I don't believe I ever said "very few people will pay more because [of] Obamacare." You must have me confused with someone else.
Yes, parents who add additional people (i.e. children) to their coverage will pay more. But what did you expect? That this would somehow be free? Obamacare has never made such a promise.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say:
Now you are stating that the people in one group pays more for this
and the other group - with no children pay less but still pay for
this change. So this other group did pay something for the
Obama-care change.
What I am saying is that people who add children to their policies will pay more because they are covering more people. I am not saying that this will result in people without children paying more.
Your mind must be very scrambled if you can't understand this.
And I'm still waiting for you to post some facts to support your claims that everyone will pay more because of parents adding adult children to their coverage.
--- In ibmpensionissues@..., KenSP@... wrote:
You are correct that the people who paid more were the people who added children to their policy. BUT previously you said that "very few people will pay more because Obamacare". Now you are stating that the people in one group pays more for this and the other group - with no children pay less but still pay for this change. So this other group did pay something for the Obama-care change. So by your own words it is not a fact that very few people will pay more because of Obamacare?- but a hope, opinion or belief.It is a fact, that insurance companies are required by law to create the reserve for this exposure.? They do not charge the full reserve to the people who added children but spread a balance to all others in the pool. Of course, many used this as an excuse to raise the premium higher than what was need because of the profit motive.Finally, do you really believe that a young person who may have an annual doctor's fees of $200 a year is going to buy health insurance for two or three thousand when they believe they are going to live forever.Ask them and hear their response.? Don't you wonder why the US government did not draft or does not take people over the age of 26into the army except in the world wars.----- Original Message -----From: edward_berkline?Date: Monday, July 29, 2013 9:50 pmSubject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Union Fears Destructive Consequences From ObamacareTo: ibmpensionissues@...> Well, uh, the people who paid more when parents added their > adult children to their policies are the parents themselves. > Since additional person(s) were covered, they paid additional > premiums. But they got something they wanted in return: HEALTH > INSURANCE ! Oh, the tragedy! They had to actually PAY for > it!!!! And it was all voluntary!> > Since the majority of young adults are healthy and can be > expected to have few claims, the premiums their parents pay are > most likely helping to keep the cost lower for everyone else. > Oh, what a tragedy!!> > If you can prove otherwise, please do so. > > --- In ibmpensionissues@..., KenSP@ wrote:> >> > The FACT is that very few people will pay more for > healthcare?coverage with Obamacare?as compared to how much they > would have paid out before Obamacare.How is this a fact. Someone > had to pay for putting children on a parent's health insurance > policy.? Isn't this a result of Obamacare?and didn't the > insurance companies increase their premiums to cover this.? So > how can you say that this is a fact very few people will be > paying more for their insurance.? Tell it to those people who do > not have children under the age of 26 and now have to pay more. > Everyone paid more because of this change.This is proof how you > make general statements which are opinions and then call the > facts.? > > >
