Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Tuesday, February 23, 2010

President Obama will propose on Monday giving the federal government new power to block excessive rate increases by health insurance companies, as he rolls out comprehensive legislation to revamp the nation's health care system, White House officials said.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

truthhurts

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

How will Republicans object to this yet still pretend to care about average Americans??
I think Obama is getting a handle on how to force them to deal with issues.
I think he is sort of saying, "ok, filibuster this bitches!"

Republicans probably don't have to do anything with this. Health insurance companies have the constitutional right to spam the airwaves with favorable propaganda.

They will squawk free market like it means something.

Meanwhile the insurance companies will post massive profits, pay their CEOs huge bonuses and pay dividends out the wazoo. at your expense

and no there is no competition to control this.

Headline at Drudge:

"BACKDOOR FIX: 'Funds will be transferred to the Social Security Trust' if necessary...
PRESIDENT'S 'HEALTHCARE' PROPOSAL SUMMARY USES WORD 'TAX' 35 TIMES...
'Increase in Fees on Brand Name Pharmaceuticals'...
Broaden 'Tax Base for High-Income Taxpayers'...
Orders 'Comprehensive Database' On Health Claims...
FORCED: 'Raises percent of income assessment that individuals pay if they choose not to become insured'..."

Danni - if this were a republican doing a similar thing you'd be squealing like a pig...WAIT!

Welcome to Amerizuela!

How will Republicans object to this yet still pretend to care about average Americans??

and in walks corporate stooge nanc

"Danni - if this were a republican doing a similar thing you'd be squealing like a pig...WAIT!"

You mean like Mitt Romney actually did do in Massachussetts NANC????
Last time I checked he is still a Republican. The people of Mass. aren't squealing. I'm not either, I seem to hear that coming from your side.

Danni, I think it more has to do with the backdoor fix aspect and the hiding in the dark to accomplish the "things all Americans want..."

I don't think Romney carried it out that way in Mass.

That is even dumb for you Nanc and everybody knows your stupidity knows no bounds. Nanc doesn't care though because she soaks the govt for her insurance with her IndianCare. I think Obama should cut that service.

"Danni, I think it more has to do with the backdoor fix aspect and the hiding in the dark to accomplish the "things all Americans want..."

Hiding in the dark??
You mean like having a televised discussion on Thrusday???
Or like posting his proposal online for anyone interested to read???

No, I mean having the congress ready to push it through no matter what, being prepared to make sure it happens how it has already been drafted no matter what.

Although peace created by a lie may seem like peace for a while, it will be exposed and eventually become far less peaceful than it was before the false peace.

You cannot try to put forward that you are interested in the other persons side and really looking to reconcile while at the same time preparing to push through whatever it is that you want regardless of what the other side says or what the outcome of the meeting is.

Just when you thought the Dems couldn't get any dumber, they surprise again.

This is tyranny.

The president's bill would grant the federal health and human services secretary new authority to review, and to block, premium increases by private insurers, and it would create a new Health Insurance Rate Authority, comprised of health industry experts that would issue an annual report setting the parameters for reasonable rate increases based on conditions in the market.

The legislation would call on the secretary of health and human services to work with state regulators to develop an annual review of rate increases, and if increases are deemed "unjustified" the secretary or the state could block the increase, order the insurer to change it, or even issue a rebate to beneficiaries. States would be eligible for a portion of $250 million in grants finance premium review and approval.

For those of you who don't know, rate increases imposed by insurers already have to be filed and approved by any and all State insurance departments you want to impose them.

This is not a new idea. It is simply a process already being done at the State level that will now be done at the Federal Level.

This isn't reform. Perhaps Obama's Sec of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelium (who used to the insurance commissioner in Kansas) can tell him that.

But I think she already did. Interesting the article doesn't mention that this is a process already in place. The rate increase Truthhurts is facing was approved by his State's insurance commissioner.

I haven't been one to say that health care reform is just another way to increase the size and power of the Federal Govt but shit like this might force me to change my position........because that is all this is.

