5 ms·

I am struggling to come up with a way you could run a health insurance company and NOT be hated. Can anyone come up with examples of successful, beloved health

I am struggling to come up with a way you could run a health insurance company and NOT be hated. Can anyone come up with examples of successful, beloved health insurance companies? Their role in the system is to more or less to do rationing / make resource allocation decisions (or at least be the "administrative face" of rationing policies) and this is always going to be unpopular. While "look inward" is always good advice, I think these companies understand that some percentage of customers will hate them simply because that is the nature of the business. They have to say "no" to some things. The more things they say "yes" to the higher your premiums are. If they say yes to way too many things (like public health care systems will tend to do) then you will see rationing by waitlist rather than price. They are also subject to the laws of large companies and so will make both random and systemic mistakes (just like every other large organisation) for the usual bureaucratic reasons. Even if major systemic change is made, whatever entity is left with the responsibility of saying "no, you don't get that care" will still be hated.

silverquiet 2y ago
> I am struggling to come up with a way you could run a health insurance company and NOT be hated. Perhaps this is a sign that a health insurance company is inherently a poor way to provide health care to a country. > Their role in the system is to more or less to do rationing / make resource allocation decisions And they increase their profits by rationing more. And as is so often pointed out to me, the highest priority of a private company is profit.
- nradov 2y ago
  That is simply false. Due to the minimum medical loss ratio, rationing care doesn't increase health insurer profits. Rather the opposite. https://www.cms.gov/marketplace/private-health-insurance/medical-loss-ratio https://www.cms.gov/marketplace/private-health-insurance/med... Every country's healthcare system rations care. Demand is effectively infinite and resources are limited. Socialized systems tend to ration by restricting supply, forcing patients to wait for expensive treatments or simply not offering certain treatments at all. That might be a net improvement over private insurance but there are certainly some downsides. https://peterattiamd.com/saumsutaria/ https://peterattiamd.com/saumsutaria/
thehoff 2y ago
I could be wrong but the first article I looked up on profits says United Healthcare Group made 22B, in profit in 2023. B, as in billion. Profit, not revenue. I’m not sure if they have any incentives to reduce that even if they could/should.
- xyzzy123 2y ago
  The number is large because they are a large entity with 350k employees and something like 400B revenue. They're also a public company with all the financial obligations and market expectations that come along with that.
  - forgetfreeman 2y ago
    There's another way to look at this. That's 22B removed from the larger economy ostensibly earmarked for healthcare that provided exactly none of that. That they are a public company is not in question. That the health insurance industry should even exist is certainly up for debate.
    - smegger001 2y ago
      If we don't do single payer which seems like something that won't happen anytime soon in this country given the political climate, then at the very least we should force health insurance to be either non-profit or public benefit companies. then there won't be this well they have to deliver prophets to shareholder bullshit excuse about why they aren't giving money to the people they are supposed to insure.
    - xyzzy123 2y ago
      They're a component of the S&P 500 / various indexes, so what is weird is that to some extent the drive for returns from people's own 401ks is the source of the oppression. The human centipede of capitalism.
      - forgetfreeman 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deprecative 2y ago
You run a health insurance company by treating your customers as clients to be empowered not flesh suits to be profited from. It's just antithetical to capitalism to do things that way.

silverquiet 2y ago

> I am struggling to come up with a way you could run a health insurance company and NOT be hated. Perhaps this is a sign that a health insurance company is inherently a poor way to provide health care to a country. > Their role in the system is to more or less to do rationing / make resource allocation decisions And they increase their profits by rationing more. And as is so often pointed out to me, the highest priority of a private company is profit.

nradov 2y ago
That is simply false. Due to the minimum medical loss ratio, rationing care doesn't increase health insurer profits. Rather the opposite. https://www.cms.gov/marketplace/private-health-insurance/medical-loss-ratio https://www.cms.gov/marketplace/private-health-insurance/med... Every country's healthcare system rations care. Demand is effectively infinite and resources are limited. Socialized systems tend to ration by restricting supply, forcing patients to wait for expensive treatments or simply not offering certain treatments at all. That might be a net improvement over private insurance but there are certainly some downsides. https://peterattiamd.com/saumsutaria/ https://peterattiamd.com/saumsutaria/

thehoff 2y ago

I could be wrong but the first article I looked up on profits says United Healthcare Group made 22B, in profit in 2023. B, as in billion. Profit, not revenue. I’m not sure if they have any incentives to reduce that even if they could/should.

xyzzy123 2y ago
The number is large because they are a large entity with 350k employees and something like 400B revenue. They're also a public company with all the financial obligations and market expectations that come along with that.
- forgetfreeman 2y ago
  There's another way to look at this. That's 22B removed from the larger economy ostensibly earmarked for healthcare that provided exactly none of that. That they are a public company is not in question. That the health insurance industry should even exist is certainly up for debate.
  - smegger001 2y ago
    If we don't do single payer which seems like something that won't happen anytime soon in this country given the political climate, then at the very least we should force health insurance to be either non-profit or public benefit companies. then there won't be this well they have to deliver prophets to shareholder bullshit excuse about why they aren't giving money to the people they are supposed to insure.
  - xyzzy123 2y ago
    They're a component of the S&P 500 / various indexes, so what is weird is that to some extent the drive for returns from people's own 401ks is the source of the oppression. The human centipede of capitalism.
    - forgetfreeman 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deprecative 2y ago

You run a health insurance company by treating your customers as clients to be empowered not flesh suits to be profited from. It's just antithetical to capitalism to do things that way.