For Profit Hospital and Clinic Model, The Specialist mentality over the General Practitioner, The Medical School Model and Cost, Pharmaceuticals, Insurance, Tort, Patient life style and eating habits, End of life care, Fraud, and the Tax Code; All of them play a part in the equation. Addressing one doesn't fix a thing and really only exacerbates the problem.

There is a cost side and a benefit side of the equation. You can't make a change to one side (like children covered until 25 and everyone covered regardless of pre-existing conditions) without having the other side change (cost to deliver per unit); that is just simple math, not jet propulsion physics. Just pointing fingers and zeroing in on one thing will never fix the problems. Everybody has a piece of this, and it won't get fixed unless we make serious changes to the way we provide services. Two of my hot buttons are the For Profit Hospital Model and the Specialist vs General Practitioner (Marcus Welby) Model.

When I was growing up (I'm 63), the nearest hospital was 53 miles away over 2 lane roads most of the way. Many people died en-route to the hospital. The idea for the For Profit Hospital Model came under Johnson. It was supposed to give incentives for investers to build hospitals and clinics in unserved / under-served areas. The problem is that they didn't define what "Under-served" was exactly. While it did a good thing by getting hospitals out into areas where there were none, now we have one of the damned things on almost every corner in a major city. I can stand at the front of my office and see 3 of them.

In order to turn a profit, they must keep them full and in order to keep the expensive diagnostic equipment they have to run tests. They pressure the Doctors that have privileges there to admit and test as much as they can. So this one thing has an effect on the number of admittances and the number of un-necessary tests.

The other is the fact that when Medicare / Medicaid started, they set rates for doctors. If you were a specialist, you were paid much more than a General Practitioner so it made sense for doctors to become Specialist rather than the Marcus Welby / Family Doctor model that works in other countries. In Europe, your Family Doctor, know YOU, Your family, how you live, and can make recommendations on what you need to do. You only go to a specialist if you have a problem that the GP can't handle. Here, everybody goes to a specialist and the ranks of General Practitioners have fallen off because it isn't profitable to be one. We need to get Dr. Welby out of retirement.

Until we address all of the problems rather than just point a finger and say "It's YOU, You miserable bastard", we will not fix anything and the cost will continue to skyrocket out of sight until the whole country is bankrupt. And, by the way, a Single Payer system alone won't fix the expense issues either. That will only cut out the insurance companies, but the out of control costs will still be there and getting bigger.

There's an old Japanese adage that, loosely translated says:

"Fix the Problem, Not the Blame."

  • 5 votes
#1.7 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:32 PM EDT
River-239955

I agree with both of you, for the most part. As a person who draws less than $12,000 per year (busting my ass for 40 hours per week), and then pays out more than 1/6 of that into health insurance premiums, I cannot afford to play the Mickey Mouse games that continue to drive people under. And I am tired of being blamed as a key point in the failure of the system.

There are many, many factors, as you both noted, that have contributed to the problem. The working poor are not the ones who should be shouldering the burden, though.

  • 2 votes
#1.8 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:39 PM EDT
gatoralum

But "for-Profit" hospitals only comprise about 14% of all hospitals, with non-profits comprising 70% and government run hospitals 16%.

http://www.mesotheliomacenters.org/for-profit-vs-non-profit.htm

  • 1 vote
#1.9 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:41 PM EDT
Chris-382117

Z1P2

I'll agree with you on most things but not the limiting on what a Doctor can make. If you do that, the "Best and Brightest" won't go into the field. When you have to go through 4 years of undergraduate, 4 years of Medical School, 2 years of internship (apprenticeship), and a year of Residency, all the time making little or nothing, then the ones that you want in the operating room just won't go through the work necessary to be there.

Some years ago, a company that I worked for tried to limit what they paid engineers. All of the good ones (Including myself), left and went with other companies. They thought that they could get away wit it and it backfired. They had to pay a premium pice to get engineers back after that. It really hurt them; oh well.

Other than that, I agree with you.

  • 1 vote
#1.10 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:51 PM EDT
Nick46

If you really wanted to drive down the costs of healthcare, start by limiting what medical schools can charge for tuition, then, after a decade or so has passed (so that those who paid higer tuition have a chance to repay their student loans), limit the amount that doctors can charge both patients and hospitals.

Well then let's limit everyone's income to minimum wage. That should drive prices down. This a capitalistic country and that will never work. One thing that is apparent in the USA is the expectation that everything should be cheap. We all complain that we are being ripped off by someone. Of course if we own a business we are fairly priced.

