At Work

The Missing Debate Over Rising Health-Care Deductibles

Rising deductibles, coupled with the slow economic recovery from the Great Recession, has depressed utilization of health services and helped to keep premium increases lower than they would otherwise be. High-deductible plans are cheaper: Family coverage in a typical high-deductible plan with a savings option runs $16,737, compared with $19,003 for a PPO plan for a family. Enrollment in high-deductible plans with savings accounts reduced the average premium increase for all employers by half a percentage point in 2014 and 2015.

But just as high deductibles help hold down costs, they also can take a big bite from the pocketbooks of consumers. As the chart below illustrates [go to link] deductibles are rising almost six times faster than wages. This, more than any other single factor, is why consumers don’t see the bright side of the historic moderation in health costs the country is experiencing. Their share of premium payments is up–if more modestly than in the past–and their deductibles are growing steadily and in some cases steeply, while wage growth has been sluggish.

Source: The Missing Debate Over Rising Health-Care Deductibles – Washington Wire – WSJ

Today we debate high deductibles, a trend that started long before Obamacare, promoted by consultants who convinced employers that they could turn employees into consumers if they forced them to pay more for health care. 

If that was true and working today, a high deductible for most people would not be a big a deal because they would be avoiding health care expenses and thus the deductible would be nearly irrelevant. Of course that is not the case, and many employees (and now Obamacare enrollees ) are caught in the middle with both health care costs and high deductibles. 

What they miss in the equation is that their premiums are lower because of high deductibles, but that is little comfort for those having most of the premium subsidized through Obamacare. 

For those of us who have been around a while all this is somewhat amusing. Back in the day as they say, health plans provided coverage only for in-patient services with a fixed amount allocated for surgery, anesthesia, lab and x-ray services. There was no insurance for out-patient services such as office visits, physical therapy, prescription drugs and much more. Who knew? Perhaps we should have stayed with a system that worked. 


2 replies »

  1. Folks have to take high deductibles so they can afford the insurance at all. Many companies don’t have plans like we did; to put money away tax free for those medical costs not covered. Depending on income; they can’t get a credit for having the insurance. And all of that came out of Medicare fund. Credits and the plans. Many work pt jobs; many companies took away their hours so they didn’t have to cover them medically. They should have tried to do a plan like Mass. had. all the folks who had insurance KEPT it. Only those w/o insurance went onto the plans offered with big deductibles. In Mass. they have almost a 100% coverage. Not in regular America.
    Those who liked their plans and liked their doctors KEPT THEM in Mass. Then Obamacare hit.


  2. I miss the old days with major medical but medical costs are what they are now. There is no lower cost, just cost shifting. It does not matter if you choose to see the doctor for chest pain or wait until you think you have to be admitted for a heart attack, we are all paying now. But what gets lost is that healthcare no matter how you look at or who is responsible to keep costs low it is still expensive. This article states a high deductible plan costs $16,737 which is 31% of the average American income of $53,657 (2015). Considering most financial planners tell you that you should only spend 30% of your income for housing, the cost of healthcare is a problem no matter how many tattoos you get or do not get.

    If you want to lower healthcare costs you have to get government out of the guaranteed payments. Medicare is a cash-cow. Medicare part D law (2007) prevents the government from negotiating lower drug prices. Another example is government back mortgages and student loans, two more areas where costs have skyrocketed and why shouldn’t they because the government will pay the higher prices.


What's your opinion on this post? Readers would like your point of view.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s