PDA

View Full Version : Health insurance went up 30.9% this renwall for my company.



Steve Amrein
06-11-2009, 09:06 AM
We just got the rate increase for our employee health care and its gone up yet again. Last year 19% the year before that 23% and before that 37% .

Participation is getting smaller as some are going without ins. and some a switch to another private Co. We currently pay half and ever year suck up the increase as well as the employees. This is creating feelings of ill will as the employees only see a smaller paycheck. I am actually hoping that if a few more folks opt out that we will no longer eligible for a group plan and the insurance companies will no longer accept us. I want out of the insurance business. The insurace companies to me seem like the goverenment, they do not increase the value of service and yet still increase cost. I cant wait for nationalized health care. :rolleyes:

Bob Gutermuth
06-11-2009, 09:11 AM
Lucky you, mine is going up 66% next month. It will get worse when Osama gets national socialized medicine for all of us and the care will be much worse.

Keith Farmer
06-11-2009, 09:12 AM
Health insurance for my family was 2500.00 per month! We cancelled this year, worked with our doctor (who we attend church with) in terms of office visit fees, and went with a health savings plan. May not be the best option but 2500.00 per month is just off the charts for a young family!


KF

Uncle Bill
06-11-2009, 11:16 AM
Just visited with a vascular surgeon that said HE couldn't hardly afford the liability insurance premiums. Said it was a 5 mill policy.

Who said the shysters can't rule the world? Much like the sheeple voting in the lunatics, thus getting what they deserve, and the rest of us having to live with that, the jurys have made awards that are so ludicrous it defys logic. Most are so quick to 'make the bigshots pay', they forget how it comes back to kick them in the ass.

I can hardly wait until the unions have run themselves out of a job, because until then they will never see how their class envy has caused the majority of the mess they think is purely a management problem.

We all know why management bought into this health insurance scam; the bennies were another union demand. In all this MSP bloviating over the management bonuses, has anyone heard even ONE story about the payments to the union fatcats? The hubris is incredible.

UB

Bob Gutermuth
06-11-2009, 11:46 AM
The only union with more brass than the united auto workers is the Soviet Uniion.

Gerry Clinchy
06-11-2009, 11:54 AM
Participation is getting smaller as some are going without ins. and some a switch to another private Co. We currently pay half and ever year suck up the increase as well as the employees. This is creating feelings of ill will as the employees only see a smaller paycheck. I am actually hoping that if a few more folks opt out that we will no longer eligible for a group plan and the insurance companies will no longer accept us. I want out of the insurance business. The insurace companies to me seem like the goverenment, they do not increase the value of service and yet still increase cost. I cant wait for nationalized health care. :rolleyes:

I'm trying to think this through logically ...

Government provides an "alternative" insurance to the insurance companies now offering this product. The government plan is cheaper. People choose the government plan over the private plans. The private insurors are not able to compete, and close up.

With Medicare, as the costs have exceeded expectations, what was supposed to be free, could not remain free. Medicare recipients had to chip in for their health insurance. Each year the cost increases. The amount is withheld from the Social Security check. (and, of course, they already had been contributing to Medicare through their paychecks during their employment). Since the government plan does have some flaws, the seniors often get "Medi-Gap" coverage, to cover some of the things that Medicare does not cover. Will premiums for that coverage go up, if health insurance providers no longer have their other products for younger people? Those other products help spread the "risk" for insuring elderly (who are more likely to get sick) among the younger people (less likely to get sick).

So ... if we get nationalized health care for everyone, does our contribution then get withheld from paychecks, just like SS and income taxes? Does Medicare simply get merged into any new nationalized health care program?

Okay ... we get this worked out ... but with everyone, including those illegal aliens, getting the benefit of this nationalized health care (BTW, do countries like UK and Canada have the size of the illegal alient problem that the US has?), seems like now more people will be seeking out health care that they might have not sought previously?