  • 1 vote
#1.11 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:59 PM EDT
Tip4ya

Nick, I would beg, steal and borrow for the health of my child. When I made the comment about not going to the doctor, now, unless it's a dire need, I was referring to myself and my husband.

We were lucky that everything worked out for our daughter, but after going to several specialists who require a much higher co-pay, and the multiple tests each specialist ran on her, it nearly sunk us. To dig it in a little deeper, she was never diagnosed. Undetermined. It was a very frustrating process all around, and that's putting it mildly.

I'm sorry to hear about your grandson, I'm happy to hear he's getting the treatment he needs.

  • 1 vote
#1.12 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:03 PM EDT
Chris-382117

gatoralum

But "for-Profit" hospitals only comprise about 14% of all hospitals, with non-profits comprising 70% and government run hospitals 16%.

But does that also include the "Doc in a Box" places like Urgent Care, the Independent Nuclear Medicine, and stuff like that? There has to be some money in it or there wouldn't be several full pages in the phone book devoted to these locations.

Those are only a couple of my hot buttons because, in rural areas is where you find the most of the For Profit Units that I have seen. Since I have family in these areas, I have seen some of the issues first hand.

  • 2 votes
#1.13 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:24 PM EDT
azartguy

The fundamental problem is that health insurance in the US (including Medicare and the revised health care system under President Obama) is set up to work through the insurance model using the employer as the primary distributor of the product suppliers, the health insurance companies.

It's pointless to even drag out the tired argument of free market for health care . The free market is a straw man to allow the insurance providers to hide. There is no no 'free market' when an oligopoly exists and according to the 2009 AMA report "Competition in Health Care," five firms control 75% of this market: "…of the 42 states we examined, the combined market share of the five insurers with the largest shares is at least 75 percent."

As long as we allow the public discourse by redirected with this kind of social darwinism doublespeak about the marketplace, instead of discussing the social need for the product, we can't fix this problem because, even without the oligopoly, this is not a free market of willing suppliers and voluntary consumers: the demand side of consumers is not voluntary, you will buy the service one time or another, it's only a question of when and who will pay at artificially maintained rates.

    #1.14 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:30 PM EDT
    Chris-382117

    gatoralum,

    But the whole point is that unless we fix ALL of the issues, we fix none of them.

    Lawyers drive Defensive Medicine, extra tests, and higher malpractice

    For Profit Hospitals drive More Tests, More admissions

    Specialist as Primary Care drive excessive prescriptions as one doctor doesn't talk to the other. My stepdad that I care for was on 14different meds. some of them were countering the effect of others because they were prescribed by different doctors. We st down with the GP and managed to get him off of all but two and he is 300% better than he was and his meds bill has shrunk from $250.00 out of pocket to $20 out of pocket every month so I have no idea how much it has saved medicare (he is 88 and has no choice but to be on medicare) along with his retiree insurance.

    One thing affects 3 others so unless you fix them all, you have fixed nothing.

    • 2 votes
    #1.15 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 5:10 PM EDT
    gatoralum

    Lawyers do not drive defensive medicine. That is a myth. Profit hospitals make up 14 % of hospitals. They do not have a markedly higher cost per patient than other hospitals. You have identified problems, but minor ones that have little effect on the overall cost of health care.

      #1.16 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:09 PM EDT
      Chris-382117

      gatoralum

      Lawyers do not drive defensive medicine. That is a myth.

      So you say. That isn't the opinion of every medical professionals I know, but I can tell you for a FACT that it drives "Defensive Engineering." As an Engineer for over 35 year, I can tell you for a fact that companies have engineering personnel that assess what one of the bottom feeding scum suckers MIGHT claim about the product that you design. We go out of our way to anticipate this and it add extra cost to the product as a whole just to be sure that the weasels don't come knocking on our door.

      So, what is your measure to determine how much defensive medicine is practiced? Do you ask a Doctor "Do you order extra tests that you don't need even tho you know the answer so that the lawyers will stay away? If so, how many?" You actually expect an honest answer? Well, then, I have this bridge in New York with a great job of the East River that is going cheap. You wouldn't be a lawyer, by chance?

      You have identified problems, but minor ones that have little effect on the overall cost of health care.