Sebelius.

was approved by his State's insurance commissioner

Whose campaign for said office was very likely financed by the companies he is bound by law to regulate.

The rate increase Truthhurts is facing was approved by his State's insurance commissioner.

then fuck the state insurance commisioner, fuck horizon blue cross blue shield, fuck the no competition. the increase is unconsiounable and unjustified and we have not option but to take it

well at least their shareholders will do well-me well I can either not pay my mortgage or not get that surgery.

The total profits for the entire health insurance industry in 2009 was $12 billion. That's a profit margin of about one percent. If the libbies honestly believe that the government can do it for less money, offer more services, AND provide for the 30 million Americans who don't have coverage besides, they're out of their minds.

Less Money
More Services
Cover Uninsured

Pick any one. And only one.

Profit is that money in excess of the money actually needed to process the claims and not even the claims themselves. That is $12 Billion for one year that was taken from the insured as wealth to a certain group.

So you have that $12 billion PLUS the costs by a private industry to process the claims.

yes the public can do better.

That is $12 Billion for one year that was taken from the insured as wealth to a certain group.

I know this sounds crazy but it is only $12 billion a year.

well over 10 years that would be well over $100billion, starting to talk real money

I venture to say that NONE of us here want to pay more but in the long run with ANOTHER govt agency, it will cost us much more later
there are already in OBAMAS FIFTY SEVEN states in this country...state insurance regulatory commissions...whey not require them to do something about it...somehow...

"How will Republicans object to this yet still pretend to care about average Americans??" - Danni

It is quite simple and logical. Being from California we experienced the energy crisis due to what was termed "deregulation". Basically this allowed providers of energy charge PGE "market" rates. But the consumers of the PGE service had fixed rates. The middle man PGE in this case was destroyed, and the people had to pay to clean up the mess.

By capping the increases on what health insurance companies can charge, but not limiting thier exposure, (in some cases increasing thier exposure) you bring about the possibility of having a situation just like the California energy crisis.

If this is enacted I predict the demise of the insurance industry in short order, which may be Obama's goal.

"then fuck the state insurance commisioner, fuck horizon blue cross blue shield, fuck the no competition. the increase is unconsiounable and unjustified and we have not option but to take it" -Truthurts

Your state issues MANDATES for the health insurance companies.... as RiR states..... pick one....

While mandates make health insurance more comprehensive, they also make it more expensive because mandates require insurers to pay for care consumers previously funded out of their own pockets. We estimate that mandated benefits currently increase the cost of basic health coverage from a little less than 20% to more than 50%, depending on the state and its mandates.
www.cahi.org

new mandates are responsible for 4% to 7% of the increase. The best we saw for the same coveage is 64%.

Price gouging pure and simple.

Meanwhile the for profit company will make lots of profit AFTER paying huge bonuses to their CEO and other employees. FUCK THEM. that is my money.

BTW I am on my company's health benefit committe and the numbers I present are factual and real from a real company

BTW I am on my company's health benefit committe and the numbers I present are factual and real from a real company

Truth, you mentioned this before and I remember asking you how much of this was the true premium increase from the carrier and how much of it was your employer increasing your portion of the cost.

you didn't know, and yet you claim to be on the "health benefit committee".

surely you know how much of this is a true rate increase from the carrier and how much is your employer transferring it to you.

Good point. Sounds like your employer might be screwing you harder than the insurance company is. What's more--that's the kind of thing that would be unaffected by Obama's plans to limit increases--you could still see double-digit percentage rises in your premiums, even though the company was in full compliance with Obama's yardsticks.

"They will squawk free market like it means something."

Because, after all, price controls always work.

surely you know how much of this is a true rate increase from the carrier and how much is your employer transferring it to you.

#26 | Posted by eberly

I'm certainly curious....

"You mean like Mitt Romney actually did do in Massachussetts NANC????"

They elected Scott Brown specifically on a platform to stop what Romney created. They hired Brown to squeal for them.

