this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2025
273 points (98.6% liked)

Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related

3667 readers
236 users here now

Health: physical and mental, individual and public.

Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.

See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.

Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.

Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.

Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.

Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The end of expanded subsidies for the Affordable Care Act exchanges means more people will go without health insurance, workers, doctors, and researchers said.

Open enrollment is under way for 2026 insurance coverage, and millions of Americans are facing extreme sticker shock thanks to the end of expanded Affordable Care Act subsidies, which capped Obamacare premiums for a “benchmark” insurance plan at 8.5 percent of income. Twenty-two million people relied on that funding, at a cost of about $35 billion annually.

With the expanded subsidies set to expire at the end of the year, reverting back to a less generous subsidy level last in place in 2021, patients around the country are facing premium increases that are so extreme, they’re either reducing health insurance coverage or dropping it altogether. Some are facing price hikes many multiples higher than they paid last year; those whose costs only doubled told the Prospect they considered themselves lucky by comparison.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 86 points 1 week ago (3 children)

At my job,

It went from $150/month to $400/month.

Family rate was $800/month to $1400/month.

It's so fucked.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 46 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

At my job

While that is definitely fucked, it is due to a different problem. The probelm discussed in this article impacts people who cant get affordable insurance through their employer and, instead, go through the ACA health care exchanges.

Maybe your employer is taking advantage of the confusion around this issue to quietly make you pay a larger share?

[–] Satellaview@lemmy.zip 45 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The article describes this too: healthy people balk at the high premiums, drop their insurance, the pool of people on insurance becomes proportionally more sick people who can’t risk dropping coverage, the insurance companies realize they’ll have to pay out more per person, premiums go up.

I mean, your job might be screwing you over regardless, but there are other explanations.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I guess my point is mainly that the increase in price for employer supplied health care is unlikely to be due to the changes in subsidies. It is more likely due to gouging by someone somewhere in the chain. We don't know enough about the impacts of losing subsidies for health care companies to adjust other prices in good faith. Someone is getting wealthy off the changes to that employer supplied health care plan.

[–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I just want to note how ridiculous this point is as well. Not only does it again ignore that the impact to employer programs is listed in the article, you are also wrong about not knowing enough about the impacts.

Insurance companies have been planning and telegraphing these price increases for a year and explaining that the subsidies going away WILL effect commercial premiums, you are making statements from a place of total ignorance apparently.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Shit, point conceded... Thanks for correcting me.

[–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What are you talking about, it's literally an impact listed in the article. Did you and everyone who upvoted you just skim or not read it at all.

The impact discussed in the article

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Shit, point conceded... Thanks for correcting me.

[–] Montagge@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago

I know people that are employed and on ACA.

load more comments (1 replies)

I was reading through some of the ACA plans as they are right now and the low income one for an individual that was "free" had a $9,500+ deductible. In any other country in that's the cost per capita of healthcare.

"Can't afford healthcare, we'lll tell people we are trying to help you for votes, but not actually help you at all"

[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

In my area, the "retail" cost of ACA's benchmark plan for a single 50-year-old is $1145/month (up from $925 in 2025).

In 2025, you'd have to earn $130,000 to actually pay that, and someone making $60k would have paid just $466 after tax credit. Same person could have gotten a cheap "Bronze" plan for $340. You could get a bronze plan for $0 out-of-pocket below $40k income.

In 2026, anyone earning over $62k will have to pay the full $1145/month. Someone earning just $58,000 could get that plan for $466/month (after credits), or a Bronze plan for $280. Have to make less than $34k to get a bronze plan $0 OOP.

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 67 points 1 week ago

What a ridiculous way to run a society.

[–] xyguy@startrek.website 55 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Already couldn't afford it so I don't have insurance, its now 40% higher and I still can't afford it. Haha! I am immune to the economic implications. If only I was immune to communicable diseases.