      So, if you are so friggin' smart, what are the big ticket items ? Oh, that's right, It is Insurance Companies; the favorite whipping boy for all liberals . If you get rid of all those evil bastard insurance companies and put everything into medicare / medicaid then the world will be just peachy. No problems if we just do a single payer system. No need to go after anything else; we are now in Camelot and life is good for everyone. Is that it? Maybe you didn't see the 60 minutes program last year where they exposed $60 Billion in Medicare and Medicaid Fraud out of $700 billion; what is that; 7% that they KNOW OF? Why don't we just put the whole medical delivery system of $3 Trillion on Medicare / medicaid; That would be about $260 Billion in fraud give or take a little. That would work out really well; at least for the fraudsters.

      This is a complex problem. just pointing a finger at one item and declaring "Its YOU, you miserable bastard." won't fix any of it.

        #1.17 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:26 PM EDT
        mstanley2265

        sidenote Chris, it's a discussion mind CoH. :)

          #1.18 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:52 PM EDT
          johny-388777

          Do something about it. Write to your congress person because if you do not the CEOs at the healthcare companies will.

          https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

          Wonder why everything is so expensive. Read this

          We can see what has happened to corporate performance in the last 45 years. In a study of 20,000 US companies from 1965 to date by Deloitte’s Center for the Edge (the Shift Index), we see a disastrous decline in performance overall in this peiod::

          • The rate of return on assets of these firms has fallen by 75%.
          • The life expectancy of these firm has fallen from around 70 years to less than 15 years, and is heading towards 5 years, unless something changes.

          Meanwhile, on the right hand side, we can see what has happened to compensation. While corporate performance has been on this sharp decline, executive compensation has been increasing astronomically. Whereas in 1965, executive compensation was 24 times what the typical worker made,studies show that today executive compensation is a staggering 275 times what the typical worker makes.

          In a more detailed study of the growth of U.S. executive pay during the period 1993-2003 by Lucian Bebchuk and Yaniv Grinstein, pay grew much beyond the increase that could be explained by changes in firm size, performance and industry classification. Had the relationship of compensation to size, performance and industry classification remained the same in 2003 as it was in 1993, mean compensation in 2003 would have been only about half of its actual size. In other words, executives were receiving increases in compensation that were twice what would have been justified by performance.

          Meanwhile, during the period, compensation for workers has remained basically unchanged. Studies show that real average hourly earnings (excluding fringe benefits) now stand roughly at 1974 levels. Since the cost of health and education has been increasing rapidly, the actual standard of living of most people has been on the decline.

          Lets understand this. CEO pay is destroying america. That money paid to the NO good bums is money that could of been used to create more jobs , do more Research, get better machines to make the production better, All that money is gone to these people who not much then comic relief.

          example, IAG CEO ( 100 mil), " We need more people to get insurance". OMG. dam he is really a stategtic thinker, If he leaves IAG. its finished forever. OMG. NO DONT LEAVE US.

          You spend all day working and you get fools like that running the companies into the ground.

            #1.19 - Wed Sep 28, 2011 5:03 AM EDT
            gatoralum

            Tort law does make manufacturers of products fix the defects that kill and maim. That is one of the purposes of tort law. The same with medicine. What you call "defensive medicine" is doctors avoiding the mistakes that kill and maim millions. Most errors committed by doctors and hospitals that result in death or disability do not result in lawsuits or other adverse actions against doctors.

            This is a complex problem. just pointing a finger at one item and declaring "Its YOU, you miserable bastard." won't fix any of it.

            That is precisely the point of my comments to Chris. He picked out three easy targets that do not have much to do with the rising cost. And I did not say word one about health insurance companies. That is why I support the health reform passed last year which use our private health insurance system to bring health care to all Americans. I guess that means you support it to, seeing as it is based on the free market.

              #1.20 - Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:10 AM EDT
              Chris-382117

              Maria,

              There was no violation of CoH, no personal attacks. However, gatoralum has made 2 comments, both directed at my posts, with nothing but "that is a myth" or "You're wrong" that are asymptotically approaching "Grenade Trolling". That IS a violation of the CoH (look under trolling).

              If he/ she has a solution or even an idea of what the problem is, let's hear it; I'm listening. But just "you're wrong" or "that's a myth" or "that is only a tiny part" without anything to back it up besides "ThinkProgress" or " mesotheliomacenters.org" (which by the way is a website with an agenda slanted toward lawyers defending asbestos suits; surprise) just doesn't cut it.

              But all some of these posters want to do is point fingers at one thing and say "It's YOU, You miserable Bastard Insurance Company (or Doctor, or Supplier, or patient, etc.) " There is no one answer, but some that post here do so with one liners that are designed to derail and distroy discussion. That, IMO, is what those posts were for; no substance, just "That's a Myth." and that really pisses me off!