"Last time I checked he is still a Republican. I seem to hear that coming from your side."

You love to paint this as some partisan issue; I guess it's easier if you try to think Republicans and Conservatives are cold-blooded and don't care about people.

Quite the opposite. Nationalizing health care is going to hurt the weak, the old and the poor most of all, Danni.

Nobody is advocating the status quo; why is your only solution to pretend it's 1932 and we need a National Socialist Party to run everything?

Any of us that were alive in the 70s know how well price controls work. Nixon and Carter both tried it.

This is tyranny.

#13 | POSTED BY NANC

You are an idiot. Here is a lesson in Tyranny.

politicalhumor.about.com

"They elected Scott Brown specifically on a platform to stop what Romney created."

No they didn't, their health care system has actually gained in popularity since it was started and is now quite popular. They looked at the Senate Bill and concluded it didn't really offer them anything they didn't already have.

Truth, you mentioned this before and I remember asking you how much of this was the true premium increase from the carrier and how much of it was your employer increasing your portion of the cost.

you didn't know, and yet you claim to be on the "health benefit committee".

surely you know how much of this is a true rate increase from the carrier and how much is your employer transferring it to you.

#26 | Posted by eberly

Why do you think he would know the answer to that? He wasn't spending his own money. You give him way too much credit.

"Nationalizing health care is going to hurt the weak, the old and the poor most of all, Danni."

Riiight. Yeah, Medicare has hurt elderly folks so much. That's why it is political suicide to threaten to end it.

They elected Scott Brown specifically on a platform to stop what Romney created. They hired Brown to squeal for them.
#30 | POSTED BY VERNON

I'm sorry. I need to ask this for the better of the comments section. Vernon, are you retarded or paid to post here? I'm just curious so we can decide why we should ignore you.

"Only 11 percent of state residents favored repealing the law, similar to last year's finding." Unless those 11 percent voted repeatedly, they did not elect Brown to "squeal" for them.
www.boston.com

" Nixon and Carter both tried it. "

#31 | Posted by Sniper at 2010-02-23 10:40 AM | Reply | Flag: half right, half wit

"January 11, 1973
Nixon ends wage and price-control program
On this day in 1973, Richard Nixon brought an end to the wage and price-control program that he initiated during the summer of 1971. When Nixon first announced the program, which included temporary freezes on wages and rents, as well as the end of the government's twenty-five-year-old policy of converting foreign money into gold, he hailed it as the dawning of a "new prosperity." However, despite triggering a brief surge on the stock markets, Nixon's initiatives did little to cure the economy's various ailments; by the time the president ended the program, the national debt, as well as the inflation and unemployment rates were all steadily on the rise."
www.history.com

"Richard Nixon had imposed price controls on domestic oil, which had helped cause shortages that led to gasoline lines during the 1973 Oil Crisis. Gasoline controls were repealed, but controls on domestic US oil remained. The Jimmy Carter administration began a phased deregulation of oil prices on April 5, 1979, when the average price of crude oil was US$15.85 per barrel (42 US gallons). Over the next 12 months the price of crude oil rose to $39.50 per barrel (its all time highest real price until March 7, 2008.)[6] Deregulating domestic oil price controls allowed domestic U.S. oil output to rise sharply from the large Prudhoe Bay fields, while oil imports fell sharply. Hence, long lines appeared at gas stations, as they had six years earlier during the 1973 oil crisis."
en.wikipedia.org

-They elected Scott Brown specifically on a platform to stop what Romney created.

Brown voted for RomneyCare, Vermin.

nothing more than pr.

It is impossible to embarrass Vernon. That's a fact.

You are an idiot. Here is a lesson in Tyranny.

politicalhumor.about.com

#32 | Posted by Sycophant

i will treat you with more respect than you give or deserve but it is tyranny in the aspect that the govt is deciding more every day on who wins and who loses.
suppose the govt had come in and said..uh no...those automobiles are illegal because the buggywhip makers contributed to my campaign and the buggywhip union head visits the white house more than any other person and I have been in bed with the buggywhip makers and a lawyer for them so I will protect them even if it means others lose thier freedom to drive one of those horseless carriages.......

thats tyranny of an oppressive govt..or how about the FAR OUT idea of the govt telling what LIGHT BULB YOU HAVE TO buY and use....

