Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obamacare shock: College insurance prices soar
The Examiner ^ | 8/29/2012 | Paul Bedard

Posted on 09/10/2012 3:36:03 AM PDT by tobyhill

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last
To: scooby321

apparently Romney can only play hardball against conservatives :/

my optimism about this election is fading.


21 posted on 09/10/2012 5:17:08 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

How does Romney exPect us to fight for him when he wOnt even fFight for himsElf


22 posted on 09/10/2012 5:32:34 AM PDT by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: 2nd wave of attacks on America after 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MachIV

There are tons of people who go to college later in life. Not everyone attends right after high school.


23 posted on 09/10/2012 5:33:21 AM PDT by ericsvibe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
"Our student health insurance policy premium has been substantially increased due to changes required by federal regulations issued on March 16, 2012 under the Affordable Care Act."

Even with this explicit statement, does anyone think the cost increase will influence the college vote?

Yo, pubbie campaign, another point to make hay with.

24 posted on 09/10/2012 5:37:30 AM PDT by CPOSharky (zero slogan: Expect less, pay more. (apologies to Target))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MachIV
I’ve never understood this thing about college insurance costs.

I went back to college at age 29. I didn't get insurance. It wasn't required.

25 posted on 09/10/2012 5:53:36 AM PDT by MulberryDraw (That which cannot be paid, won't be paid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GlockThe Vote

Romney seems intent on testing the theory that in troubled economic times the challenger just needs to assure voters that he is capable of taking the reigns and nothing else.

Well will see in a few weeks if that theory holds water.


26 posted on 09/10/2012 6:01:55 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Wait...Didn’t the maximum age of a “student” remaining on mom and dad’s insurance get bumped up to 26 not too long ago? What’s the fuss?


27 posted on 09/10/2012 6:04:32 AM PDT by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gotribe
Depends on which gub'mnt workers. State and local are all over the place ~ sometimes they actually pay 100%, but it's against a group buy so it's cheaper than an individual policy.

Other places a union may have negotiated a deal where the gub'mnt pays 100% ~

With postal employees it's 10%. With other federal employees it's 28%.

Since health bennies are just part of the total compensation package the only real difference is how much federal personal income tax is going to be paid ~ with a lower government share, the tax will be imposed on the employees. With a higher government share the employees will pay less income tax.

I've often thought it exceedingly curious that we have Conservatives whose biggest goal in life is to raise government employee's percentage of direct payment of health care so they can pay more income taxes.

That's a tax increase folks. All that does is make them demand a higher salary! And, of course, you know where those gub'mnt salaries come from eh!

No you don't actually. Postal salaries come from postage. By offloading 90% of the health benefit segment of compensation to the USPS directly, it is NOT TAXED. That allows the company to negotiate a better deal with the unions, and thereby pass through the income tax savings to the mailers ~ that's you!

Slick deal!

28 posted on 09/10/2012 6:21:38 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

That would be correct....all can be covered under parents policy (and their carrier must accept them) regardless of education, work, if not insured at work, or marital status.

Everyone has been royally Fluked.


29 posted on 09/10/2012 6:21:47 AM PDT by Mouton (Voting is an opiate of the electorate. Nothing changes no matter who wins..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Romney certainly needs to attack Obama’s failure to correct deficiencies in the medical insurance market and to push for tort reform. However, arguing against the immediate rise in student medical insurance is kind of a cheap political point: It ignores the bigger issues of pricing of medical insurance in general. Pricing of insurance embeds a host of actuarial and arbitrary value assumptions. If you set insurance rates by the age of the insured for the upcoming year, then the premiums for young adults will be low and those for folks in their 60s and above will be astronomical. The market needs to come up with the equivalent of level term life insurance, where buying into a long term policy essentially spreads the risks and costs across a much longer period than a year. If folks decide to not pay insurance when they are young, then they must anticipate paying higher premiums when they need it later on.


30 posted on 09/10/2012 6:26:54 AM PDT by bjc (Check the data!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

I know of insurance agencies that haven’t been able to place an individual health policy in months.


31 posted on 09/10/2012 6:30:40 AM PDT by Mike Darancette (CREDO QUIA ABSURDUM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

The irony of this is the law now says your child must be on your education until age 26 - normally past a college graduate so not sure who this will affect other then masters programs.

We got the letter for our daughter saying if we did not prove she was covered by insurance they would tack on 1,300 to her tuition. Went on line with the insurance the family has and saved that. Course I pay for it anyway so they are just looking at more revenue streams.


32 posted on 09/10/2012 6:52:13 AM PDT by edcoil (It is not over until I win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

The irony of this is the law now says your child must be on your education until age 26 - normally past a college graduate so not sure who this will affect other then masters programs.

We got the letter for our daughter saying if we did not prove she was covered by insurance they would tack on 1,300 to her tuition. Went on line with the insurance the family has and saved that. Course I pay for it anyway so they are just looking at more revenue streams.


33 posted on 09/10/2012 7:21:13 AM PDT by edcoil (It is not over until I win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

It impacts people who do not have other health insurance or cannot add their children because of price or other issues. School insurance was a life saver for me as a single Mom.


34 posted on 09/10/2012 7:21:13 AM PDT by Roses0508
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MachIV
I’ve never understood this thing about college insurance costs. I went to college from age 18 to 22 and was covered by my parents’ insurance. I think it stopped after age 22.

Well, a lot of "kids" aged 30 and above are still "students"......they might be part Cherokee too.

FMCDH(BITS)

35 posted on 09/10/2012 7:58:00 AM PDT by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: gotribe

I work for the Fed. My bi-weekly premium is approx. 25% of the basic plan’s cost.


36 posted on 09/10/2012 8:54:32 AM PDT by Java4Jay (The evils of government are directly proportional to the tolerance of the people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: informavoracious

Interesting. I went to a private college in the late 80s. The issue never came up.


37 posted on 09/10/2012 9:34:24 AM PDT by MachIV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MachIV

It’s a racket. I understand they need to spread the cost but it’s unfair that you can’t opt out. When I went it was about $120 a year at a state school as a “Health Services Fee” that you paid along with your tuition and other fees. It’s 10-20x that now. Gotta pay for those “free” condoms.


38 posted on 09/10/2012 10:50:14 AM PDT by informavoracious (Abortions are unproductive wrongs, not reproductive rights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: bonehead4freedom; sirchtruth

No - the ultimate goal is government health care. And easy enough to do with gov’t insurance. Only paying the doctors for the procedures and to whom the gov’t wants.


39 posted on 09/10/2012 10:57:28 AM PDT by 21twelve (So I [God] gave them over to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices. Psalm 81:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MachIV

What if your parents are dead....or even unemployed and therefore, uninsured?

There are probably far more college students that are unable to get coverage under their parents’ policies, for one reason or another, than there are that can. And these are the people Obama is counting on to help vote him back into office....lol!


40 posted on 09/10/2012 12:25:54 PM PDT by XenaLee (The only good commie is a dead commie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson