4 ms·

>Any estimates on how much this will relieve our healthcare system.. aren't diabetes and CVD the biggest burdens? I know diabetes is up there, but I was also u

>Any estimates on how much this will relieve our healthcare system.. aren't diabetes and CVD the biggest burdens? I know diabetes is up there, but I was also under the impression that cancer and cancer-adjacent issues were a much larger burden on the system than CVD or end-of-life care (or aging related problems like arthritis or dementia). Could be wrong though - I'd love to see numbers and statistics. >Will insurance costs come down if the US becomes healthier? No. Insurers are public companies and need to increase profits every quarter. Lowering costs harms this ability tremendously.

lotsofpulp 2y ago
> No. Insurers are public companies and need to increase profits every quarter. Lowering costs harms this ability tremendously. And selling their insurance at higher prices than their competitors harms their ability to sell their insurance to customers. Hopefully, you or your employer are shopping around, and not just for health insurance.
- NickC25 2y ago
  Hard to shop around as an individual who doesn't work for a large corporation. My rates are absurdly high, and I get effectively zero coverage. None of the plans I could chose from were all that different.
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    That is because those are the lowest prices possible. Insurance companies earn tiny low single digit profit margins. Almost every dollar they collect goes out as an expense for claims. They literally have to get their prices approved by the state government regulator. To suggest they are colluding to ratchet up the amount of money they spend on healthcare is unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. It’s actually funny, because at the same time, there are complaints of insurance denying coverage and requiring prior authorizations. So which is it? Insurance companies inflating healthcare spend to increase their profit, or denying coverage to reduce healthcare spend to increase profit? Your premiums are high because the ACA mandates your premiums pay for healthcare that older and sicker people get. A huge portion is effectively a tax, from young and healthy to old and sick. >Hard to shop around as an individual who doesn't work for a large corporation. That must be because you are in a low population state, or a state where the regulators make it difficult for companies to compete. For example, New Jersey has many options for an individual to choose from: https://www.nj.gov/dobi/division_insurance/ihcseh/ihcrates2024.pdf https://www.nj.gov/dobi/division_insurance/ihcseh/ihcrates20...
    - NickC25 2y ago
      >That is because those are the lowest prices possible. Insurance companies earn tiny low single digit profit margins. Almost every dollar they collect goes out as an expense for claims. Just as a caveat to this, UnitedHealth Group posted a FY'23 (according to their FY2023 investor report) profit of 22.4 billion USD. Profit, not revenue. Now, that's about a 6% margin (FY'23 net rev was 371.6 billion), so you're right about single digit profit margins, but the sheer scale of UHG is insane. They have plenty of room to reduce profits, and shouldn't be held to the same rules that non-essential service providers are held to. They can, and absolutely should reduce the costs they pass along to end-users, especially those who are healthy and don't make claims. >They literally have to get their prices approved by the state government regulator. To suggest they are colluding to ratchet up the amount of money they spend on healthcare is unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. Those same regulators are just as susceptible to bribes, kickbacks, "lobbying" and other favors as any other politician. >It’s actually funny, because at the same time, there are complaints of insurance denying coverage and requiring prior authorizations. So which is it? Insurance companies inflating healthcare spend to increase their profit, or denying coverage to reduce healthcare spend to increase profit? It's both. >That must be because you are in a low population state, or a state where the regulators make it difficult for companies to compete. For example, New Jersey has many options for an individual to choose from: I don't live in a low population state. I live in one of the 3 most populated states. My rates are still sky high, which is odd considering I: don't consume alcohol, exercise religiously, eat cleanly, don't have a family history of any major diseases or illnesses, don't have preexisting conditions, am under 35, don't take any medication, and most importantly, haven't made a claim against my insurance in over a decade - the last time I have had any medical procedure of any major sort was an X-ray when I broke my wrist as an undergrad in college, and I paid cash for that. So, why are my rates still over $250 a month? I'm self-employed running a small startup with myself and a sibling as the only employees. While I made good money in a previous job, $250 a month for basically nothing is a sinkhole that I would like to avoid, $3k a year isn't much in the grand scheme of things, but it's $3k I could use to pay rent, invest into my company, invest into the markets, or just use to live my life. It's a waste.
      - lotsofpulp 2y ago