              • 1 vote
              #1.21 - Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:11 AM EDT
              mstanley2265

              Still, we must try and maintain...easier on the BP. nice to see you this morning. :)

                #1.22 - Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:40 AM EDT
                gatoralum

                So, Chris, you can make an assertion without any evidence that what you say is true and that is Ok. If someone disaggrees with you, that is trolling? Your claim that for-profit hospitals drive the cost increase is not true simply because they make up a small % of all hospitals. 14 %

                In 2006, non-profit hospitals comprised 70 percent of the mix, with state and local government hospitals taking up 16 percent and for-profit hospitals making up 14 percent.

                http://www.mesotheliomacenters.org/for-profit-vs-non-profit.htm

                Your claim about defensive medicine had been disputed by the CBO and the GAO. There may be some effect on the cost, but what percentage of what you call defensive medicine are actually procedures that should be performed? You don't know. You just pulled some talking points from somewhere and repeated them here. If my disagreeing with you is "grenade trolling", what does that make you unsupported assertions in the first place?

                And if that is trolling, what do you call your false claim that the mesothelioma centers web site is slanted web site for lawyers in asbestosis cases. You really pulled that one out of thin air. Gives us an idea about your level of concern about the accuracy of what you post.

                  #1.23 - Wed Sep 28, 2011 8:23 AM EDT
                  azartguy

                  what do you call your false claim that the mesothelioma centers web site is slanted web site for lawyers in asbestosis cases. You really pulled that one out of thin air.

                  gatoralum (#1.23). I don't have a dog in this dust up between you and Chris, but I have to agree that your citation is weak. Any website that does not include a statement of funding and participants should be suspect.

                  The data looks good and they source it adequately, but there's no way know whether data was cherry picked to support an agenda. Much like wikipedia, this kind of clearing house website is only good for finding links to primary research and data, but isn't a reasonable cite beyond that.

                  I don't buy a watch from a guy named Harry down on the corner, or a car from Honest Sam in the gravel parking lot, so there's no reason to "buy" information from a "blind" site.

                  • 1 vote
                  #1.24 - Thu Sep 29, 2011 2:44 AM EDT
                  gatoralum

                  Lets see. No source or citation versus a "weak" one. Which do you think is more likely true? And, havd you bothered to go the website and clicked on "resources" you would have found the original source, http://www.aha.org/research/rc/stat-studies/fast-facts.shtml In case you also do not bother to go there, that is the American Hospital Association. No reason to think that they might know the breakdown. Taking you people by the hand to the truth is really getting tiresome.

                    #1.25 - Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:37 PM EDT
                    Reply
                    David-1830107

                    Though the price was supposed to come down. Thats why none of this really goes into effect till 2014 cause if it fails Hell already be reelected.

                    • 4 votes
                    Reply#2 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:34 AM EDT
                    CaptainObviousSays

                    whatever Obama says will happen is complete opposite of what will actually happen..

                    • 7 votes
                    #2.1 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:12 PM EDT
                    my-pockets-r-mt

                    The study does not delve into why rates jumped in 2011, but foundation CEO Drew Altman said a number of factors may have played a role.

                    Last week there was the talk about how so many more 18-26 year olds have health insurance and most contribute that to being on their parent's policy, seems to me explains the premium increases.?

                    • 2 votes
                    #2.2 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:48 PM EDT
                    CaptainObviousSays

                    seems to me explains the premium increases.?

                    exactly... wait till the whole law is in effect..

                    insurance rates will rise even more.

                    then the insurance companies will be able to legislate their profits directly with the feds...

                    the people and free markets have been pushed out of the conversation

                    • 7 votes
                    #2.3 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:56 PM EDT
                    paxildog

                    Obamacare was never about people benefits, it has always been about government forcing purchase of private industry insurance and more overhead in government.

                    • 5 votes
                    #2.4 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:00 PM EDT
                    Nick46

                    whatever Obama says will happen is complete opposite of what will actually happen..

                    Well at least we know. With Bush we didn't know which lie he was covering for with another lie.

                    • 3 votes
                    #2.5 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:28 PM EDT
                    gatoralum

                    Though the price was supposed to come down

                    Then you were not paying attention to the debate. No one said that this would cause premiums to drop. It was argued that it would slow the growth of premiums. If you read the article, that it exaclty what they expect to happen next year. The premiums are based on the insurance company's experience in paying claims in previous years.

                    • 4 votes
                    #2.6 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:58 PM EDT
                    ComSen

                    that it exaclty what they expect to happen next year.

