Obamacare update: Regence Blue Shield customers notified of skyrocketing rates

And making record profits every year.


Why idiots defend these evil assholes who hire drs to figure out how not to provide treatment while making record profits is beyond me.
 
evince said:
Hey idiot, healthcare profits and premiums have been growing well before this bill was ever introduced.

The assholes have been raising the cost of healthcare and reaping HUGE ass profits for years.


Now you know why the public option was needed.

They would have raised rates even if hand had followed the republican plan which was to stand by like so many rubes and just WATCH them raise our rates and their profits with our fingers up our noses.
Click to expand...

I know that the leash marks around your neck have left nasty callouses.
 
evince said:
Hey idiot, healthcare profits and premiums have been growing well before this bill was ever introduced.

The assholes have been raising the cost of healthcare and reaping HUGE ass profits for years.


Now you know why the public option was needed.

They would have raised rates even if hand had followed the republican plan which was to stand by like so many rubes and just WATCH them raise our rates and their profits with our fingers up our noses.
Click to expand...

You are quite wrong on the HUGE ass profits desh.... which is not surprising since that is the same line of bullshit your masters fed to you.

http://biz.yahoo.com/p/sum_qpmd.html

Do try to at least ATTEMPT to educate yourself.
 
evince said:
And making record profits every year.


Why idiots defend these evil assholes who hire drs to figure out how not to provide treatment while making record profits is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Why do idiots keep parroting party lines rather than actually doing a quick search that shows the average profit margin for accident/health insurance is about 7.5%

Side note: BCBS was a non-profit firm until 2004 when it was merged into Wellpoint.... yet their rates escalated too... I wonder why?
 
YEAH!!!! I just got my 20th fucking robo call this week! Do I get a set of steak knives or something???

Political groups should be subject to the no call list. This is fucking annoying...

/venting.... and now.... back to our thread
 
http://lansing.injuryboard.com/misc...nditures-on-medical-care.aspx?googleid=268656


AHIP numbers seem to indicate that insurance companies are making very little in profits and spending a lot on providing coverage for their customers. However, the data fails to clearly explain that insurers are measuring their profits against total health care spending in the U.S., not in comparison to insurance company revenue. In other words, according to health care economist Uwe Reinhardt: “[a]ll that statement says is, if you eliminated all our [insurance company profits], national health spending in America would be 1 percent lower.” AHIP numbers only have meaning within that context—otherwise, within the context of actual insurance companies’ revenues, insurers skim between 15-20% of premium dollars to pay for administrative costs and profits. Moreover, even more alarming is the fact that within the last 10 years, insurers have been spending less (from plan premiums that their customers pay) on medical care and more on administrative costs and profits. Indeed, a report by Families USA found that some insurers maintain a ratio of 60% on medical payouts to 40% for administration, marketing and profit. You may think there is nothing wrong with that payout to profit ratio. However, that figure represents a two to ten percent difference from what AHIP claims insurance companies make in profits.
 
evince said:
http://lansing.injuryboard.com/misc...nditures-on-medical-care.aspx?googleid=268656


AHIP numbers seem to indicate that insurance companies are making very little in profits and spending a lot on providing coverage for their customers. However, the data fails to clearly explain that insurers are measuring their profits against total health care spending in the U.S., not in comparison to insurance company revenue. In other words, according to health care economist Uwe Reinhardt: “[a]ll that statement says is, if you eliminated all our [insurance company profits], national health spending in America would be 1 percent lower.” AHIP numbers only have meaning within that context—otherwise, within the context of actual insurance companies’ revenues, insurers skim between 15-20% of premium dollars to pay for administrative costs and profits. Moreover, even more alarming is the fact that within the last 10 years, insurers have been spending less (from plan premiums that their customers pay) on medical care and more on administrative costs and profits. Indeed, a report by Families USA found that some insurers maintain a ratio of 60% on medical payouts to 40% for administration, marketing and profit. You may think there is nothing wrong with that payout to profit ratio. However, that figure represents a two to ten percent difference from what AHIP claims insurance companies make in profits.
Click to expand...

1) You are a moron if you believe a trial attorney who makes his living suing insurance companies. It is his blog desh.... he is spouting bullshit OPINIONS.

2) Insurance companies are for the most part publicly traded companies. They have to report their earnings in the exact same manner as everyone else. Their profit margins are on average 7.5% as shown.

3) that 40% "administration/marketing/profit"... yeah... they PAY their employees, they pay their rent/mortgage, they produce all the paperwork, they pay their utilities, they market their products and they make a profit. That profit is 7.5% on average. Meaning the other 32.5% goes to the other areas.

