3 ms·

>... some of those customers are unhappy... That's a tremendously generous way of saying, "Many of their customers are dead because the company opted for profi

>... some of those customers are unhappy... That's a tremendously generous way of saying, "Many of their customers are dead because the company opted for profit over treatment".

avalys 2y ago
[flagged]
- jjulius 2y ago
  >What do you think is a reasonable profit margin for a for-profit insurance company? Healthcare should not be for-profit, full stop. >How many people are dead because you didn’t personally volunteer all of your disposable income to pay for their medical care? A false equivalency that is so disingenuous that it feels intentional. >Why are you more entitled to your earnings than UHC? I'd be happy to have my earnings taxed more so that everyone could have equal access to healthcare. That's why I voted for Sanders in 2016. But hey, keep trying to insinuate that I'm super greedy!
  - avalys 2y ago
    > Healthcare should not be for-profit, full stop. Do you think doctors should work for free? Do you think doctors should work for minimum wage? Why are doctors entitled to "profit" from their work in healthcare, but a CEO who spends his time organizing the activities of others, isn't? What about an investor who chooses to use his capital to invest in a healthcare company instead of another social media app? If you're saying that the US should have government-run healthcare, do you realize this is a political decision, in which your opinion is at odds with the current political system in the US, and that killing CEOs in the street over political disagreements is a poor path to go down to resolve political disagreements?
    - wfme 2y ago
      There's a big difference between compensating skilled professionals for their work and running healthcare as a profit-maximizing business. Doctors deserve fair compensation for their expertise and time, just like any other skilled professional. The issue with for-profit healthcare isn't about individual compensation - it's about corporate entities having the power to make sweeping decisions that affect access to healthcare. When large healthcare companies control substantial market share, they can unilaterally raise prices or restrict coverage in ways that leave patients with few alternatives. Unlike choosing a different doctor, patients often can't easily switch insurance providers or hospital systems, especially in emergencies or in areas with limited options.
      - avalys 2y ago
        > Doctors deserve fair compensation for their expertise and time, just like any other skilled professional. What's fair compensation for the skilled professional who administers a $50B organization? Your proposed alternative to corporate healthcare is what? Government-run healthcare? How does that solve the problem of a single entity being able to unilaterally raise prices or restrict coverage, or allow patients flexibility to change their hospital in an emergency? Are you claiming that government-run healthcare will make better decisions at minimizing cost than private healthcare? What other industry have you found the government to be better at minimizing cost than the private sector?
        nobody9999 2y ago
        >Are you claiming that government-run healthcare will make better decisions at minimizing cost than private healthcare? What other industry have you found the government to be better at minimizing cost than the private sector? Medicare has overhead of just 3%. Last I checked, that's leaps and bounds better than private insurers. You were saying?
- Terr_ 2y ago
  I think both of you are headed down a false path because that "profit" metric isn't meaningful here. A company can be rapacious and growing and exploitative without that always being reflected in "revenue minus expenses." In particular: 1. The folks with incentive to make a bad policy have other ways of personally profiting. 2. IANAAccountant, but I think that isn't including all the money it has sunk into buying competitors and removing choice from consumers and policyholders.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- xdennis 2y ago
  > How many people are dead because you didn’t personally volunteer all of your disposable income to pay for their medical care? Insurance companies make a profit by taking money and denying claims. Your whataboutism is ridiculous. GP never took anyone's money and then denied their claim.
- scotty79 2y ago
  > UHCs profit margins are 6%. Those are for tax purposes. You can be sure they extract way more into private pockets through various mechanisms.
  - avalys 2y ago
    "It's a write-off Jerry, they just write it off!"
    - scotty79 2y ago
      Don't you think companies have ways of hiding profits for tax purposes? Don't you think those margins are calculated from these lower official profits? Margins have nothing to do with reality. They are a compromise between looking poor for IRS and looking good for investors
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- manquer 2y ago
  UHH profit margins are far greater than 6%. Companies with 6% margins do not grow market cap and shareholder value by 8000 % since Jan 2000. i.e the stock rise has risen 80 times from their ~$7 Jan 2000 price to around $560 today.[1] [1] https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UNH:NYSE?hl=en&window=MAX https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UNH:NYSE?hl=en&window=M...
avalys 2y ago
Is it your belief that UHC could have approved every denied claim and paid for these out of their 6% profit margin? This seems at odds with the numbers I have seen shared here. If not, what do you think would happen if UHC lost money by paying out every claim that they previously denied? Is there an alternative to charging everyone much higher premiums? Are you saying a government-run insurance company could be run more efficiently, and collect the same amount in premiums yet somehow pay out more in claims? Do you think it is moral for UHC to deny _any_ claims because they are for treatments which are not medically necessary, or too expensive given the potential benefits? Should UHC pay $1M of policyholders premiums for a risky liver transplant for a chronic alcoholic who is still drinking? If you accept it is moral for UHC to deny some claims, how do you know that UHC's policies around denying claims (which led to their 6% profit margin) are actually wrong? Because you read some articles with anecdotes about people's bad experience with them?
- jjulius 2y ago
  As I've said elsewhere in this thread, my belief is that healthcare should not be for-profit, full stop. Everyone should be able to get the care they need, full stop. Whatever that looks like, just not whatever the current bullshit is. Beyond that, I have no desire to engage in this conversation with someone who, very clearly, cannot discuss things in good faith right now.

