EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 why don't you back up your information with facts. "exorbitent" profits??? Man, you sure do know all the liberal talking points don't you? Once again, I will disprove you with facts, not just empty blanket statements. http://biz.yahoo.com/p/522qpmd.html I guess yahoo is distorting the numbers right? http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/health...nks-86-by.html# hmmm, ranks 86th in profit margins at 3.3% . Ya, that's "exorbitent" http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=aci3ct0e9J8w “There are other sectors whose profits dramatically exceed our modest profits,” Williams said. Publicly traded insurers generated about $11 billion in net income in 2008 and nonprofit Blue Cross Blue Shield plans made less than $2 billion, said Carl McDonald, an Oppenheimer & Co. analyst in New York, in a July note issued when Democrats first raised the idea of industry fees. Obama’s proposal to tax health insurance plans may lead to an increase in premiums paid by consumers, especially union members who often have the most expensive plans, said Uwe Reinhardt, professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton University. Passing the Buck “When you tax the corporation, no matter what the tax is, it will be passed on to somebody,” Reinhardt said in an interview with Bloomberg. “In this case, it will be passed on to premiums.” Reinhardt also said that Obama’s proposed cost of $900 billion over ten years won’t be enough to provide universal health coverage, which he estimates would cost more than $1.5 trillion. Obama hasn’t given a fair portrait of the industry, or the true reasons for rising medical costs in the U.S., said Binns, the spokeswoman for Indianapolis-based WellPoint. UnitedHealth Group Inc., of Minnetonka, Minnesota, is the largest provider. “We disagree with the president’s continued mischaracterization of the health-care industry,” she said in an e-mail. “Health insurer profits account for less than 1 percent of every health-care dollar.” Man, that was fun I'll be awaiting your next blanket statement, backed up by nothing other than the typical talking points you hear from the W.H, Congress and MSNBC Pretty slick there, I must say... using the deep recession we were in to somehow give the insurance industry a free pass! To you, $2 billion in profits is not much compared to the other 80 or so companies, but this is HEALTH CARE- not construction, not airlines, not industries that are luxuries. Health care is a NECESSITY, and to make this much of a profit off of others misery is insanity. When our economy finally recovers, the gravy train will ramp up again and the exorbitent profits will roll as they have in the past. A new video about health insurance, Sick for Profit, from Robert Greenwald, slams the health insurance industry. The video, targets the CEO’s for living lavishly, and being greedy. According to the Sick for Profit video, and website, “United Healthcare CEO Stephen Hemsley owns $744,232,068 in unexercised stock options. CIGNA’s Edward Hanway spends his holidays in a $13 million beach house in New Jersey. Meanwhile, regular Americans are routinely denied coverage for the care they need when they need it most.” Sick for Profit calls insurance companies “obscene”, saying they get rich by denying coverage. A question asked in the video is “why are we putting money into the profits of insurance companies, rather than medicine”? Greenwald's Brave New Films has given us documentaries like "Outfoxed," "Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price," and the newly released "Rethink Afghanistan" Greenwald's newest video, and website, Sick for Profits takes a hard look at first hand experiences from patients who have been denied treatment from health insurance companies for reasons that on the surface, seem to defy explanation. Sick for Profit testimonials include denials for surgery, paperwork holdups, and nonpayment for nutrition. According to one patient, life saving parenteral nutrition was denied by her health insurance provider, as “not medically necessary”. She had to take out a loan to pay for her health care. http://www.emaxhealth.com/1020/72/32760/si...e-industry.html Insurance Co. Profits: Good, But Not Breaking Records August 5, 2009 Bookmark and Share When President Obama said at his July 22 news conference that health insurance companies were making record profits "right now," we thought he might have insider access to corporate earnings data. After all, most of the top publicly traded companies were on the verge of filing their reports, but only one had done so at the time Obama spoke. Obama, July 22: Now, you know, there had been reports just over the last couple of days of insurance companies making record profits. Right now, at the time when everybody’s getting hammered, they’re making record profits and premiums are going up. A day earlier, UnitedHealth Group had reported its earnings for the second quarter of 2009, which beat analysts’ expectations with profit of $859 million. Still, other quarters have been more profitable for the insurer, such as the first quarter of 2008, when profit rang in at $994 million. We wondered if there was any other evidence to support Obama’s statement now that other earnings reports are in. The answer is: not much. Humana Inc. logged a quarterly profit of almost $282 million. But in the third quarter of 2007, it rang up $302 million in profits. Aetna came in at $347 million in profit for the quarter, which