According to estimates from CMS, the average premium for an Obamacare health policy has dropped about 10% since 2020 after adjusting for inflation. The average net cost after subsidy is down about 50%.
Here are figures for the past five years. The top chart shows the average for all enrollees. The bottom chart shows the average for a family of four earning $100,000. In both cases, the premium is for the lowest-cost plan.
For a family of four with income under $50,000, a low-cost silver plan is basically free.
It's worth noting that although this is good news, we still have a ways to go on the health care front. Deductibles and copays under Obamacare remain high, especially for low-cost health plans, so the average family is still going to pay a fair amount if they have any significant health problems.
I have benefitted hugely from the dropping of the salary cap for subsidies, and I appreciate it very, very much.
However, it must be noted that these subsidies are still funnelling huge gobs of cash towards private insurers. No attempt has been made to reduce actual premium costs, and now that consumers are shielded from the worst of it, the pressure to deal with this will be hard to generate.
It’s not true that premiums were not addressed.
Premium costs are partly controlled by requiring that a percentage of the premiums go to health care. The payor is reimbursed if the balance. Insurers therefore have an incentive to become more efficient.
That's a good point.
That preceded the removal of the subsidy income limit.
For a family of four with income under $50,000, a low-cost silver plan is basically free.
I'll note this is an average, and one factor that hugely impacts whether you're paying below or above average as you move up the income scale is age. I shudder to think what a 61 year old making $120K is being charged.
Obamacare didn't impose total community rating. It allowed for premiums discrimination based on age. I think this was a justifiable policy choice given the political realities involved. But, well, as the man once sang, what a drag it is getting old.
You will never pay more tha 8.3% of your income for the 2nd most expensive silver plan in your state (as long the uncapped subsidies continue). And if you don't earn much, the percentage goes down.
And BTW, I'm pretty much that 60 year old making $120k/yr. I have a gold plan for my wife and I, and it costs us (after subsidies) about $500/month. Almost like the rest of the world.
Good to know, thanks.
FWIW, I did a bit of digging, and that 8.5% cap is effectively lower still if one wanted to buy a bronze plan instead of a silver plan (although other out of pocket costs would likely be higher in the event of illness).
https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/nine-changes-to-watch-in-open-enrollment-2023/
Why did American life expectancy start slowing down around 1982, peak in 2010, then remain stable until COVID, even while peer nations continued to see a steady rise?
Hmmm...Peer nations had National Health Care? And the "free" market kills people to keep up the profit margins?
Reaganomics? The shredding of the safety net? Unions having lost their power? "Government is the enemy, not the solution"? Tax policies that further encouraged the rich getting exponentially richer while the poor starved?
D_Ohrk_E1
US life expectancy is materially impacted by youth gun violence and overdose.
When a 15 year old dies from gun violence or overdose, the population level average is impacted much more than getting several 86 yr olds to make it to 87. It is expensive and requires helping a lot of 86 year olds to offset youth deaths.
Good point! And increased infant mortality also has a huge effect.
Deductibles and copays are pretty brutal to those of us on private insurance, too.
This is absolutely true. I'm 55 and my wife is 60 and we're on Obamacare. I saw one policy with a $9000 deductible. Doesn't really pay anything until that. How is that even insurance?
Yes, the ages past 50 up to Medicare Time are brutal as far as medical insurance goes. By the time I became eligible, I was warned, with great concern, that Medicare had (at that time) an $85 deductible. I practically danced in the street.
People who have never been on the private insurance treadmill, but had been used to the corporation providing all, just have no idea...
I saw one policy with a $9000 deductible. Doesn't really pay anything until that. How is that even insurance?
I doubt the policy you describe appeals to many people your age. But if you've got significant assets to protect and are in excellent health, the thought of having to come up with ten grand to cover a serious illness (and insurance kicks in tp pick up the other $800K) isn't necessarily crazy it you value significantly lower premiums. And, per the Affordable Care Act, a person in that situation couldn't be denied the right to upgrade to better, more comprehensive coverage at the next enrollment period.
It would be nice if the beneficiaries would vote in ways to support or expand it. Sadly, Trump and his supporters seem ready to take another run at killing it.
Along with antivax, apparently some old football player thinks you should skip the sun screen. Aaron Roger’s agrees! I think we should lean into this. Republicans don’t need insurance or doctors at all!
You can’t make useful progress when half the country thinks it’s oppressive. I’m done trying.
Oh - and this also demonstrates the futility of the social welfare agenda. Fuck em!
“A Black Lives Matter (BLM) leader threw his support behind former President Donald Trump in the 2024 race for the White House, accusing Democrats of racist policies that are working against the black community. Mark Fisher, co-founder of Black Lives Matter Rhode Island, joined “Fox & Friends” to discuss why some black voters are leaving the Democratic Party as they contemplate whom they will vote for in the 2024 presidential election.”
I’m sure they all have their reasons. Best of luck to them.
They don't know that government programs are government programs. Somebody needs to help them make the connection. Democrats ought to remember this.
The ACA ,as a non user, was a step forward and provided insurance to many. However, I believe many Democrats viewed the ACA as a vehicle to eventually get something like, national health care.
IF your focus was really the second goal then, it seems, the ACA will always underperform.
Has no one seen the WSJ editorial "Elizabeth Warren has an Obamacare Epiphany"?
"The nation’s largest health insurers are dodging ObamaCare’s medical loss ratio (MLR). The result, they say, is higher costs for patients.
The MLR is a de facto cap on profits. It requires that insurers spend at least 80% or 85% of premium dollars on medical claims.
...the rule has spurred insurers to merge with or acquire pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), retail and specialty pharmacies, and healthcare providers. This has made healthcare spending less transparent since insurers can shift profits to their affiliates by increasing reimbursements."
VaLiberal - this reminds me of actor's getting a percentage of profits from their movies. The studio's often allocate all kind of items onto the profit/loss statement of successful movies or TV shows. Based on studio accounting, even very popular movies are often break even ventures...
Pingback: On ACA’s future, Trump isn’t done doing Democrats a big favor – Handmade With Love
Pingback: Why it matters that another state has embraced Medicaid expansion – Handmade With Love