Again, you are full of shit and simply parroting party points that are groundless.
 
http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2009/05/20/health-insurance-ceos-total-compensation-in-2008/


. Co. & CEO With 2007 Total CEO Compensation

■Aetna Ronald A. Williams: $23,045,834
■Cigna H. Edward Hanway: $25,839,777
■Coventry Dale B. Wolf : $14,869,823
■Health Net Jay M. Gellert: $3,686,230
■Humana Michael McCallister: $10,312,557
■U.Health Grp Stephen J. Hemsley: $13,164,529
■WellPoint Angela Braly (2007): $9,094,271
L. Glasscock (2006): $23,886,169
Ins. Co. & CEO With 2008 Total CEO Compensation


■Aetna, Ronald A. Williams: $24,300,112
■Cigna, H. Edward Hanway: $12,236,740
■Coventry, Dale Wolf: $9,047,469
■Health Net, Jay Gellert: $4,425,355
■Humana, Michael McCallister: $4,764,309
■U. Health Group, Stephen J. Hemsley: $3,241,042
■Wellpoint, Angela Braly: $9,844,212
See Nonprofit Health Related CEO Compensation Here.
 
http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2009/11/16/nonprofit-health-related-ceo-compensation/


Nonprofit executive compensation, health-related nonprofit:
New York-Presbyterian Hospital Herbert Pardes (CEO): $6,170,885
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Harold Varmus (CEO): $3,677,402
Partners HealthCare System James J. Mongan (CEO): $3,376,554
New York Presbyterian Hospital Steven J. Corwin (COO): $3,127,051
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Samin Sharma (Professor of Medicine and Cardiology): $2,894,580
 
evince said:
http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2009/05/20/health-insurance-ceos-total-compensation-in-2008/


. Co. & CEO With 2007 Total CEO Compensation

■Aetna Ronald A. Williams: $23,045,834
■Cigna H. Edward Hanway: $25,839,777
■Coventry Dale B. Wolf : $14,869,823
■Health Net Jay M. Gellert: $3,686,230
■Humana Michael McCallister: $10,312,557
■U.Health Grp Stephen J. Hemsley: $13,164,529
■WellPoint Angela Braly (2007): $9,094,271
L. Glasscock (2006): $23,886,169
Ins. Co. & CEO With 2008 Total CEO Compensation


■Aetna, Ronald A. Williams: $24,300,112
■Cigna, H. Edward Hanway: $12,236,740
■Coventry, Dale Wolf: $9,047,469
■Health Net, Jay Gellert: $4,425,355
■Humana, Michael McCallister: $4,764,309
■U. Health Group, Stephen J. Hemsley: $3,241,042
■Wellpoint, Angela Braly: $9,844,212
See Nonprofit Health Related CEO Compensation Here.
Click to expand...

now pull up CEO compensation for other industries desh....

I agree that CEO compensation is out of hand in most industries, including insurance, but again, you are spinning away from the profit margin.

The average profit margin is 7.5%
 
The profit margins are handed out to the top CEOs. There are many top people in each company getting these HIGH compensation packages.

This is JUST the CEOs
 
evince said:
http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2009/11/16/nonprofit-health-related-ceo-compensation/


Nonprofit executive compensation, health-related nonprofit:
New York-Presbyterian Hospital Herbert Pardes (CEO): $6,170,885
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Harold Varmus (CEO): $3,677,402
Partners HealthCare System James J. Mongan (CEO): $3,376,554
New York Presbyterian Hospital Steven J. Corwin (COO): $3,127,051
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Samin Sharma (Professor of Medicine and Cardiology): $2,894,580
Click to expand...

I am not familiar with Partners.... but all the rest are INDIVIDUAL hospitals... they are NOWHERE NEAR THE SIZE of the insurance companies you listed. You are comparing apples to oranges.

If you have the numbers, share with us the revenue each of those brings in... then we can compare the salaries as a percent of revenue.
 
evince said:
The profit margins are handed out to the top CEOs. There are many top people in each company getting these HIGH compensation packages.

This is JUST the CEOs
Click to expand...

You clearly don't have any clue what a profit margin is.

Profits are AFTER all expenses have been paid. Including salaries.

and AGAIN... there are many executives in almost EVERY industry that are getting the high level packages.

so unless you are saying that companies should be restricted in how profitable they can be and the amount of salary they can pay out.... then you have no case.
 
NigelTufnel said:
I believe the other poster merely said that this particular rate increase has nothing to do with HCR and cited the commissioner of insurance in support of that.





Calling health insurance pre-paid health care is ridiculous. Health insurance is insurance. If you need care, it covers the costs of your care. If you don't need care, you don't get coverage. Just like other types of insurance. The difference is that pretty much everyone needs care at some point or another (and really ought to get preventative care on a regular basis) whereas not everyone will get into an auto accident or have a house fire.



It's a trade off, like I said. You thing that trade off isn't worth it. I disagree.




Fargle Bargle.
Click to expand...
Right. Fargle Bargle. Got it. And calling it "insurance" when the premiums are far more than I pay for simple doctor visits is ridiculous. We pre-pay for every part of the care and more. Insurance helps me to cover crap that would burden me financially. This would be like buying "insurance" on your vehicle that paid for your oil changes. It would be exceedingly costly because you would be pre-paying for all those regular services and it would cost far more than you needed or would ever receive from your "coverage". It is stupid to constantly cover people who do not need it, and it is cost ineffective. Forcing me, literally, through the force of government to purchase unnecessary products that burden me financially is both wrong, and unconstitutional. Even if you say "fargle bargle"...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top