(OOPs..that shit is about to happen to all of us)

AND let me report from the beck show yesterday since most liberal fucks dont give a shit about any opposing view...but he says the health care insurance profit was 3. ? per cent while pepsi made a 18% profit...so who's calling for an end to the pepsi people raping the american public??????

zat, don't be a fucking dope!!!! The point of the whole thing was to show it didn't work. As usual you completly avoided the subject.

Truth, you mentioned this before and I remember asking you how much of this was the true premium increase from the carrier and how much of it was your employer increasing your portion of the cost.

you didn't know, and yet you claim to be on the "health benefit committee".

surely you know how much of this is a true rate increase from the carrier and how much is your employer transferring it to you.

#26 | Posted by eberly

actually I didnt answer that question and yes I am on our HBC and yes I know the answer to that question and yes I just met with the owner of the companyto discuss health benefits.

The shift is substantial, the shift is spearate from the gouging that is being done by the health insurance company and yes you are wrong.

and to those who say I should just suck it up and deal with it are demonstrating your hatred to the middle class.

AND if any of you think I want to pay more for health insurance, then you are dumber than you look.

BUT....this is just another obama/progressive intrusion into the freedom of americans and another plank in the dismantling of the constitution....you people remember that dont you..thats the document you were so concerned about when bush was in office.

...so who's calling for an end to the pepsi people raping the american public??????

#42 | Posted by afkabl2

So who is calling for the US government to stop raping the American public?

"This is tyranny."

when you cry wolf, when one isn't around.. bad things happen.

damn the right on this site keep turning more and more into the new code pink.

cry babies

i'll call them code yellah cause they are yellah like french's mustard.

So who is calling for the US government to stop raping the American public?

#47 | Posted by Sniper at

a LARGE group of people who are demeaned, insulted, ridiculed, attacked, and defiled at every turn. one of the organizations behind them is called the tea pary express.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

WAAAAAAAAAAAAA

President Obama will propose on Monday giving the federal government new power to block excessive rate increases by health insurance companies...

Seeing as States already have commissions in place, what is different about this proposal? Other than handing it over to the federal government? No doubt States will file suits and probably win. Why Obama thinks there is a one size fits all solution as the answer, is laughable.

If the insurance companies were forced to comply, they would have to make up for it by cutting services; offering less to doctors and hospitals and hoping that they accept. Maybe they will.

If you want low cost healthcare, you are going to have to accept lower quality healthcare. Nothing is free.

CBO ANNOUNCED today that obamas plan is "too vague'..
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO really????

they also said they didnt have enough "TIME" to look closely at it..

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO barry running something through before people can look at it??
NO WaY....

and doNT FORGET the MISSING 200 BILLion for 'drs fix'....so those of you who keep bringing up iraq into budget talks..I JUST KNOW that you want to consider aNYTHING like that when its DEMS doing it...

yeah right...

Brown voted for RomneyCare

#38 | Posted by Corky at 2010-02-23 10:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

nothing more than pr.

#39 | Posted by Shawn at 2010-02-23 11:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

It is impossible to embarrass Vernon. That's a fact.

#40 | Posted by danni at 2010-02-23 11:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

----------------------

U.S. Senate hopeful Scott Brown: "I can stop the bill" on healthcare reform

January 13, 2010 by MassDevice staff

Saying he will "stop the bill" if elected during a tour of Zoll Medical Corp.'s Chelmsford, Mass., headquarters, U.S. Senate hopeful Scott Brown wades into the fray over a proposed tax on medical device makers contained in the Senate's healthcare reform package.

www.massdevice.com

It is impossible to embarrass Vernon. That's a fact.