>... some of those customers are unhappy... That's a tremendously generous way of saying, "Many of their customers are dead because the company opted for profit over treatment".

avalys 2y ago

[flagged]

jjulius 2y ago
>What do you think is a reasonable profit margin for a for-profit insurance company? Healthcare should not be for-profit, full stop. >How many people are dead because you didn’t personally volunteer all of your disposable income to pay for their medical care? A false equivalency that is so disingenuous that it feels intentional. >Why are you more entitled to your earnings than UHC? I'd be happy to have my earnings taxed more so that everyone could have equal access to healthcare. That's why I voted for Sanders in 2016. But hey, keep trying to insinuate that I'm super greedy!
- avalys 2y ago
  > Healthcare should not be for-profit, full stop. Do you think doctors should work for free? Do you think doctors should work for minimum wage? Why are doctors entitled to "profit" from their work in healthcare, but a CEO who spends his time organizing the activities of others, isn't? What about an investor who chooses to use his capital to invest in a healthcare company instead of another social media app? If you're saying that the US should have government-run healthcare, do you realize this is a political decision, in which your opinion is at odds with the current political system in the US, and that killing CEOs in the street over political disagreements is a poor path to go down to resolve political disagreements?
  - wfme 2y ago
    There's a big difference between compensating skilled professionals for their work and running healthcare as a profit-maximizing business. Doctors deserve fair compensation for their expertise and time, just like any other skilled professional. The issue with for-profit healthcare isn't about individual compensation - it's about corporate entities having the power to make sweeping decisions that affect access to healthcare. When large healthcare companies control substantial market share, they can unilaterally raise prices or restrict coverage in ways that leave patients with few alternatives. Unlike choosing a different doctor, patients often can't easily switch insurance providers or hospital systems, especially in emergencies or in areas with limited options.
    - avalys 2y ago
      > Doctors deserve fair compensation for their expertise and time, just like any other skilled professional. What's fair compensation for the skilled professional who administers a $50B organization? Your proposed alternative to corporate healthcare is what? Government-run healthcare? How does that solve the problem of a single entity being able to unilaterally raise prices or restrict coverage, or allow patients flexibility to change their hospital in an emergency? Are you claiming that government-run healthcare will make better decisions at minimizing cost than private healthcare? What other industry have you found the government to be better at minimizing cost than the private sector?
      - nobody9999 2y ago
        >Are you claiming that government-run healthcare will make better decisions at minimizing cost than private healthcare? What other industry have you found the government to be better at minimizing cost than the private sector? Medicare has overhead of just 3%. Last I checked, that's leaps and bounds better than private insurers. You were saying?
Terr_ 2y ago
I think both of you are headed down a false path because that "profit" metric isn't meaningful here. A company can be rapacious and growing and exploitative without that always being reflected in "revenue minus expenses." In particular: 1. The folks with incentive to make a bad policy have other ways of personally profiting. 2. IANAAccountant, but I think that isn't including all the money it has sunk into buying competitors and removing choice from consumers and policyholders.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
xdennis 2y ago
> How many people are dead because you didn’t personally volunteer all of your disposable income to pay for their medical care? Insurance companies make a profit by taking money and denying claims. Your whataboutism is ridiculous. GP never took anyone's money and then denied their claim.
scotty79 2y ago
> UHCs profit margins are 6%. Those are for tax purposes. You can be sure they extract way more into private pockets through various mechanisms.
- avalys 2y ago
  "It's a write-off Jerry, they just write it off!"
  - scotty79 2y ago
    Don't you think companies have ways of hiding profits for tax purposes? Don't you think those margins are calculated from these lower official profits? Margins have nothing to do with reality. They are a compromise between looking poor for IRS and looking good for investors
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
manquer 2y ago
UHH profit margins are far greater than 6%. Companies with 6% margins do not grow market cap and shareholder value by 8000 % since Jan 2000. i.e the stock rise has risen 80 times from their ~$7 Jan 2000 price to around $560 today.[1] [1] https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UNH:NYSE?hl=en&window=MAX https://www.google.com/finance/quote/UNH:NYSE?hl=en&window=M...

avalys 2y ago

Is it your belief that UHC could have approved every denied claim and paid for these out of their 6% profit margin? This seems at odds with the numbers I have seen shared here. If not, what do you think would happen if UHC lost money by paying out every claim that they previously denied? Is there an alternative to charging everyone much higher premiums? Are you saying a government-run insurance company could be run more efficiently, and collect the same amount in premiums yet somehow pay out more in claims? Do you think it is moral for UHC to deny _any_ claims because they are for treatments which are not medically necessary, or too expensive given the potential benefits? Should UHC pay $1M of policyholders premiums for a risky liver transplant for a chronic alcoholic who is still drinking? If you accept it is moral for UHC to deny some claims, how do you know that UHC's policies around denying claims (which led to their 6% profit margin) are actually wrong? Because you read some articles with anecdotes about people's bad experience with them?

jjulius 2y ago
As I've said elsewhere in this thread, my belief is that healthcare should not be for-profit, full stop. Everyone should be able to get the care they need, full stop. Whatever that looks like, just not whatever the current bullshit is. Beyond that, I have no desire to engage in this conversation with someone who, very clearly, cannot discuss things in good faith right now.