                    Yeah, after the elections. What if that doesn't happen? If Obama is re-elected is he going to resign? I don't think so. He'll probably blame Bush, the GOP, and the Tea Party.

                    • 3 votes
                    #2.7 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:14 PM EDT
                    gatoralum

                    Go read the article. Better yet, read the actual Kaiser report. Then we can have in intelligent discussion.

                    • 5 votes
                    #2.8 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:23 PM EDT
                    bushman1

                    Some facts that may have been missed or ignored.

                    Just one to two percentage points of the nine percent increase can be blamed on the Obama administration's sweeping 2010 health care reform act.

                    "Critics of the national health reform law passed in 2010 like to blame everything but the weather on 'Obamacare,' but... regardless of how you feel about the Affordable Care Act, its effect on premiums this year is modest," said Drew Altman, Kaiser Family Foundation chief executive.

                    "While the conventional wisdom is that private insurance does a better job of controlling costs, the opposite is true."

                    • 3 votes
                    #2.9 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:48 PM EDT
                    Reply
                    BigRev

                    It appears that private sector health insurance is totally failing the American people. The Republicans want you to die quicker and Private sector health insurance is just helping that to happen.

                    • 7 votes
                    Reply#3 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:44 PM EDT
                    paxildog

                    And the democrats are trying to force everyone to buy that death. Great huh....

                    • 2 votes
                    #3.1 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:01 PM EDT
                    Nick46

                    It appears that private sector health insurance is totally failing the American people.

                    If you really feel that way then I suggest you start a company that will not fail the public. I guarantee you will be rich or poor very quick. You buy car insurance and rarely use it what's the difference?

                      #3.2 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:36 PM EDT
                      paxildog

                      Having a car is optional, living isn't.

                      • 3 votes
                      #3.3 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:44 PM EDT
                      Nick46

                      I'm sorry but my mother choose to die rather than endure all the treatments and surgery. So we do have a choice. In fact people commit suicide everyday.

                      • 2 votes
                      #3.4 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:53 PM EDT
                      Reply
                      J. W. Welch

                      Sooner or later there will have to a serious push back against the health insurance, pharma and health provider industry.

                      This huge, out of control transfer of wealth to a single sector of the national economy will have to end for all our sakes.

                      My health insurance premiums for me alone went up 19.2%!! this year with more increases on the way.

                      • 2 votes
                      Reply#4 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:21 PM EDT
                      Nick46

                      Healthcare premiums are regulated. That means they must justify all increases.

                      The push back won't happen. Medical providers have what we need and we pay for it like any other service. Food costs are skyrocketing do you not eat? Or why don't we complain and push back on that?

                        #4.1 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:43 PM EDT
                        J. W. Welch

                        You're right Nick. I am in error. We should keep paying until we can pay no more.

                        • 3 votes
                        #4.2 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:46 PM EDT
                        Nick46

                        Unfortunately for many that day is near. In the world today the cost of living and I mean necessities just keeps rising. My pay remains the same and has for years. I give up little things to stay even. No cable premium channels, no fast food, no extended vacations, etc. Pretty soon we'll be like our parents/grandparents and sit on the porch for entertainment.

                          #4.3 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:01 PM EDT
                          Carol-500283

                          This creeping up of all costs is another argument for cooperative buying, even of things like insurance. Groups, not just unions, have done this for years. Think farm bureau, religious groups(Lutheran Brotherhood, etc.), similar to community credit unions, but for insurance. There are also other buying groups, we need to understand and use cooperative agreements with companies who want our business. If you have say, a thousand potential customers, they'll listen. Let's put the burden back on them when we can. We, the consumer, have more clout than we ever use. Get together with others that you can identify as a group and go for it. Even your employer could do this with others in the field.

                          • 1 vote
                          #4.4 - Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:19 PM EDT
                          azartguy

                          Healthcare premiums are regulated. That means they must justify all increases.

                          Nick (#4.1). Well, not really. There is not now uniform national regulation. One of the things the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" would do is allow the states to continue to regulate but set minimum standards applicable to all states.

                          Today regulation is left up to the states: some states closely regulate, some loosely regulate and some pretty much give carte blanche to the insurance companies to rate gouge, use recessions, cherry pick customers, use stall-to-death claim denial policies, etc, etc and charge usurious rates for it.

                          One of the reasons that the Republicans hate real reform, and have pushed so hard for so long for interstate health policy writing, is to use that fragmented control for an end-run around regulation in the guise of the "free market."

