States aim to sell Affordable Care Act’s changes to young, healthy Americans

[markomalley]

From the Washington Post:
In Connecticut, selling Obamacare involves airplanes flying banners across beaches. Oregon may reel in hipsters with branded coffee cups for their lattes. And in neighboring Washington, the effort could get quite intimate: The state is interested in sponsoring portable toilets at concerts.

The advertisements, developed with political consultants and communications firms, illustrate the ability of the health-care law’s supporters to p(name removed by moderator)oint the precise group they want to sign up for Obamacare — young and healthy Americans who won’t weigh down the system with high medical bills.
They are having to sell this program to young adults who are healthy. Why? Because otherwise the “exchange” system will collapse under its own weight.

The thing I would tell a young adult is: “do the math.” An average single coverage policy is going to cost a little better than $5,000 per year. The “tax” if you don’t take the policy is 2% of your income. Which is cheaper? (And, oh, by the way, there is no penalty for pre-existing conditions, so if you find out you have something serious…like cancer…you can enroll then, so you don’t have to worry about “what if…”)

As a matter of a fact, I’d love to see some Tea Party groups put together PSAs to that effect and spread the word.

 

[powerofk]

The ironic thing about this is that it was young, healthy Americans who wanted Obamacare in the first place. The only people who wanted Obamacare more were people who were dropped from insurance coverage for being sick or people who had a hard time finding coverage due to preexisting conditions (or had children with preexisting conditions).

 

[Trader]

From the Washington Post:

The state is interested in sponsoring portable toilets at concerts.
​

Good. If those thousands of pages of regulations had been printed on toilet paper, we could get some value from Obamacare.​

 

[Deus_tecum]

Why would people who spend less than $1000 on health care per year including dental and eye care, pay $5000 in premiums for a medical plan with a big deductible and no dental or eye care? Would they do it “in case” something happens? I know people who have gone over 50 years with less than $10k total health care expense. …and the old, “what if something catastrophic happens?” Well, do we not have eternal life? Why then a clinging to this lesser life?

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

One of the more important reasons that young people have to be convinced to buy healthcare is that young people tend to be Democrats. With the passage of ObamaCare, Democrats are now picking the pockets of their young voters. They’re going to have to brainwash young, healthy Democrats into believing that they, in fact, should allow the government to pick several hundred dollars out of their pocket every month for something they don’t need.

 

[Trader]

One of the more important reasons that young people have to be convinced to buy healthcare is that young people tend to be Democrats. With the passage of ObamaCare, Democrats are now picking the pockets of their young voters. They’re going to have to brainwash young, healthy Democrats into believing that they, in fact, should allow the government to pick several hundred dollars out of their pocket every month for something they don’t need.

A lot of advertising is required to accomplish this brainwashing. In an effort to make insurance more affordable for old sick people, young and healthy people are intentionally charged a higher than market rate under Obamacare. Lots of young people, like my 18 year old goddaughter are unable to get jobs with full time hours, even though they are covered under the policies of both parents until they are 26.

On Monday this week our local (liberal) newspaper ran a story about this:
The headline was, “Health Law Menaces Student Jobs.”

fortwayne.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130708/NEWS/320122402

These kids may be young, but they already know more that the proponents of ACA want them to know.

 

[ManOnFire]

It’s feels good to dream and have the best of intentions. To pony up, not so much.

 

[runningdude]

…They are having to sell this program to young adults who are healthy. Why? Because otherwise the “exchange” system will collapse under its own weight.

The thing I would tell a young adult is: “do the math.” An average single coverage policy is going to cost a little better than $5,000 per year. The “tax” if you don’t take the policy is 2% of your income. Which is cheaper? (And, oh, by the way, there is no penalty for pre-existing conditions, so if you find out you have something serious…like cancer…you can enroll then, so you don’t have to worry about “what if…”)

As a matter of a fact, I’d love to see some Tea Party groups put together PSAs to that effect and spread the word.