Follow me for more financial tricks they dont want you to know. 🙃

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It screws up the entire economy and society, too. If you can't afford insurance, you certainly can't afford the hospital bills. And that's taking money and resources from people that are actually doing something good for society. And it stresses a system that's already limited, which is why the emergency room always has a multi-hour wait. And it stresses your job, because you need an unplanned absence.

[–] justmercury@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 1 week ago

ER employee here, multi-hour wait times aren't caused by people without insurance seeking care, they're caused by admitted patients taking up all the ER rooms. The ER would function great even with pretty substantial patient volumes because many of the primary-care tier complaints can be seen and discharged relatively quickly, many not needing anything more than a closet to speak in private for 10 minutes and imaging or prescription. In the hospital I work at, and every hospital in the city, and probably every hospital in your city, the floor that holds the most non-ER patients is the ER.

The reason for this is because shit runs downhill, and there's not enough inpatient infrastructure because it's expensive during the summer to have excess beds not in use just to have a reserve for flu season. This matters because even nonprofit hospitals are run to make money to pay our CEO ~50x more than the lowest paid employee, which- while a respectable ratio compared to most- is wholly unnecessary. nobody needs a multimillion a year paycheck except perhaps pediatric surgeons with a good bedside manner.

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

. . . that’s taking money and resources from people that are actually doing something good for society.

What the actual fuck.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] FosterMolasses@leminal.space 39 points 1 week ago

Oh no. The thing that everyone warned would happen for months. It's happening.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (1 children)

To everyone who voted against Trump: you have my warmest sympathies.
To everyone else: have the day you voted for.

[–] Mossheart@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Are third party voters in the first or second category?

[–] gdog05@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Solidly second. They knew what they were doing as they were doing it.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Absolutely.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 35 points 1 week ago

The only solution to this is to abolish insurance companies entirely and implement single payer instead.

If there’s a Dem running in a primary for ‘26 and they aren’t saying this, vote for someone else.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Maybe one should market Trumps "big beautiful bill" as "unaffordable care act".

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The Dems should pay you a cool million dollars for consulting instead.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I would not mind the money...

[–] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You'd even be able to afford health insurance for a short while!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Huh. Other modern, wealthy countries don't have entire families of their citizens regularly bankrupted due to unexpected medical issues. Weird, wonder what they're doing differently...

[–] Montagge@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's what happens when the citizenry is too cowardly to do anything about it.

[–] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not cowardly - most Americans are brainwashed to not realize there's a problem.

Most of the Democrat party is bought off.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ebolapie@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If only there was something that could have been done to prevent this. Ah well.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 15 points 1 week ago

And yet somehow people keep voting for Republicans. Republicans make everything worse. Even for the rich, in the medium term, when they have sick workers or get shot dead on the street.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

If someone punched you in the face you'd be allowed to fight back. If the government dooms you to economic death, you're supposed to just accept it. America is incredibly cruel...

[–] FosterMolasses@leminal.space 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Lol, in American public schools they literally teach children from a young age that if you fight back against a bully you'll also be punished.

[–] LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Public schools are weakening humans and indoctrinating our wise self-preservation instincts right out of us. Who runs public schools? The government. Why would the government want everyone to be non-confrontational doormats? Hmmm....

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

Public Schools are for brainwashing.

Same with when I was in China. Same with when I was in the US.

Its all about government control. Manipulating people against each other, divide and conquer. Nationalism, getting people to hate others across borders based on lies.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I assume some real tangible humans were behind these healthcare-cutting decisions. Real tangible humans are indeed punchable.

[–] witten@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

The term you're looking for is social murder.

[–] Drekaridill@lemmy.wtf 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Who could have possibly foreseen this?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 9 points 1 week ago

Hmm didnt plumber with medical issues cause a scene recently? Hmm better make the situation worse and see if more ppl like green overalls.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Americans voted for this. Have the day you voted for. It’s just a shame that it affects all the others who tried to warn you, tried to stop you, and were disenfranchised.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

I would very much like the day I voted for. Maybe even the day I voted for in spring 2016…

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›