#40 | Posted by danni at 2010-02-23 11:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

Thank you, Danni. The truth kinda does that to me

Riiight. Yeah, Medicare has hurt elderly folks so much. That's why it is political suicide to threaten to end it.

#35 | Posted by danni at 2010-02-23 10:49 AM | Reply | Flag

Medicare began in 1965, Danni, as a hospitalization plan for railroad widows. Today is not 1965, and ObamaCare -- a takeover of a fifth of the economy -- 'enjoys' what? 22% support?

They are not quite the same. If you can grasp that.

"Why Obama thinks there is a one size fits all solution as the answer, is laughable."

I've heard at least two maybe three using this "one size fits all" talking point already this morning.

I dont think its one size fits all because as of now if you are a union member who lives in nebraska or louisanna or floride..then you wont pay near as much as the rest of us..
and if you are someone like andy stern...hell your fortune is in the bag...
of course the size im talking about is the cost.

and any man gets nervous talking about size anyway

HEY CHECK IT OUT

go get um brietbart..kick his ass for real next time

www.thefoxnation.com

and any man gets nervous talking about size anyway
#61 | Posted by afkabl2

Not nearly as upset as I and the rest of the staff have grown over your persistent habit of whistling to the children with whom you share the three compooters in our "Linked to the Werld Gnook," wiggling your eyebrows, laughing like a hyena in heat, pointing to your zip and then holding up both hands and moving them apart like a fisherman at Lake Lady Bird measuring a trophy class bass.

Sincrely,

Ms. Satania Abadon, G.E.D.
Readin & Writin Specialist
Looneyville Rodent Reduction Corp., Barn Painter, Tio Taco Shoppe & Libarry
Looneyville, TX

#62 | Posted by afkabl2
LOL!

now doc...you are just not being truthfull

you know the court order keeps them far enough away...
but when the local catholic school has a field trip here and all those plaid blue and white dresses.......................
...........

heres another one for you mister stirsumop

www.thefoxnation.com

now doc...you are just not being truthfull
you know the court order keeps them far enough away...
but when the local catholic school has a field trip here and all those plaid blue and white dresses.......................
...........
#65 | Posted by afkabl2

Ah ha, a defrocked padre! There's no way in hell you were a Jesuit. So, what was it? Carmelite? Franciscan?

now dont make fun of me...just because some priests have had more poon than I have recently...be nice.

and what used to be my favorite word back when I was a working stiff

LUNCH!

You can tell Obama and his libtards are lawyers and not economist because they dont even understand the basic principles of supply and demnand and what it does to prices. I think he should try price fixing lawyer fees and see where that gets him.

HEY DOC

instead of doing drudge at work maybe it would help if you saw this..because some people need all the help they can get

www.newsmaxhealth.com

I assume that if costs go up and they cannot raise the premiums, that they will have to find a way to lower the coverage.

"You can tell Obama and his libtards are lawyers and not economist because they dont even understand the basic principles of supply and demnand and what it does to prices. I think he should try price fixing lawyer fees and see where that gets him."

Perhaps but more obviously you seem to be pretty naive in that you seem to think that the principles of supply and demand are what determines the cost of health care insurance in this country.
In a monopoly the laws of supply and demand do not matter.

The total profits for the entire health insurance industry in 2009 was $12 billion. That's a profit margin of about one percent. If the libbies honestly believe that the government can do it for less money, offer more services, AND provide for the 30 million Americans who don't have coverage besides, they're out of their minds.

They can. It's call the Public Option. But, you are AFRAID of it because you are sucking up the "Obama is a Socialist propaganda".

When did it become OK in your mind to make such an outrageous profit on the sickness and misery of other humans? What is in that for you?

California's largest for-profit health insurer, Anthem Blue Cross, is expected to raise premiums by 30 to 39 percent on an unknown number of its 800,000 members.

WellPoint, who owns Anthem, as a whole posted a profit, recording net income of more than $4.7 billion in 2009

WellPoint's profit margin at 7.3 percent, the highest of the five big insurers.