How do we really make a significant change in the cost of hospitalization? If it costs $X per day to cover the costs of a hospital stay (not counting profit), how do you cut that down?

We can cut down what doctors are allowed to charge. But we'd better put some tort limits on suing doctors, because who will choose to be a doctor if their income is marginal after paying liability insurance. Every time legislation for tort limits in Pennsylvania come up, the trial lawyers exert every pressure to keep such laws from being enacted.

Okay, the government decides what doctors can charge for their services. But a hospital needs electricity, heat, and a lot of other workers to keep it going. Sooner or later, you're going to have to cut the cost of labor like nurses, xray technicians, housekeeping workers, maintenance workers, etc. Somebody is always going to be at the bottom of the totem pole. Are any of those workers, by any chance, unionized? Oops ...

We know that the net result of national health care has been to "ration" health care services. Once you reach a certain age, it is simply not cost-effective to provide certain health care services. Even in our present system, when it comes to transplant organs, the recipients are ranked for factors to determine which of two or more "matching" recipients would be the more "viable" recipient. If you're 70 years old, unless you're a POTUS or a SCOTUS, you'd probably lose out to the 20-yr old Olympic hopeful.

I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that before we decide that national health care is the best solution to this problem, we need to think through the repercussions of what is likely an irrevocable change on such a mass scale.

We really have to address the issue of liability insurance for doctors and hospitals. The only people who seem to really "make out" on liability torts are the attorneys. Awards for true negligence in medical matters should be "reasonable". And if the doctor is a real screw-up, he shouldn't be allowed to practice any longer. No court award to a damaged patient is worth spit, if the dr. gets to go do it all over again to someone else.

Our present system might not be so costly if we fixed some of the "auxilliary" problems that we often overlook when talking about the cost of healthcare.

ErinsEdge
06-11-2009, 12:04 PM
But we'd better put some tort limits on suing doctors, because who will choose to be a doctor if their income is marginal after paying liability insurance. Every time legislation for tort limits in Pennsylvania come up, the trial lawyers exert every pressure to keep such laws from being enacted.....We really have to address the issue of liability insurance for doctors and hospitals. The only people who seem to really "make out" on liability torts are the attorneys. Awards for true negligence in medical matters should be "reasonable". And if the doctor is a real screw-up, he shouldn't be allowed to practice any longer.

I completely agree. We are controlled by insurance fees and the lawyers, and national insurance will happen before the liability cap.

Bob Gutermuth
06-11-2009, 12:11 PM
One of my former training partners is a physician. According to him, the group that sues the most is medicade patients, who treat malpractice as a lottery. Crack addicted mothers who sue for problems with their drug affected babies is an example. If the nation doesn't figure a way to limit awards to some alleged malpractice victims then the system will break. Its one thing when the incompetent doctor takes off the wrong leg for example and another when a crack addict has a messed up child. One is the doctors fault the other isn't.

HuntsmanTollers
06-11-2009, 02:57 PM
Creative options to reduce costs and increase profitability will emerge. Some things people take for granted will no longer be covered. For example, hospital bed charges will be for just occupying the bed, just like a hotel. Food menus will be available but billed separately or must be provided by family. Family members could be expected to provide daily living activities (bathing, changing clothes, etc) similar to hospitals in other developed countries require, Japan for example. After all quality of care doesn't mean as much as reducing costs right?

Thomas D
06-11-2009, 04:27 PM
Just dealt with BCBS today. Sent them an e-mail question regarding the $1000 per year preventive care part of my policy. Asked if standard blood panel, PSA, and reating EKG were covered. Also, what CPT codes should be used for preventive treatment. A rather simple question I thought.

"Lakisha" wrote me back to say that she could not tell me, as that would be a conflict of interest!

That got me pouring thru the book and found a part of the policy that stated all 3 of those items were covered.

Maybe it can be but I don't see how government run health care can be any worse.

Tomorrow I will spend several hours on the phone getting the proper answer.

