Seems one of the biggest problems is the legal requirement for insurance companies to spread their cost increases on any one plan over all other plans they offer. Because of that they may choose to eliminate a high cost plan in an effort to hold down prices to subscribers on other plans they offer. I think I read that this was exactly the reasoning Blue Cross gave for their decision.
We can argue the pros and cons of ACA, single payer systems, greed on the part of Doctors, hospitals, insurance companies or whatever, but in the end it probably doesn't matter as prices will go up ahead of costs, or services will decline to match what can be charged. We need a critical mass of people and politicians to develop a real understanding the the relationship of cost-to-price and recognize that shifting costs doesn't diminish them in any way. It may lower prices to one privileged group but it will increase prices to others to compensate.
No doubt the BCBS of Texas decision will prompt a lot of full timers to relocate to other States which currently offer better insurance plans at lower prices, but these changes will come to those States in time as well. We are like lemmings marching to the edge of the cliff - some of use see the edge and object to the path we're on, other's see it as a great mass migration journey and drag us along with them.