This is how insurance works; the healthy majority pay for the sick minority, on the understanding they are covered if something serious happens.

What you advocate is “young people” getting free health care if they get a serious illness, by leaching off those who already have been paying into the system. How is this fiscally responsible?

Actually, this is exactly the situation we are in currently, except there are exclusions to preexisting conditions to discourage such leaching. Would you rather keep these exclusions?

 

[PrayHarder]

It’s feels good to dream and have the best of intentions. To pony up, not so much.

So true. Bills become laws because they have nice sounding titles with words like “comprehensive”, “affordable”, “care”, “reform”, etc. and the masses just project their wishes into the bill instead of analyzing what is actually in the bill. They are also swindled by politicians’ blatant lies and demagoguery because in several years no one will remember what dirty tricks were used to pass a bill.

 

[St_Francis]

This is how insurance works; the healthy majority pay for the sick minority, on the understanding they are covered if something serious happens.

What you advocate is “young people” getting free health care if they get a serious illness, by leaching off those who already have been paying into the system. How is this fiscally responsible?

Actually, this is exactly the situation we are in currently, except there are exclusions to preexisting conditions to discourage such leaching. Would you rather keep these exclusions?

The elderly, who generally have most of the health care, paid into Medi-Care so that they would be covered in their retirement. They paid into that system throughout their working lives.

The young have a certain percentage of their wages going into MediCare now, or did before Obamacare.

And it was a percentage of their wages, so the amount they paid in was proportionate to their wages.

Tell someone whose making $10/hr that they have to pay $450/month for health insurance they don’t need. Tell those even making $20. That’s a big percentage of their takehome pay.

Add to that the fact that that is *if *they have a job… and it’s a bigger chunk if they have only a part-time job…

And if they have no job, or only a part-time job, it’s because of Obamacare!!!

The reality is that this is a huge cover-up for the fact that because a Certain Generation decided to limit the number of children they had they caused the collapse of the huge P on zi scheme the government set up when they set up Social Security and Medicare.

And who will pay the trillions in debt? Who will pay for the $100k/yr retirement plans of so many state employees? The young people of today will have all that on their backs as well.

So don’t blame them for taking advantage of a system which is basically designed to
suck ever drop of blood it can get from them.

 

[RACJ]

The ironic thing about this is that it was young, healthy Americans who wanted Obamacare in the first place. The only people who wanted Obamacare more were people who were dropped from insurance coverage for being sick or people who had a hard time finding coverage due to preexisting conditions (or had children with preexisting conditions).

Actually, it was supported by folks of all ages who were unable to comprehend that a 2700 page bill with concomitant 20,000 pages of regulations was passed not for US , but for the layers upon layers of bureaucratic masterminds. Socialized medicine is a disaster everywhere in the world, but it does tighten the noose of power over the individual. That’s what Barack Obama is all about, and frankly, the guy’s motives were trasparent from the start to people not blinded by his race and vacuous rhetoric. Rob

 

[markomalley]

This is how insurance works; the healthy majority pay for the sick minority, on the understanding they are covered if something serious happens.

What you advocate is “young people” getting free health care if they get a serious illness, by leaching off those who already have been paying into the system. How is this fiscally responsible?

That is the easiest possible way to break the system. And breaking Obamacare is the the only way that we will manage to get rid of it at this juncture, since the House apparently does not have the moral courage to defund it in the HHS appropriation bill.

Actually, this is exactly the situation we are in currently, except there are exclusions to preexisting conditions to discourage such leaching. Would you rather keep these exclusions?

I absolutely would rather keep those exclusions…with one modification. I would extend HIPAA pre-existing exclusion rules to apply to individual policies rather than merely group policies. Otherwise, yes, I would keep pre-existing condition exclusions.

 

[runningdude]

That is the easiest possible way to break the system. And breaking Obamacare is the the only way that we will manage to get rid of it at this juncture, since the House apparently does not have the moral courage to defund it in the HHS appropriation bill.

I absolutely would rather keep those exclusions…with one modification. I would extend HIPAA pre-existing exclusion rules to apply to individual policies rather than merely group policies. Otherwise, yes, I would keep pre-existing condition exclusions.

So, you want people to skip paying into the system, and then not be eligible to enter the system if they need it. I fail to understand what alternative you propose that will improve health care coverage.

 

[runningdude]

I honestly have no idea where you are getting the $450 number. A quick search of providers in Connecticut, perhaps the most expensive state to live in, gave a range of rates for a 25 year old between $50 and $200 per month.

I suspect that you are inventing numbers purely to discredit “Obamacare”. Please use real numbers if you wish to impress me.

 

[CarolNoel]

Good. If those thousands of pages of regulations had been printed on toilet paper, we could get some value from Obamacare.

Love it

 

[markomalley]

So, you want people to skip paying into the system, and then not be eligible to enter the system if they need it. I fail to understand what alternative you propose that will improve health care coverage.

Actually, I want to break the system.

Then go back to where it was before, with the enhancement that individual policy holders can use the HIPAA pre-existing condition rule.

The are a lot of other things I would do, but that is a start.

 

[markomalley]

I honestly have no idea where you are getting the $450 number. A quick search of providers in Connecticut, perhaps the most expensive state to live in, gave a range of rates for a 25 year old between $50 and $200 per month.

I suspect that you are inventing numbers purely to discredit “Obamacare”. Please use real numbers if you wish to impress me.

Kaiser Family Foundation 2012 Survey of Employer-Provided Health Insurance.

"“The average premium for single coverage in 2012 is $468 per month or $5,615 per year (Exhibit 1.1).”

 

[runningdude]

Kaiser Family Foundation 2012 Survey of Employer-Provided Health Insurance.

"“The average premium for single coverage in 2012 is $468 per month or $5,615 per year (Exhibit 1.1).”

Yes, that is the average for all single person policy holders. This includes all self employed individuals who purchase comprehensive insurance for themselves. Currently, many “young people” do not have such plans; they get it from their employer, their parents, or are uninsured altogether.

As you pointed out, young people are generally healthy. They can get by with only catastrophic care coverage, which is significantly cheaper than the prices you’ve cited. High deductible plans start in the $50 range, as I mentioned earlier. Such plans are the bread and butter of the proposed exchange.

 

[zz912]

Yes, that is the average for all single person policy holders. This includes all self employed individuals who purchase comprehensive insurance for themselves. Currently, many “young people” do not have such plans; they get it from their employer, their parents, or are uninsured altogether.

As you pointed out, young people are generally healthy. They can get by with only catastrophic care coverage, which is significantly cheaper than the prices you’ve cited. High deductible plans start in the $50 range, as I mentioned earlier. Such plans are the bread and butter of the proposed exchange.

forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/06/03/democrats-new-argument-its-a-good-thing-that-obamacare-doubles-individual-health-insurance-premiums/

*And I appreciate Ezra’s perspective. I, too, am a supporter of universal coverage, so I understand Ezra’s passion for providing health insurance to the sick. But what we didn’t know last week—and we do now—is how much more the healthy will have to pay for that insurance, under Obamacare. In Orange County, where Irvine is located, the three-fourths of the 25-year-old population that is in good health will have their premiums jacked by 95 percent.

And that’s for Obamacare’s “catastrophic” coverage; *

 

[ProVobis]

The advertisements, developed with political consultants and communications firms, illustrate the ability of the health-care law’s supporters to p(name removed by moderator)oint the precise group they want to sign up for Obamacare — young and healthy Americans who won’t weigh down the system with high medical bills.
[/INDENT]They are having to sell this program to young adults who are healthy. Why? Because otherwise the “exchange” system will collapse under its own weight.

Mark, to be fair, they are also told that in case of emergencies, the medical providers are MANDATED to save them if they can. If they can get this guarantee for nothing, why would they want to pay for it, especially if they have very few assets to their name?