BonMallari
06-11-2009, 05:05 PM
One of my former training partners is a physician. According to him, the group that sues the most is medicade patients, who treat malpractice as a lottery. Crack addicted mothers who sue for problems with their drug affected babies is an example. If the nation doesn't figure a way to limit awards to some alleged malpractice victims then the system will break. Its one thing when the incompetent doctor takes off the wrong leg for example and another when a crack addict has a messed up child. One is the doctors fault the other isn't.

You are spot on...My brother is a board certified MD and one of the things that made him change his practice to pain management were his malpractice insurance premiums. when he was in a surgical practice his insurance premiums were close to 45 % of his income, he no longer wanted to put his practice and his family at risk because of some ambulance chasing atty looking for a big payday...many ob/gyn are not taking any new clients because insurance premiums are so high and if babies dont come out perfect, crack moms are suit happy..

YardleyLabs
06-11-2009, 06:18 PM
A couple of years ago, I received notice of a 41%premium increase from my insurance company. Two weeks later I received notice that the company was canceling the policy since it was terminating the joint venture between Guardian and HealthNet under which the policy had been issued in New Jersey. In HealthNet's annual report for that period they noted that they had been able to increase profits by 20% on a 12% growth in revenues. They also gave a bonus of $25,000 to the employee who came up with a legal way to cancel small business policies in NJ that were less profitable (including mine), saying that the cancellation saved them tens of millions of dollars. To make matters worse, they did not provide an invoice for the new premium amounts despite telephone calles asking for an invoice. When they canceled the policy the cancellation was made retroactive "because payment had not been received". By the time we found out we had been canceled we had been without coverage for six weeks. When calls were placed questioning the action, we were told that the joint venture had been terminated and there was no one to talk with. I actually ended up terminating health benefits for all of our employees because no other insurance company would cover us. Instead, I purchased insurance for myself through the Chamber of Commerce and worked with my staff to help them move to other plans individually. Ultimately there was a class alaw suit about this and HealthNet was ordered to pay unreimbrsed medical costs incurred by people during the "transition" period but that did not help us.

As an aside, the premium requested following the increase by HealthNet was $24,000/year for family coverage and $10600 for individual coverage. I purchased an equivalent Blue Cross policy for about half that amount but could not purchase coverage for my staff.

Steve
06-11-2009, 06:56 PM
The problem is that people want something for nothing. People have been conditioned to going to the doctor and paying very little. Insurance should be for serious diseases and accidents. Imagine how much car insurance would be if it covered oil changes and new tires.

My company has high deductible coverage and a health savings account. This is great for me because it's not year to year, but the balance grows minus what I use.

Thomas D
06-11-2009, 07:42 PM
The problem is that people want something for nothing. People have been conditioned to going to the doctor and paying very little. Insurance should be for serious diseases and accidents. Imagine how much car insurance would be if it covered oil changes and new tires.

My company has high deductible coverage and a health savings account. This is great for me because it's not year to year, but the balance grows minus what I use.

If that's the case they should change the policy (and premiums) to cover only those items.
If the insurance companies do not want small claims they should change their policies to pay for less. Premiums are based on their past and expected loss experience. I doubt seriously if people will pay high premiums and not use the coverage.
It's a viscious cycle. Premiums are sky high, policies cover everything, so people go to the doctor. Doctor's bills are high so people have to use their insurance that covers everything.

ErinsEdge
06-11-2009, 08:20 PM
Premiums are based on their past and expected loss experience. I doubt seriously if people will pay high premiums and not use the coverage.
When you are self employed all you ca afford is high deductible insurance so you don't go in for every little thing. You still can go for years and not use your insurance and your premiums will go up because you are still paying for those that have expensive illnesses.

Thomas D
06-11-2009, 09:14 PM
But isn't that the very definition of insurance and spreading the risk. I have had one small claim on my HO ins in my entire lifetime. However, my premiums keep going up. Why, because others have claims and I don't want to take on the risk myself if I should have a big claim.