As the nation struggled last year with rising healthcare costs and a recession, the five largest health insurance companies racked up combined profits of $12.2 billion -- up 56 percent over 2008, according to a new report by liberal healthcare activists.

This is the problem with running the Health-care industry to make Profits. The PROFITS drive the industry not the actual Health-Care!

They are driven to raise prices for their health plans to satisfy INVESTORS, which in turn drives away customers.

"It is a terrible thing to run your business for Wall Street," Skolnick said.

"It creates very bad incentives, and it ultimately prevents you from doing the thing that is in the best long-term interest of your business. . . . There is no way that as long as these businesses are publicly traded, they can have the best interest of their customers at heart."

But, you know better right?

www.columbustelegram.com

We need a PUBLIC OPTION NOW!

Hiding in the dark??
You mean like having a televised discussion on Thrusday???
Or like posting his proposal online for anyone interested to read???

#10 | Posted by danni
Oh you mean posting it with so much detail, that the CBO could not even score it? Nice

"They can. It's call the Public Option. But, you are AFRAID of it because you are sucking up the "Obama is a Socialist propaganda"."

I'd like you to consider if the public option was as well run as the DoD or the Dept of Education, both of which routinely pay far more than market rate. For a simple reason. There is no incentive to keep costs low. The DoD is tasked with protecting the nation, so when they come up short, it is on congress to demand more money from the people. In contrast, a private insurance company must limt costs in order to stay competitive.

"As the nation struggled last year with rising healthcare costs and a recession, the five largest health insurance companies racked up combined profits of $12.2 billion -- up 56 percent over 2008, according to a new report by liberal healthcare activists."

$12.2 billion on how many trillion in sales. And even using the wellpoint example. Let's say the elected to use profits to cut costs. They could do so by 7.4% and no more while still staying in the black. So, on a family plan you could save somewhere around a thousand dollars a year, all other things being equal. But that's also ignoring the shareholders, who might just pull thier money out or demand that the board sell off the assets of wellpoint in order to recover some of the investment.

Oh you mean posting it with so much detail, that the CBO could not even score it? Nice

Exactly!

The public despises Obamacare, both the senate AND the house version. Obama's "proposal" just takes the senate version and makes it worse.

He STILL seems to think that he's some kind of magician and that, by the appearance of bi-partisanship that he can, on camera, effectively brand the GOP as simple obstructionists and then justify a flagrant nuclear option by calling it 'reconciliation' which is a blatant misnomer given that reconciliation is limited to budgetary issues. Of course, if this attempt happens, will 7 brave Dem senators step forward to spearhead a 'new' gang-of-14' to try (the numbers don't work as 7 Dem defectors still can't stop a 50+1 vote given the Dem majority in the senate) and prevent this from happening on principled grounds? I highly doubt it.

"In contrast, a private insurance company must limt costs in order to stay competitive."

Yeah Wellpoint has to limit increases to 39% to stay competitive with who??? No one. Health insurance is largely a mononopoly in most markets which are divied up between major companies...all legally due to exemptions in inti-trust laws which apply only to them.

"I'd like you to consider if the public option was as well run as the DoD"

But that would be dumb because the DOD is virtually immune from the same considerations as other parts of the government and thus operates more wastefully than does Medicare which would be a better agency to compare a Public Option to. Also a Public Option could operate as an independent company self-sustaining through premiums.
Also, when insurance companies buy other insurance companies it reduces "profit", there are plenty of ways to hide profit. Anyone who has ever owned a business is well aware of that.

"On October 15, 2006, it was announced that McGuire would step down immediately as chairman and director of UnitedHealth Group, and step down as CEO on December 1, 2006 due to his involvement in the employee stock options scandal. Simultaneously, it was announced that he would be replaced as CEO by Stephen Hemsley, who has served as President and COO and is a member of the board of directors. [16] McGuire's exit compensation from UnitedHealth, expected to be around $1.1 billion, would be the largest golden parachute in the history of corporate America.[17]"

In a monopoly the laws of supply and demand do not matter.

