4 ms·

Whatever your politics that $500 million comes from profit in healthcare. Aetna has an economic incentive to denvy as much care as they can. That $500 million

Whatever your politics that $500 million comes from profit in healthcare. Aetna has an economic incentive to denvy as much care as they can. That $500 million to one person is part of the overall cost of healthcare in the U.S. Is this really money well spent on healthcare?

Spivak 9y ago
Just like every insurance company? Part of that is from the value of his stock increasing but nonetheless even if it was all from the exit why not if they think they got value for their money?
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  > Just like every insurance company? Yes, which is why insurance for something that's non-optional - health - is so sucky, and sucky enough that the rest of the developed world has decided to largely cut out the middleman.
  - rukittenme 9y ago
    This is wrong. Most countries still have the "middleman". The NHS is the only European system (that I know of) that is completely government operated. Germany, France, Switzerland all leverage private and public health insurance plans. Furthermore, we can look at our own country (the US) and see how the different European systems play out. The VA (NHS-like) is a poorly run mess. Medicare (like Switzerland) runs decently.
    - yequalsx 9y ago
      In France the health insurance companies are non-profit. I'm guessing that insurance CEOs in other countries don't get $500 million bonuses so I'm thinking there must be some sort of regulation controlling profit levels and pay.
sitkack 9y ago
More importantly, that 500M was money siphoned away from healing people. This is a share of the reward in not healing the sick.
- rukittenme 9y ago
  Not necessarily... If we pretend the $500m is "profit", that $500m could have been created by Aetna offering better preventative care or it could have been created by letting people die in the name of corporate greed. Aetna's valuation has grown out of the passage of the ACA. I find it unlikely that the second is true. The first certainly has happened but its unlikely that it accounts for all of the profit. I put profit in quotes because the $500m is a bonus from the sale of the company, not an "income - expenses" profit.
  - yequalsx 9y ago
    This is from be ACA but I think it gives the general idea of the tactics insurance companies use: https://health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2008/08/25/how-crafty-health-insurers-are-denying-care https://health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2008/08/25/ho... Here's one from after ACA passed and was implemented: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mental-illness-health-care-insurance-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mental-illness-health-care-insu... The ACA attempted to make things more fair in terms of appealing denials and mandating certain coverages. It's not reasonable to believe that Aetna's profit comes from offer better preventative care. I'd need to see some evidence to believe that. Certainly before ACA health insurance companies let people die in the name of corporate greed. They have an economic incentive to deny care. Evidence of this is in the fact that the CEO is getting a $500 million bonus. Yes the $500 million comes from stock price increase. But that comes from profit and the profit, at least partly, comes from denying care. EDIT: https://twitter.com/RoseAnnDeMoro/status/922627477553397761/video/1 https://twitter.com/RoseAnnDeMoro/status/922627477553397761/... It happens often enough that there is a market for lawyers to help out when insurance claims are denied. https://scottglovsky.com/practice-areas/health-insurance-denial-lawyer/ https://scottglovsky.com/practice-areas/health-insurance-den...
    - 9y ago
maxerickson 9y ago
Sort of. It's clearly stated that some of it is from growth in the value of stock that he has been compensated with, that value (the growth of the stock) isn't literal profit from healthcare, it's market pricing of the future ability of Aetna to profit on healthcare. And then there is some reason to consider how much delivered value the profit is associated with. If patients reaped similarly large amounts of value from the care they received, the profit isn't necessarily problematic.
- yequalsx 9y ago
  That's a fair point. But the value in stock comes from profit which comes from...
  - pc86 9y ago
    > the value in stock comes from profit You haven't been following Wall Street very long, have you? The stock price gain is something like 8-9x the profit gain for Aetna. This money would not have paid a single claim, ever.
    - yequalsx 9y ago
      This money would not have paid a single claim, ever. That is the essence of my point and we agree on this. Yes, if the CEO did not get this $500 million it would have gone elsewhere but certainly not to paying claims or enhancing healthcare for anyone. We agree on this point.

Spivak 9y ago

Just like every insurance company? Part of that is from the value of his stock increasing but nonetheless even if it was all from the exit why not if they think they got value for their money?

ceejayoz 9y ago
> Just like every insurance company? Yes, which is why insurance for something that's non-optional - health - is so sucky, and sucky enough that the rest of the developed world has decided to largely cut out the middleman.
- rukittenme 9y ago
  This is wrong. Most countries still have the "middleman". The NHS is the only European system (that I know of) that is completely government operated. Germany, France, Switzerland all leverage private and public health insurance plans. Furthermore, we can look at our own country (the US) and see how the different European systems play out. The VA (NHS-like) is a poorly run mess. Medicare (like Switzerland) runs decently.
  - yequalsx 9y ago
    In France the health insurance companies are non-profit. I'm guessing that insurance CEOs in other countries don't get $500 million bonuses so I'm thinking there must be some sort of regulation controlling profit levels and pay.

sitkack 9y ago

More importantly, that 500M was money siphoned away from healing people. This is a share of the reward in not healing the sick.

rukittenme 9y ago
Not necessarily... If we pretend the $500m is "profit", that $500m could have been created by Aetna offering better preventative care or it could have been created by letting people die in the name of corporate greed. Aetna's valuation has grown out of the passage of the ACA. I find it unlikely that the second is true. The first certainly has happened but its unlikely that it accounts for all of the profit. I put profit in quotes because the $500m is a bonus from the sale of the company, not an "income - expenses" profit.
- yequalsx 9y ago
  This is from be ACA but I think it gives the general idea of the tactics insurance companies use: https://health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2008/08/25/how-crafty-health-insurers-are-denying-care https://health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2008/08/25/ho... Here's one from after ACA passed and was implemented: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mental-illness-health-care-insurance-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mental-illness-health-care-insu... The ACA attempted to make things more fair in terms of appealing denials and mandating certain coverages. It's not reasonable to believe that Aetna's profit comes from offer better preventative care. I'd need to see some evidence to believe that. Certainly before ACA health insurance companies let people die in the name of corporate greed. They have an economic incentive to deny care. Evidence of this is in the fact that the CEO is getting a $500 million bonus. Yes the $500 million comes from stock price increase. But that comes from profit and the profit, at least partly, comes from denying care. EDIT: https://twitter.com/RoseAnnDeMoro/status/922627477553397761/video/1 https://twitter.com/RoseAnnDeMoro/status/922627477553397761/... It happens often enough that there is a market for lawyers to help out when insurance claims are denied. https://scottglovsky.com/practice-areas/health-insurance-denial-lawyer/ https://scottglovsky.com/practice-areas/health-insurance-den...
  - 9y ago

maxerickson 9y ago

Sort of. It's clearly stated that some of it is from growth in the value of stock that he has been compensated with, that value (the growth of the stock) isn't literal profit from healthcare, it's market pricing of the future ability of Aetna to profit on healthcare. And then there is some reason to consider how much delivered value the profit is associated with. If patients reaped similarly large amounts of value from the care they received, the profit isn't necessarily problematic.

yequalsx 9y ago
That's a fair point. But the value in stock comes from profit which comes from...
- pc86 9y ago
  > the value in stock comes from profit You haven't been following Wall Street very long, have you? The stock price gain is something like 8-9x the profit gain for Aetna. This money would not have paid a single claim, ever.
  - yequalsx 9y ago
    This money would not have paid a single claim, ever. That is the essence of my point and we agree on this. Yes, if the CEO did not get this $500 million it would have gone elsewhere but certainly not to paying claims or enhancing healthcare for anyone. We agree on this point.