lotsofpulp 2y ago

> No. Insurers are public companies and need to increase profits every quarter. Lowering costs harms this ability tremendously. And selling their insurance at higher prices than their competitors harms their ability to sell their insurance to customers. Hopefully, you or your employer are shopping around, and not just for health insurance.

NickC25 2y ago
Hard to shop around as an individual who doesn't work for a large corporation. My rates are absurdly high, and I get effectively zero coverage. None of the plans I could chose from were all that different.
- lotsofpulp 2y ago
  That is because those are the lowest prices possible. Insurance companies earn tiny low single digit profit margins. Almost every dollar they collect goes out as an expense for claims. They literally have to get their prices approved by the state government regulator. To suggest they are colluding to ratchet up the amount of money they spend on healthcare is unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. It’s actually funny, because at the same time, there are complaints of insurance denying coverage and requiring prior authorizations. So which is it? Insurance companies inflating healthcare spend to increase their profit, or denying coverage to reduce healthcare spend to increase profit? Your premiums are high because the ACA mandates your premiums pay for healthcare that older and sicker people get. A huge portion is effectively a tax, from young and healthy to old and sick. >Hard to shop around as an individual who doesn't work for a large corporation. That must be because you are in a low population state, or a state where the regulators make it difficult for companies to compete. For example, New Jersey has many options for an individual to choose from: https://www.nj.gov/dobi/division_insurance/ihcseh/ihcrates2024.pdf https://www.nj.gov/dobi/division_insurance/ihcseh/ihcrates20...
  - NickC25 2y ago
    >That is because those are the lowest prices possible. Insurance companies earn tiny low single digit profit margins. Almost every dollar they collect goes out as an expense for claims. Just as a caveat to this, UnitedHealth Group posted a FY'23 (according to their FY2023 investor report) profit of 22.4 billion USD. Profit, not revenue. Now, that's about a 6% margin (FY'23 net rev was 371.6 billion), so you're right about single digit profit margins, but the sheer scale of UHG is insane. They have plenty of room to reduce profits, and shouldn't be held to the same rules that non-essential service providers are held to. They can, and absolutely should reduce the costs they pass along to end-users, especially those who are healthy and don't make claims. >They literally have to get their prices approved by the state government regulator. To suggest they are colluding to ratchet up the amount of money they spend on healthcare is unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. Those same regulators are just as susceptible to bribes, kickbacks, "lobbying" and other favors as any other politician. >It’s actually funny, because at the same time, there are complaints of insurance denying coverage and requiring prior authorizations. So which is it? Insurance companies inflating healthcare spend to increase their profit, or denying coverage to reduce healthcare spend to increase profit? It's both. >That must be because you are in a low population state, or a state where the regulators make it difficult for companies to compete. For example, New Jersey has many options for an individual to choose from: I don't live in a low population state. I live in one of the 3 most populated states. My rates are still sky high, which is odd considering I: don't consume alcohol, exercise religiously, eat cleanly, don't have a family history of any major diseases or illnesses, don't have preexisting conditions, am under 35, don't take any medication, and most importantly, haven't made a claim against my insurance in over a decade - the last time I have had any medical procedure of any major sort was an X-ray when I broke my wrist as an undergrad in college, and I paid cash for that. So, why are my rates still over $250 a month? I'm self-employed running a small startup with myself and a sibling as the only employees. While I made good money in a previous job, $250 a month for basically nothing is a sinkhole that I would like to avoid, $3k a year isn't much in the grand scheme of things, but it's $3k I could use to pay rent, invest into my company, invest into the markets, or just use to live my life. It's a waste.
    - lotsofpulp 2y ago