                          If the industry and Republicans would have had their way, an insurer could have moved to an industry-friendly state (Texas comes to mind) but sell across state lines into other states and the home-state regulations would apply to all sales. Although that Rep interstate proposal is aimed at closing down markets, stifling competition and increasing industry profit, ironically enough the "free market" which Reps are so enamored of actually would have come into play at that point: to compete, insurance companies would have been forced to relocate to the loosely regulated states, then states would have had to compete to hold those companies, and the jobs, by easing up on regulation. This would have become a nifty closed loop system that quickly would have found it's lowest common denominator of true caveat emptor supply side control.

                          Combine that with the other Republican hot button "tort reform" proposal that may still weasel their way into law to remove one of the few effective market controls available to the consumer, and we would you have had the perfect 19th Century pro-business anti-consumer reform package.

                          Thankfully, the Affordable Care Act should, at least temporarily, detour us from that big-business dystopian road to ruin, but judging by the rabid conservative attempts to gut the law before it can even come into full affect in 2014, the Republican right is going to keep gnawing away at the thing.

                            #4.5 - Thu Sep 29, 2011 3:34 AM EDT
                            johny-388777

                            The CEO pay is going up. You are all paying for it. Its where all the cash is. You don't get a pay rise so this no good bum of a CEO and his cronies can. The rare talent? The market price sets the pay? Thats just insane. The destruction of unions means that all the small people get shafted. ITs actually worse then that. That money you didnt get meant you didnt spend it to create more jobs. That money the greedy CEOs and board took made this mess. Whats worse is they are not only ordinary people, the are incompetent.

                              #4.6 - Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:23 AM EDT
                              Reply
                              ma91744-1401618

                              There's something wicked about the smile on Drew's face. Gives me the creeps. Reminds me of the Goodfellas line about how your killers come with smiles on their faces

                              • 1 vote
                              Reply#5 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:16 PM EDT
                              zapper45701

                              I'm not sure about the smile, but that hair is freaky. It look more like fur.

                              • 1 vote
                              #5.1 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:18 PM EDT
                              ma91744-1401618

                              Looks like he could be sporting a Mike Brady due.

                                #5.2 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 5:57 PM EDT
                                Reply
                                zapper45701

                                And who didn't see this coming? Sorry folks, this was what the insurance companies wanted. Remember when all the legislation was in the mill (Congress). We didn't hear a peep out of the insurance industry to the negative. (That should have been a warning right there.) They were just waiting--like vultures. They knew the loopholes in and out before any of us ever saw the first paragraph. Has the cost of medical treatment dramatically increased since Obamacare passed? No. But corporate greed sure has. Make no mistake, the insurance companies are using the system to mass benefit. It's already started.

                                • 3 votes
                                Reply#6 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:17 PM EDT
                                AlphaDogReporter

                                This has nothing to do with the reform bill.

                                Historical increases in premiums:

                                1999 5.3%
                                2000 8.2%
                                2001 10.9%
                                2002 12.9%
                                2003 13.9%
                                2004 11.2%
                                2005 9.2%
                                2006 7.7%
                                2007 6.1%

                                Also, people need to SERIOUSLY start shopping insurance providers. Keeping your old plan may not be a good idea with the new plans coming out. I just went from my old plan which was hitting over $500 a month to a new one at $335 a month with better coverage.

                                • 1 vote
                                Reply#7 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:19 PM EDT
                                johny-388777

                                The 100 million American workers without college degrees, whose real take home pay today is less than it was 25 years ago, certainly can't be said to have shared in that 40% productivity gain. And the other 20 million or so with college degrees whose pay rose modestly at best certainly shared in very little of that nearly 40% productivity gain.

                                So who got all the money?

                                CEO PAY. THEY ARE JOB DESTROYERS.

                                  #7.1 - Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:29 AM EDT
                                  Reply
                                  Box Lunch

                                  Just the tip of the iceberg Obmacare will send healthcare cost skyrocketing. Now we aren not only stuck paying for our own health care but also the health care of every low life liberal that walks the streets shooting up junk.

                                  • 1 vote
                                  Reply#8 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:22 PM EDT
                                  gatoralum

                                  No. It will not send health care cost skyrocketing. Have anything other than your "hunch" to back that up? By the way, this article is not about health care costs. It is about health insurance premiums paid by employers, which is how about 40% of the population is covered.

                                  • 2 votes
                                  #8.1 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:25 PM EDT
                                  Reply
                                  chaos99972

                                  just to clarify, I am a big proponent of universal, government-run healthcare.

