Hacker News Reader

premiums rose by 4% for 2013, so that's the right direction, even sub 5%

edit: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/21/business/survey-finds-mode...

Your pointing to an article based on a Kaiser Family Foundation survey of employers for 2013 without any guidance on 2014 when the ACA changes occur for businesses. A study about a year that the ACA doesn't affect the group being studied is not very informative.

study: http://kff.org/private-insurance/report/2013-employer-health...

Is the national review less biased?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353475/slowdown-health-...

Its not the bias, its the timing - you are using numbers under one system to prove numbers under a future different system. If anything, these numbers show that the ACA wasn't needed as it came into effect years after in passed. Look at the implementation dates to ACA and see what years the data in the graph is for.

Also, article points to same http://kff.org/health-costs/issue-brief/assessing-the-effect... - same group

Reply on news.ycombinator.com