Forty years ago, similar problems existed in auto insurance. Costs increasing because the laws created reasons for increasing costs. Finally states began a major rewrite of auto insurance rules. Then auto insurance rates stopped increasing almost exponentially.

We finally have a solution for medical insurance. We should be moving onto other reasons for increases. Instead, many extremists want to destroy government like a child who takes home the baseball because he thought he was safe at first base. (Extremists often don't use the part of a brain that only exists in adults.)

While wackos have distorted the waters, many never noticed another reason for increasing health costs. He claimed he was fixing things. He also blamed Joe Paterno for pedophilia while not doing any investigation? He subverted discovery for some 14 Vioxx lawsuits - a drug that was killing people. Subverted discovery to protect profits and to keep selling a killer drug.

Once 42 major drug companies existed. Each averaged 7 drugs in the innovation pipeline. Merck, once a most innovative company (because its management were doctors), is now a laggard. Must increase profits by increasing profit margins while, well, Merck only has two innovative drugs in the innovation pipeline. So Merck must rape the public with higher prices.

Once 42 companies were doing seven new drugs. MBAs have successfully merged those companies into 13 with only 3 new drugs in the innovation pipeline. So your medical costs for drugs must increase.

Ken Frazier, a lawyer, was preaching he had greatest respect for scientists. Nonsense. He had so little respect for anyone as it even get Joe Paterno blamed by doing no investigation. He should have been disbarred for subverting discovery on so many Vioxx cases. Instead they made him Merck's president. He has subverted the innovation drug pipeline. Same problem is in most other drug companies.

In a responsible market, costs for a new product drop each year. Because every year, innovation makes the product better. Profit margins can be less as the product ages - is eventually replaced with new innovations. Profits no longer have to pay for the initial product development costs. But in a drug industry now run by management that stifles innovation, prices increase every year even as the patent expires. And as we protect those companies by not blaming management who does not come from where the work gets done.

Drug companies have even paid generic drug companies to NOT market their equivalent. To increase profit margins. To protect an industry that does not innovate like it used to.

Another reason why medical costs and insurance rates increase. Frazier is now downsizing Merck because, as a lawyer, he successfully stifled innovation. Trials of new Merck drugs have not been going well. He is spinning downsizing as if it is a corporate refocus.

Frazier is another reason why your insurance and medical costs will increase. Just like in the auto industry, he will continue to subvert your standard of living - to protect and enrich himself. Using the same knowledge that even blamed Joe Paterno for pedophilia. Making decisions without learning anything about the problem.

With the waters so muddied by extremists attacking health insurance, did you notice another of your enemies spinning his excuses?

An industry that once had more than 250 new drugs in the innovation pipeline now has less than 40 - because these companies are now more concerned with profits than with the products. Your medical costs must then increase.

Has anyone made use of the 'exchanges' and did you get a good deal on coverage?

From the lack of responses: I'm guessin' no one has made use of the exchanges.

Why not?

I have employer-provided healthcare.

Personally, we haven't used it because we are one of the lucky ones with employer-paid insurance. I know other people who have used them, but I don't know what kind of a "deal" they got (though I would have to assume it was better than what they were paying before, otherwise they wouldn't have gone for it.)

My mother-in-law is going to use the state exchange, because preliminary searching shows that she will get a much better deal than what she is currently having to pay, but right now she is procrastinating. Supposedly it is because the site has been slow as millions of people try to use it all at once, but in reality it is because she really, really doesn't want to believe that Obamacare could work out to be a good thing for her.

I have employer-provided healthcare.

If your employer (for whatever reason) chooses to terminate your coverage (or you), you'll use the exchanges, yes?

I expect I will. I'll at least check them out and compare prices with non-exchanges.

If fired, I'd compare them to COBRA. They'll probably be cheaper (COBRA is more about continuity than affordability), but I'd factor in the hassle of changing providers compared to how long I'd expect to be out of work. The next employer will probably provide coverage, and changing providers twice in a short time might not be worth it.

If healthcare were just dropped by my employer, I'd use the exchange. That's what it's there for.

Like HM, I'd first look into COBRA because right now we have a plan that was specifically tailored to our unique medical needs (because Mr. Clod's employer was very clear that he wanted to keep him happy, and added certain coverages just for him.)

But yes, if everything fell apart and Mr. Clod were for some reason unemployed for a long time, we would certainly use the exchange.

We have employer paid insurance but now we can keep our daughters on ours until they get their own or age out at what 26? Thanks Mitt!

I am waiting until the website problems are sorted out.

Would any one just opt to pay the fine and be done with it?

As I understand: for the first year it's 95 bucks or 1% of your income.

At least for now: is that a better option than the exchanges?

But then you are uninsured.

The fines are low for this first year. But they will go up the next year. They are getting phased in.

I imagine you would think it is, since you also believe that you have no need for emergency services paid for with tax money that you resent having had "stolen" from you.

But any reasonable risk assessment of life would come to the conclusion that we all get sick eventually, or perhaps get hit in an auto accident that wasn't our fault, but nonetheless leaves us with massive medical bills. There could be zero fine, and buying medical insurance would still be a good deal, when comparing risk vs. reward.