- 3,352
MedicareAgent: Would it help if say Megyn Kelly ran with Hillary as VP on the 2016 ticket? I heard she thinks highly of Grandma Hillary.
Scotus: Subsidies upheld
- Thread starter TN_agent
- Start date
- 8,448
The SCOTUS decision today doesn't do anything to alleviate rising premiums and shrinking networks. If the pain is bad enough, Republicans could win in 2016 just by campaigning on "It's time for a change!", just like Obama did in 2007-2008.
----------
Cindy,
IMO, "Medicare for everyone" would work for consumers, if the premiums are subsidized similarly to how they are now with ObamaCare. The Medicare contributions that employees have deducted from their paycheck would have to stop, since everyone will be instantly eligible for Medicare.
On the flip side, doctors would fight it because Medicare doesn't pay them as much as Private insurance. Attorneys who specialize in suing health insurers would see their business shrink. Naturally, the few remaining Indiv/Group health insurance companies would fight Medicare-for-all as well.
I have no idea if Medicare would get many enrollments though. Most well-off Americans would probably stay with Private Insurance?
-Allen
Medicare for all is a pipe dream and will solve nothing.
Obamacare cuts funding for Medicare to pay for the subsidies. Docs and hospitals will (in many cases) receive less $$$ for services rendered. Some hospitals already have closed due to funding cutbacks. Others will follow.
Medicare pays providers about 15% less than Obamacare for the same service. Medicare does nothing to control health care costs, they just pay less to "balance their books".
They are also cost shifting more of the cost of care to the beneficiaries.
DC is cutting funding for MA plans and squeezing carriers even more.
Mcare for all works for me but I don't see this happening anytime soon, if ever.
Regardless of what happens going forward there is still the question of funding this crap.
And none of what happened today addresses agent compensation but expect more carrier compression going forward.
AC, a dual system where you pick between Obamacare and Medicare will create more adverse selection than we have now. The MA plans probably wouldn't change much but I would be surprised if Medigap premiums for those under 65 would drop from the current stratosphere.
Obamacare cuts funding for Medicare to pay for the subsidies. Docs and hospitals will (in many cases) receive less $$$ for services rendered. Some hospitals already have closed due to funding cutbacks. Others will follow.
Medicare pays providers about 15% less than Obamacare for the same service. Medicare does nothing to control health care costs, they just pay less to "balance their books".
They are also cost shifting more of the cost of care to the beneficiaries.
DC is cutting funding for MA plans and squeezing carriers even more.
Mcare for all works for me but I don't see this happening anytime soon, if ever.
Regardless of what happens going forward there is still the question of funding this crap.
And none of what happened today addresses agent compensation but expect more carrier compression going forward.
AC, a dual system where you pick between Obamacare and Medicare will create more adverse selection than we have now. The MA plans probably wouldn't change much but I would be surprised if Medigap premiums for those under 65 would drop from the current stratosphere.
- 4,716
I don't know how to feel about this.
Now that the structure has been upheld (it was a very weak case) it's all a matter of how the insurance companies will treat agents like us. If they continue to cut commissions none of us will be pleased, if they remain in the same general area most of us are fine.
It would be appropriate for insurance companies, after the dust has settled, to let us know what to expect down the road-do I expect that to happen? no:
Now that the structure has been upheld (it was a very weak case) it's all a matter of how the insurance companies will treat agents like us. If they continue to cut commissions none of us will be pleased, if they remain in the same general area most of us are fine.
It would be appropriate for insurance companies, after the dust has settled, to let us know what to expect down the road-do I expect that to happen? no:
The last round of cuts for MA were supposed to be this year, but they ended up being a raise. Is there another bill coming through DC?
First time in a while I have to agree with you 100% on the second line, Mcare for all works for me, but it's a long shot.
- 15,319
When the commissions drop to zero will you be asking us to send YOU $100?
That's next.
Rick
- 4,716
- 948
I don't know how to feel about this.
Now that the structure has been upheld (it was a very weak case) it's all a matter of how the insurance companies will treat agents like us. If they continue to cut commissions none of us will be pleased, if they remain in the same general area most of us are fine.
It would be appropriate for insurance companies, after the dust has settled, to let us know what to expect down the road-do I expect that to happen? no:
Eventually it would be no surprise to have all products be non-commissionable. I think it's only a matter of time - especially with consolidation occurring with the large insurance companies. Once there are only a handful of players, basically the consumer has so little choice, they could argue that there's no need for agents to assist or to "sell".
Carriers can rely on Mcare.gov to continue to peddle their products if they want but obviously that hasn't worked out so well or they would have cut out agents a long time ago.
DC created hc.gov to cut out the agent and they are doing a fine job of carrying out the master plan.
Major med commissions on IFP will go to $0 within 2 years.
Don't see Medicare following suit either on the MA side or Medigap.
DC created hc.gov to cut out the agent and they are doing a fine job of carrying out the master plan.
Major med commissions on IFP will go to $0 within 2 years.
Don't see Medicare following suit either on the MA side or Medigap.
