logoalt Hacker News

jonhohleyesterday at 5:02 PM5 repliesview on HN

Before I went indie, prior to ACA requirements I researched private insurance and found plans for around $3K. This year I’ll pay over $20K for a bronze plan for my family. 700% increase in less than a decade. Aetna left the marketplace input state and no pediatrician in a 10 mile radius takes the most cost effective ACA plan. The pediatricians we found are actually just GPs who have training in pediatric medicine, but we bring in the only minors they see. This is in a top-5 market based on population.

All of the providers have consolidated. I don’t know if ACA affected that or not, but wait times for checkups went from later this afternoon to sometime 6 months from now.

Part of my experience is going from corporate health insurance to marketplace, but in the past 5 years, ACA plans have consistently gotten worse and more expensive while service for those plans has gotten significantly worse in almost every way.

Who is it better for?


Replies

peezdyesterday at 6:04 PM

I think it's generally gotten better for insurance companies, at the expense of both end customers and providers (with the exception of providers that have vertically integrated into the ecosystem, e.g. Aetna/CVS, etc. to capitalize on the advantages that brings).

Not debatable that it has gotten worse over the last decade, mostly due to one party in the government intentionally doing what they can to chip away at the efficacy of the program, which when it launched was incredibly compromise heavy and should have been viewed as a first step towards a better, long term solution.

I had a local primary care I really liked; I never saw the Dr. there, just the Physician's Assistant typically. They were independent, and last year they made the change to go to a membership model. Basically $50/month just to be able to be a patient of their practice, and then use your insurance for care. In their notification she laid out the economics of where they currently were and it wasn't sustainable for them, based on how much they were squeezed, mostly by not being also a facility to be able to double bill insurance for facility fees + care fees. Also mentioned that the other 3 independent doctors in our neighborhood had all closed in the last 2 years.

dummydummy1234yesterday at 5:12 PM

Out of curiosity what state are you in?

show 1 reply
cyberaxyesterday at 5:49 PM

> Who is it better for?

People with pre-existing conditions. They were literally uninsurable before the ACA.

The insurance costs are also skyrocketing in the employer-sponsored insurance.

show 1 reply
lotsofpulpyesterday at 5:11 PM

ACA premiums are literally taxes, the price you pay has nothing to do with your health risks.

You are paying more because a lot more healthcare is being delivered, to people who never used to either due to exceeding maximum benefits (we have the opposite today with out of pocket maximum), or being denied for pre existing health conditions.

So to answer:

>Who is it better for?

My 4 year old, who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars of cancer treatment, and will need a bunch more over the coming years.

show 2 replies
nradovyesterday at 5:25 PM

Without the ACA it would have been even worse. And by worse I mean that even if the premiums were lower, we would still have horrible limitations like maximum lifetime coverage amounts or exclusions for pre-existing conditions.

There is a legitimate shortage of physicians in many areas, especially in primary care. This has a variety of causes including bottlenecks in the training pipeline, shitty working conditions that drive experienced doctors out of the profession, and an aging populace that has drastically increased demand. More and more doctors are opting out of taking any sort of insurance and shifting to concierge medicine or cash-pay models.