                                  Health care costs are rising because of the Health Care Reform Bill.
                                  This is deliberate. Those that actively supported the bill knew that this would happen, as health care insurance providers attempt to maintain their profits by raising premiums in response to new rules that limit their ability to deny coverage.
                                  The reason for this is simple. As health care insurance costs rise, they become unaffordable to a larger and larger percentage of employers and citizens. This means that less and less people will ultimately have health coverage, and this, coupled with increasing employer demands to be relieved of the costs of healthcare insurance, will precipitate a move towards universal, government-run heathcare insureance that not even the most die-hard conservative will be able to argue against.
                                  In other words, the fix is in.

                                    Reply#9 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:22 PM EDT
                                    Real Talk-373084

                                    Health Insurance is a SCAM. I think liberals and conservatives alike are so uneducated on matters of the economics. I have a unique perspective having been in the insurance industry (not health, but life/property/etc).

                                    Our health care system works so GREAT, wouldn't it be awesome if we just had insurance for EVERYTHING we needed?

                                    Imagine another constant need you have, let's say you bought Grocery Insurance. You pay $200 a month, it comes right out of your check.

                                    So you go to the grocery store to use this insurance plan. You go into the aisle and go to buy a box of cereal. But there are no prices on the cereal. Also it is hard to tell the difference of the quality of each product. However you need cereal, so you just take one. Next you go to buy some rice. Again, there are just bags of rice, no prices. You eventually fill up your cart with a few more things you dont really need, because your insurance company will cover everything anyway, and besides you already paid for all the stuff in your paycheck.

                                    After you are finally done shopping, you go to the check-out line. You pay a copay of $15 and you leave. Occasionally you notice there are a few poor people that show up to the grocery store hungry. The grocery store lets them take away groceries, but the store is never is able to recoup any money for it. By law they are required to serve them.

                                    A few days later, the grocery store than sends a bill to your Grocery Insurance Company. They pretty much charge what they want to the insurance company. The Grocery Insurance Company than pays about 75% of your bill. You are responsible for the other 25%. The grocery store sends you a bill of whats leftover. The grocery store also has insurance to protect from lawsuits, because often they are under constant threat of lawsuit, sometimes legitimate, sometimes frivolous.

                                    This process repeats itself week after week. The consumer (YOU and others) shops with little information, and no concern or knowledge of costs, until your premiums are raised, your copay goes up, or your insurance only covers a portion. You feel the price increases, but only about half of it, because your employer is bearing the other half of the increase. Some people show up at the grocery store (hospitals), and do not pay anything. The grocery store (doctor or hospital) raises prices however or whenever they want, with no fear of loss of business because no costs are advertised and there is not really any competition going on in the market place. The unnecessary middle man in all of this, the insurance companies as well as the trial lawyers take their cut and leave and in the end YOU pay for all of this. Not to mention the people who can't or won't pay for their health care.

                                    Make sense why this health insurance scheme does not work and why prices continue to rise? The Free Market is not the problem, it is the LACK of the Free Market that is the problem!

                                    What has happened is the politicians and the lawyers and the health care insurance industry (even the life insurance industry) have BASTARDIZED the original intent of insurance products.

                                    What is the purpose you buy an insurance product? To protect against uncertain risk. For example, you purchase life insurance to protect against the financial risk of early death, in which your family would be left with no income from your job. You purchase car insurance, (besides that it's often mandatory), to protect against the financial risk of you being involved in a car accident. Insurance covers events that may happen, or may NEVER happen. RISK, not CERTAINTY.

                                    Which is why the ONLY type of health insurance plan that makes any sense is CATASTROPHIC coverage, essentially a very high-deductible plan, with low monthly premiums. This type of health coverage is TRUE to the concept of insurance. Why? Because it covers you against RISK. For example, if you have to have heart surgery or brain surgery that costs say $25,000, you are covered against that financial risk. It covers expensive events that may happen, but also may NEVER happen.

                                    Why is traditional health "insurance" a rip off? Because it is like Grocery Insurance. The event of you needing to go to the grocery store sometime this week or next week is not a RISK, it is a CERTAINTY. You CONSTANTLY need food. The event of you needing to go and get checked out by your doctor or dentist every six months is not a RISK, it is a CERTAINTY. It is almost statistically CERTAIN, that you or someone in your family health will require the services of a doctor for something or at least CERTAIN that you and your family will want to go visit the doctor for a check up to make sure you are in good health.

                                    So why do we practice Free Market Capitalism in our grocery stores and nearly everywhere else, but not in our doctor's offices? You do not see the prices of other things we need sky rocketing so irrationally and without any kind of logic.

                                    TRUE story: I was paying $240 per month for our highest healthcare package here at my workplace. I had a problem with my foot. The copay for a specialist was $40 on my plan. I went to the specialist and ended up having surgery on my foot, the insurance company paid for almost none of it. The next year I got rid of my traditional health care plan and decided to pay out of pocket. My foot problem returned. When I went to the foot specialist, they indicated that it is normally $45, but I can just pay $40 (since they were very nice people).

                                    So I was throwing away $240 per month!

                                      Reply#10 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:31 PM EDT
                                      Nick46

                                      TRUE story: I was paying $240 per month for our highest healthcare package here at my workplace.

                                      You blame the insurance company when it was actually your company that actually selected the coverage. I pay much more that you. My doctor visit is $120 the negotiated insurance rate is $70. So even though I pay $70 I did save $50 because of the negoriated rates. In 2003 I had excellent coverage, spouse included for $89 per month. In 2004 that changed to $450 with a high deductible. This year is $725 with a high deductible. My company did that not the insurance company. They decided they were not paying for the excellect coverage nor paying 80% of the premium anymore.

                                        #10.1 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:12 PM EDT
                                        gatoralum

                                        Can you name any other nation where health care is paid for directly by the patient on an as needed basis and only catastrophic events are covered? Did not think so. What an absurd idea. If only catastrophic health care problems are covered by insruance, many people will not seek out medical care until that event occurs. Then, the cost of providing care is high. The key to reducing the cost of health care is having people see their physician on a regular basis so that they can get the inexpensive care they need to avoid the catastrophic event. It is cheaper to provide high blood pressure medication and periodic chckups than it is to pay for caring for a stroke victim. It is cheaper to pay for chemotherapy or other similar treatment for a cancer detected early, than to pay for the surgery and palliative care a patient who is diagnosed later will need. Trying to apply "free market" solutions to health care is idiocy.

                                          #10.2 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 5:00 PM EDT
                                          Nick46

                                          If only catastrophic health care problems are covered by insruance, many people will not seek out medical care until that event occurs.

                                          Who would insure you once cancer is diagnosed? It's like buying car insurance after the accident and expecting them tp pay.

                                          • 1 vote
                                          #10.3 - Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:18 AM EDT
                                          Nick46

                                          It is almost statistically CERTAIN, that you or someone in your family health will require the services of a doctor for something or at least CERTAIN that you and your family will want to go visit the doctor for a check up to make sure you are in good health.

                                          My wife and I visit the doctor twice a year for checkups. We rarely get sick, very lucky. We pay $725 per month for insurance and pay for the doctors visit until we reach a $3000 out-of-pocket each. So by my calculation that's $2245 per doctors visit.

                                          • 1 vote
                                          #10.4 - Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:23 AM EDT
                                          Reply
                                          The Dire DiscipleDeleted
                                          Laos Deo

                                          We can all thank folks like Michael Eisner from Disney who helped set this stage.

                                          http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/13/us/baptists-censure-disney-for-gay-spouse-benefits.html?pagewanted=1
                                          http://articles.latimes.com/1995-10-07/news/mn-54276_1_partner-benefits
                                          http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1996-07-07/news/9607070058_1_walt-disney-same-sex-domestic-partners-health-benefits
                                          http://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/08/us/disney-co-will-offer-benefits-to-gay-partners.html
                                          http://newsbusters.org/node/5972

                                            Reply#12 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:50 PM EDT
                                            Daniel_Paul

                                            Yawn... This is no surprise to people with brains. Keep pouring government money at it though. Let's have fun and see just how expensive we can make it!

                                            • 2 votes
                                            Reply#13 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:51 PM EDT
                                            mstanley2265

                                            9% increase, must have had a 9% drop in policy holders. Health insurance companies like level paying fields.

                                              Reply#14 - Tue Sep 27, 2011 5:06 PM EDT
                                              The Dire DiscipleDeleted
                                              Reply
                                              Leave a Comment:
                                              You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                              You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                                              (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                                              Newsvine Privacy Statement
                                              As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                              FUN STUFF:
                                              • Leaderboard |
                                              • E-Mail Alerts |
                                              • Top of the Vine |
                                              • Newsvine Live |
                                              • Newsvine Archives |
                                              • The Greenhouse
                                              COMPANY STUFF:
                                              • Code of Honor |
                                              • Company Info |
                                              • Contact Us |
                                              • Jobs |
                                              • User Agreement |
                                              • Privacy Policy |
                                              • About our ads
                                              LEGAL STUFF:
                                              • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                                              • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                                              • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com