#73 | Posted by danni at 2010-02-23 01:25 PM

Wrong again! In a monopoly you can change the supply, the real demand remains the same. You can fix or move the price point but the laws of economics are still in play at setting the price point.

Actually you bring a good point for the other side. If we increase the supply by allowing competition across state lines and limiting regulations on the hospitals, doctors and insurance we can reduce the costs. (see republican proposal) If we falsely limit the supply or fix the cost with single payer/limited payouts or additional restrictions, we will not decrease the costs we will limit sevices.

Health insurance is largely a mononopoly in most markets which are divied up between major companies...all legally due to exemptions in inti-trust laws which apply only to them.

That's why big business loves regulations. They don't protect consumers from business; they protect business from consumers.

-That's why big business loves regulations.

In Bizarro World, maybe.

Industry spends millions of dollars a year fighting regulations that they haven't been able to pay to be written themselves.... which is a minor percent of total regulations.

And the lesson most crackpots learned from deregulated financials causing Bush's Great Recession?

They want more deregulation.

No one. Health insurance is largely a mononopoly in most markets which are divied up between major companies...all legally due to exemptions in inti-trust laws which apply only to them.

#78 | Posted by danni
Exactly why people with common sense have touted compatition across state lines.

You cannot try to put forward that you are interested in the other persons side and really looking to reconcile while at the same time preparing to push through whatever it is that you want regardless of what the other side says or what the outcome of the meeting is.

#11 | Posted by ExpsRedemption

That would be akin to the 2 Bush tax cuts of 2001 the GOP passed via reconciliation the CBO scored at the time as a $2.2 Trillion deficit over 10 years. Turning out to be in the $3.7 Trillion range. Or Medicare Part D, or Medicare Advantage, or ....

As to premiums, anyone who can add 2 + 2 know premiums have gone up at far above the rate of inflation. They've even gone up as we've experienced deflation in the economy.

"Industry spends millions of dollars a year fighting regulations that they haven't been able to pay to be written themselves.... which is a minor percent of total regulations." - Corky

I would think of it in terms of, they spend millions of dollars fighting for thier own self interest. Sometimes its against other industries and the regulations they are trying to impose. For instance, being part of the Cotton industry, I would love to see more polyester regulations, I would even help them hog tie those guys. They do the same to me.

You see we are not there just to stop regulations, we help write those regulations to hinder competition. Washington DC is where the game is played now, not NYC or Silicon Valley.

"They've even gone up as we've experienced deflation in the economy." - AU

NFL - Not For long...... look up Weimer Republic....

You put more money into an Industry, with no change in resources within the Industry, its going to raise its prices... government getting involved with MediCare, Medicaid didn't help control prices....

ANDREA

We don't have less hospitals. One of the problems I point to was the privatization of non-profit community hospitals all across America. We have many more hospitals where I live than we did 20 years ago and only one community hospital where there used to be 5.

To me, insurers are middlemen who provide no service, but rake up to $.40 of every health care premium dollar. Take them out of the equation and you have more money for actual health care.

We need a PUBLIC OPTION NOW!

#74 | Posted by donnerboy at 2010

sure why not?
but lets ask the cbo first who yesterday said that the obama plan is "TOO VAGUE" to score and others have reported that the REAL price is TWO TRILLION dollars because of a couple of things NOT made as public as others

NEBRASKA kickback...caused a rucus so they just did away with it ...RIGHT?
WRONG>..they gave it to everystate THUS pushing up the cost

and the union thing...did away with it right??
uh..that would be a NO...everybody can get that deal PUSHING THE COST up again...
see how this is working???

and lets not forget the REAL DEAL ..
DRS fix...now I AM sure that all of you who go into convulsions when you talk of the UNBUDGETED WAR in iraq will agree with me..putting the drs fix OUTSIDE OF THIS BILL even though the COST wont go away is NOT what should happen.
RIGHT??

yeah sure you will...

so sure bring that public option and while we are at it..I want the concession on
INDENTURED SERVANTS of the 21st century T shirts...

