« Book Meme | Main | Reasons Not To Date Etomologists »
September 28, 2006
In Case You Were Curious
As per usual, if anyone is still confused as to the median voter's stubborn resistance to admitting the economy's overall awesomeness, new data showing that health premiums went up 7.7 percent in 2005 may help illuminate things. 7.7 percent, after all, was more than twice the inflation rate and the growth in worker's wages. In fact, since 2000, health premiums have gone up by 87 percent. Somehow, I doubt the average worker's salary has done the same.
September 28, 2006 in Insurance | Permalink
Comments
And why are health premiums going up? Well, the underlying services are going up. When are you going to blame the cause and not the derivative?
Posted by: Fred Jones | Sep 28, 2006 11:08:50 AM
Yeah Ezra, jeez. Even better, why not stop whining about "median voters" and just pretened everything's OK like Fred does?
Posted by: verplanck colvin | Sep 28, 2006 11:44:25 AM
Now the trick is to convince people that the cost of health insurance is a political choice.
People, who now think it is a political choice are already Democrats.
The fools, who don't, vote Republican.
How do the Democrats reach voters, and convince them that health care/health insurance inflation has been a direct consequence of political choices made by a corrupt Republican Congress?
There will be plenty of stealth Republican analysts pushing the idea that it is all a mysterious consequence of evolving technologies, which no one can find a solution for. Or, alternatively, that Republican solutions, designed to further redistribute income upwards, will magically reduce health care inflation.
Posted by: Bruce Wilder | Sep 28, 2006 11:46:55 AM
What percentage of the worker's income was being spent on premiums to begin with and what percentage is it now?
For some reason, just like with the Wal~Mart stories of how they are horribly abusing their employees, the only people I hear complaining about this are left-leaning editorial writers.
Waithing to see the pitchfork and torch bearing mobs on either topic.
Posted by: Guy Montag | Sep 28, 2006 11:57:12 AM
Well, the underlying services are going up.
Um, no, not really - at least anecdotally. My doctor's visits cost my insurance company a little less than they did 5 years ago. For my son's recent birth, the charges for room/board, the c-section and most of the other services are about the same as for my daughter almost 5 years ago.
Increases in costs are usually due to the amount of new equipment, tests and procedures while the ones that have been around a while tend to stay the same or even decrease a little.
What percentage of the worker's income was being spent on premiums to begin with and what percentage is it now?
Rather than worrying about all those lazy workers sucking at the teat of the glorious corporations, why don't you worry at the glorious corporations who are at risk of going under because of the rising costs of providing healthcare to their workers?
In fact, I would expect a moronitarian to support universal healthcare, because a healthy workforce is a productive workforce, making sure that our glorious economy is producing the items that our captains of industry want and need. It's either good healthcare or a serious increase in the birth rate in order to replace the worker drones, or we're in trouble.
Posted by: Stephen | Sep 28, 2006 12:17:42 PM
7.7 percent in 2005
That's "2006," according to the link, meaning part of 2005 and part of 2006, I guess (data was collected January through May). 9.2% is the figure given for "2005."
The rate of growth has been going down.
Would be helpful to have the figures adjusted for what coverage is purchased (which might make the figures worse).
The figures are for total premiums, including both the employer and employee portions. The percentage paid by each has remained essentially the same, according to the report.
On average, workers are paying $259 more this year than they did last year toward the cost of family health coverage.
Guy, whatever percentage of income it is, it's larger than before.
Posted by: Sanpete | Sep 28, 2006 12:30:21 PM
Wow, that was cute.
The most probable reason for your premium going up while your visits cost the bill payer less is the overall increase in cost to the insurance company by other policy holders.
Now, if you just paid the bill yourself, cash, you would realize the reduction yourself.
Oh, my statement that you quoted was asking for what real numbers that we are talking about here. Sorry if that was confusing to you. Thanks for opening the shades that expose your personal biases in an attempt to project them to others. Very informative.
Posted by: Guy Montag | Sep 28, 2006 12:31:09 PM
Sorry, that last post was in response to Stephen, nobody else.
Also, Stephen, you may be experiencing a shift in policy premiums from your employer (indirectly paid by you) to you (directly paid by you).
You are paying either way, so it really does not matter what the employer/employee "split" is.
Posted by: Guy Montag | Sep 28, 2006 12:39:56 PM
'7.7 percent, after all, was more than twice the inflation rate and the growth in worker's wages. In fact, since 2000, health premiums have gone up by 87 percent. Somehow, I doubt the average worker's salary has done the same.'
Quite Ezra, as many people have been trying to point out to you and others. As health insurance, in the US system, is part of total labor compensation, and the cost of said health insurance has been rising strongly, total labor compensation has indeed been going up while labor wages have not.
In fact, one of the reason that wages have not been going up is that a greater part of total labor compensation is now spent on purchasing health care.
So when we debate labor comensation can we please debate total compensation? Not cherry pick wages which do not show the effects of rising health care costs?
Consistency, it's not too much to ask for is it?
Posted by: Tim Worstall | Sep 28, 2006 1:13:24 PM
Tim,
Nicely put. I would have responded earlier but I was distracted while discilplining my wig powderer and shoe shiner.
Off to see how my ponies are being groomed and then, perhaps, some support for women in the arts.
Posted by: Guy Montag | Sep 28, 2006 1:27:05 PM
And this is really not all of it. While this is the reported increase, my company would fit into this range based on what I know. BUT, they have also shifted more cost to employees to keep the company premium lower AND they have reduced the actual coverage to further keep the cost down.
Posted by: George | Sep 28, 2006 3:01:52 PM
I don't believe the average American's life expectancy has gone up by 87% either, contrary to what some would have you believe.
Posted by: David Yaseen | Sep 28, 2006 3:17:14 PM
David,
Health care is about quality of life, hygine and safety are about length of life.
Posted by: Guy Montag | Sep 28, 2006 11:01:17 PM
perhaps now that torture is legal, the medical field will blossom.
need those skills to keep folks conscious between stress positions and waterboarding sessions, dontcha know?
Posted by: the dreaming ape | Sep 29, 2006 11:15:34 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
