Judge rejects federal subsidies for obamacare exchanges

obamacare is going to save us billions!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...s-some-obamacare-subsidies-in-blow-to-health/

Nearly 90 percent of the federal exchange’s insurance enrollees were eligible for subsidies because of low or moderate incomes that the outcome of the case could potentially leave millions without affordable health insurance.

“We reach this conclusion, frankly, with reluctance. At least until states that wish to can set up Exchanges, our ruling will likely have significant consequences both for the millions of individuals receiving tax credits through federal Exchanges and for health insurance markets more broadly,” the ruling stated.

A total of $1 trillion in subsidies is projected to be doled out over the next decade.

 

Scrap the exchange. Have a public option to compete with private insurance.

I hate subsidizing the entities that have helped cause skyrocketing healthcare costs. But I'm really biased (not because of politics in this case) as you know.

 

Ours is going up 20 percent next year, with BCBS.

 

Just allow insurance to be allowed to be sold across state lines.

 

Wouldn't dramatically have an effect, imo.

 

The Partners for Health thingy?

 

not sure that's materially different. you still have the huge adverse selection problem. the vast majority of healthy and/or rich people are not going to select the public option.

 

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2014/jul/17/bluecross-asks-for-19-percent-rate-hike/

 

i agree, not a dramatic effect, but it would help. I actually have a health insurance sales license (which i rarely use) and there are tons of superior products available outside of california. the heavy regulation states like new york and california get screwed even more than everyone else.

 

Maybe not, but look at it this way: at least you'll only get screwed by the govt instead of the govt AND the insurance *******s.

 

Wouldn't be a cure all, but would help increase competition.

 

oh goody

 

Might be cheaper to go with the higher co-pays with Cigna. I don't think they charge extra for tobacco either, but I might be mistaken on that.

 

I'd support that. Why not do both then?

 

Haha.

That's all I could come up with on short notice. With my insurance experiences, I understand how people can snap.

 

my deductable doubled essentially. thank god for HSAs.

 

i recently got a bill for $25,000 from UCLA medical because they claimed the nicu for one of my kids what out of service which is absurd because a) they paid for the other one and b) we got preapproved to switch to that nicu by the friggin insurance company. keep in mind my twins were born almost 2 years ago. i call the insurance company and they claim it's just a billing mistake. riiiggghhhttt. i imagine the are attempting to negotiate with ucla

 

I believe that's who we had and they dropped my wife's woman doctor during the middle of our pregnancy, so we switched to BCBS to be able to keep her. If it was just me, I'd do a catastrophe plan and use clinics if needed. I've not been to a doctor since middle school, besides physicals.

 

Wait, rates are still going down tho, right?

 

i basically have a catastrophic plan. it still saves me money over a "cadillac plan" even despite my wife taking our kids to the doctor for every minor problem and the fact i have to pay full boat up to $5K. i can fund my HSA with pretax dollars which saves me a fortune. it's a direct deduction off my taxes. only way it wouldn't be worth it is if one of us had reoccuring medical problems. even the occasional hospital visit every couple of years would still make it the right economic decision.