To me, insurers are middlemen who provide no service, but rake up to $.40 of every health care premium dollar. Take them out of the equation and you have more money for actual health care.

#88 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2010-02-23 06:41 PM

Please provide a link to a creditable source on this. Everything I have seen says that insurance companies live on a 2-7% net profit and 10-12% gross profit. Most in a servie or manufacturing indusrtries live on much higher margins closer to 35 - 50% GP

#90 | Posted by WI_Hunter

You're only talking profits, not 'administrative costs'.

GOOD One WI

but you see..the left cant be bothered with a fact like that.>NOT when they are villifiying thier next devil in the corporate world...remember the hemoraging in the house committe over gm and the car people and the banks who are still making out like bandits.
and NOW its toyota's turn to be the goat while the house gets their face on tv in a day long display of rightous indignation..and then tomorrow...people like jay rockefeller will STILL TAKE millions from toyota and YES the repubs who do it too...

"...but you see..the left cant be bothered with a fact like that..."

I'd like to see at least one remotely credible link to that claim before I started calling it a fact. I don't rule out that such a link exists mind you.

You're only talking profits, not 'administrative costs'.

#91 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2010-02-24 12:49 PM

It obvious you are not in business or have never had to deal with a P&L statement

Gross Profits are the difference between what your product costs vs what you sell it for. It dosent include administrative cost, and other business expenses.

Net profit includes all admin cost and other business expense,(ie payroll, copiers, paper, rent, cleaning)

SO again without avoiding the question please post a creditablelink showing the gross margins on a health insurance company that makes 40% gross margins or admitt you make this shit up.

If these 40% gross margins are true with 2-6% net margins then the real solution is not a government run health program with single payer but rather just control the excessive payroll and bonus programs. Or as most in a capitolistic economy would do is make sure they have competititon with one another to make sure they dont have excessive profits

Wi HUNTER

Besides doing some reading of your own, ask your primary care physician what percentage of revenues they pay personnel who bicker with insurance companies and process claims.

As a business owner most of my life I can tell you you have to pay personnel and all other expenses out of gross receipts before you get to profits. I'd have thought a business expert such as yourself would have included expenses into your equation.

I've read 'up to' 40% administrative costs. Average between 20-30%.

As a business owner most of my life I can tell you you have to pay personnel and all other expenses out of gross receipts before you get to profits. I'd have thought a business expert such as yourself would have included expenses into your equation.

I've read 'up to' 40% administrative costs. Average between 20-30%.

#95 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2010-02-24 01:39 PM | Reply

American - Please reread my explination to you on gross profit and net profit. I explained the differnce to you and we seem to agree. Now that we agree that gross profits are before payroll and other operating expenses, are you still claiming that health insurance companies make on average 20-30% NET profit or are you saying that is gross profit or as your last atemednt that is their admin expenses? I'm trying to understand your argument. If you want to make a statement you better be able to back it up or else it should be called out as BS.

I have found licks showing a 2-7% Net profit. Others discuss a 10-20% gross profit. AsIi pointed out before most manufacturing and service industies work on much higher gross and net profit. Do you have any thing that is creditiable to enlighten me? Stop dancing and explain to me what you see as the underlying issue for are premiums going up beyond cost of living. In order to identify a solution one must undersand the problem. Are you claiming that health insurance makes to much gross profit?

Since my first comment it's been 'administrative costs' not 'profits'.

Simply: $.20 - .40 of every health care dollar does NOT go to providing health care.

Simply: $.20 - .40 of every health care dollar does NOT go to providing health care.

#97 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

It depends upon what you call a healthcare dollar. Some numbers include things like drug research, and advertising. The discussion of a healthcare dollar is nonsense until it is understood what that dollar means..

Here is a page for you... 7% admin
www.bcbs.com

I have seen 70% of healthcare dollars go towards chronic care....

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable