has anyone...

"any change to co-pays and deductibles?"

No changes. I've heard the reports on many individual plans being dropped because they don't conform to the ACA (mental health coverage, etc.). Now I am fully expecting to be dropped at some point in the future and rates to increase, since I have a basic, bare-bones policy. But I'll take my discounted price now, and deal with the expected disappointment later....

Not to get off topic (this is a sports board after all), but this ACA is going to be a disaster of biblical proportions. The whole idea in keeping this affordable was that the exchanges would provide enough competition amongst insurance companies that would make the premiums affordable. Many major insurance co's are not participating in several states, preferring to wait it out and see how this shakes out and/or just don't want to take on thousands of new people. Insurance companies are supposed to take on huge numbers of people with pre-existing conditions and the prices are supposed to be affordable? Think again. There were no price controls built in and they haven't anticipated the huge bureaucracy that has to be created just to administer this plan-those costs get passed on to policyholders as well. Also, the lowest avg premium about 200-250 a month for a "barebones" plan - I don't see how that is affordable when you also consider the deductibles and Rx's are going sky high. I agree with the previous poster - this might just be a design to get us to a single-payor system. This plan has socialized medicine written all over it, but ultimately the laws of supply & demand, pure American Capitalism, will doom this plan - ironic isn't it?

JohnnyB--

I was getting ready to say the same--the law of S&D will, ultimately, doom the plan. Putting in a price control would only speed up the process--be it a floor or ceiling. That whole "invisible hand" bit--you think Adam Smith wrote that about Hal and the bullpen, but it was just used to describe economics?

new oxymoron equals the affordable health care act.

Gentlemen...

The kinks need to be worked out with this. Give it time.

For those of you paying more thru the A.C.A. (Obamacare), I ask you this... Was your insurance really that good? Have you had any experience with out-of-pocket expenses with your current provider?

Sure you might be paying more for your care, but you are getting a standard level of care. I'm sure there are many things your new care will provide that isn't provided for by your older insurance.

FWIW, for those that don't know me, I'm a chiropractor in SoCal. (Huntington Beach) I've seen my fair share of patients complain about their new coverages. The main problem they have with it? $$$. These are the same people who have paid less on their monthly premiums, but more out of pocket. They seem to forget this. They also seem to forget their deductibles, $1000-$5000, that must be met before their insurance pays.

I'm divorced for 2 years now. I've been without insurance during this time. Football/baseball and rugby injuries have caught up with my right hip. Applying for insurance with a pre-existing condition? Yeah right... Well now I can. I was expecting $300-$400/month with my premiums. Instead, I'm looking at $250-$300.

I couldn't be any happier.

Change is hard for people. Look at the big picture with your inurance. Maybe your monthly premium will go up. But you will have BETTER insurance for it.

visick

viscik, i love it. you go without heath insurance but make your living off of it. curious how many of your clients you have informed of your position? where do you come up with the "its ok to pay more for better coverage" BS? then you get covered for a pre-existing conditon. i think the government needs to enact the Affordable HOmeowners ACT. therefore you don't have to purchase insurance until after the flood, fire, or burglary!

viscik, i love it. you go without heath insurance but make your living off of it. curious how many of your clients you have informed of your position? where do you come up with the "its ok to pay more for better coverage" BS? then you get covered for a pre-existing conditon. i think the government needs to enact the Affordable HOmeowners ACT. therefore you don't have to purchase insurance until after the flood, fire, or burglary!

It's not like the insurance companies gave folks with pre-existing conditions an option. They didn't offer coverage that would cover the conditions.

It's not that one couldn't afford the policy, there was no policy to buy.

Pay more for better coverage makes all the sense in the world. I need the higher cost/more coverage to take care of ongoing medical issues. Someone younger and healthier would choose a lower cost option.

I would be stupid to take a lower cost option and paying $10s of thousands out of pocket annually, and a 25 year old in good health would be stupid to pay for a high end plan when he only needs coverage for emergency issues.

Don't like that? Then start voting for pols that want a single payer system, and it's all the same to everyone.

Now, if this thread makes it to the weekend without getting moved or deleted, we know that management isn't paying attention

The biggest problem we have is distinguishing between health care and health insurance

Governments, both Federal and State, have given us the insurance system we had prior to passage of the Affordable Health Care Act and the debacle we are seeing now.

It wasn't that long ago in that people paid for most of their health care services directly from their neighborhood physician. There were insurance plans against some high cost operations, but people bought insurance from their local insurance broker just like we buy car insurance today.

This started to change in WW2 when wage and price controls went into effect. Employers were only able to entice employees to change companies by offering better health care insurance. This was codified into law and eventually companies started getting tax benefits for the insurance programs that were offered to their employees also by law.

Then State governments started getting involved by telling insurance companies in their states what conditions they had to cover, and prevent people from buying the more affordable insurance in the next state that didn't have the same coverage requirements.

Things have gotten worse from there for a number of reasons. Among them are treatments such as organ replacement surgeries. Some other reasons would be the administrative requirements of hospitals, health insurance companies, doctor's offices and so forth.

I have seen recent articles where private payers have been able to get various surgeries for 1/3 the cost of what hospitals charge insurance companies simply by paying cash. Might try and cite a couple of them later, but need to head off to work.

I just had a discussion with a friend who has been self insured for about a year and a half. She is paying $189. To get the same coverage under the new system she will have to pay $545. Her insurance company has told her they can keep her on the current plan through 2014 but after that they will have to force her on to one of the new policies or cancel her.

Not terribly surprising. Simple supply and demand. The number of insurance companies is not changing. But now that everyone is forced by law to purchase something from those insurance companies demand has been forced up. Should not take a rocket scientist to predict what will happen when supply remains steady while demand goes up.