lagged behind its $480 million of a year earlier. Health Net logged a $40 million profit in the spring quarter, compared with $77 million a year earlier. Wellpoint’s $693 million for the quarter paled next to its third quarter 2008 profit of nearly $821 million. And Coventry Health Care Inc. wasn’t breaking any records, with second quarter profit of about $18 million compared with $83 million a year earlier. CIGNA’s balance sheet showed second quarter profit of $435 million, which was better than anytime in the last couple of years, but the company saw higher numbers in, say, 2004 and 2005. In the quarter ending June 30, 2005, for instance, the company’s net income, or profit, came in at a sizable $720 million. In general, the health insurance industry did poorly toward the end of 2008 and in the first quarter of 2009, so record profits weren’t likely in the second quarter. Obama was right about one thing: Health insurance premiums have gone up. The average premium for a family with employer-sponsored insurance rose 5 percent from 2007 to 2008, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, and has more than doubled since 1999. Figures for 2009 haven’t been calculated yet. http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/insurance...reaking-records Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Status quo as in those who earn exorbitent profits off of misery still are untouched, while those who suffer injuries under the system as penalized for wanting restitution. Is that fair? No, that is not fair... and you know it. The definition of a shell game is making it seem as if something is so when it simply has been moved around, i.e. deception. All your tax benefits do is pass on the costs to the government, and we pay for those costs later on, either through this deficit you talk about, or higher taxes, or costs somewhere else. THAT is the shell game, and you cannot deny it, no matter how hard you try. I get it now. You are a personal injury attorney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 20, 2009 Author Share Posted October 20, 2009 Pretty slick there, I must say... using the deep recession we were in to somehow give the insurance industry a free pass! To you, $2 billion in profits is not much compared to the other 80 or so companies, but this is HEALTH CARE- not construction, not airlines, not industries that are luxuries. Health care is a NECESSITY, and to make this much of a profit off of others misery is insanity. When our economy finally recovers, the gravy train will ramp up again and the exorbitent profits will roll as they have in the past. The second article you posted doesn't prove anything. All it proves is that they make a profit. Evil insurance companies, for making a profit, evil evil evil The first article is So when have nothing, demonize the CEO's. This is a disturbing trend, first it was the banks, then the credit card companies, then the hedgefunds, then the automakers, then the GM bondholders, then the health insurers, then the medical device makers, next will be the oil companies (you can take that to the bank). You've been duped into buying the snakeoil the W.H has fed you bottom line: http://biz.yahoo.com/p/522qpmd.html http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/health...nks-86-by.html# everything else is fluff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 The second article you posted doesn't prove anything. All it proves is that they make a profit. Evil insurance companies, for making a profit, evil evil evil The first article is So when have nothing, demonize the CEO's. This is a disturbing trend, first it was the banks, then the credit card companies, then the hedgefunds, then the automakers, then the GM bondholders, then the health insurers, then the medical device makers, next will be the oil companies (you can take that to the bank). You've been duped into buying the snakeoil the W.H has fed you bottom line: http://biz.yahoo.com/p/522qpmd.html http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/health...nks-86-by.html# everything else is fluff Fluff is a mainstay in the typical liberal's arsenal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Fluff is a mainstay in the typical liberal's arsenal. Snide one liners are a mainstay in the typical extremists arsenal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 The second article you posted doesn't prove anything. All it proves is that they make a profit. Evil insurance companies, for making a profit, evil evil evil The first article is So when have nothing, demonize the CEO's. This is a disturbing trend, first it was the banks, then the credit card companies, then the hedgefunds, then the automakers, then the GM bondholders, then the health insurers, then the medical device makers, next will be the oil companies (you can take that to the bank). You've been duped into buying the snakeoil the W.H has fed you bottom line: http://biz.yahoo.com/p/522qpmd.html http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/health...nks-86-by.html# everything else is fluff Hmmm, and lawyers making profits due to malpractice is evil? Please tell me how lawyers making profits is evil and insurance companies doing it is not evil... this I MUST hear!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 20, 2009 Author Share Posted October 20, 2009 Hmmm, and lawyers making profits due to malpractice is evil? Please tell me how lawyers making profits is evil and insurance companies doing it is not evil... this I MUST hear!!!!! Oh God! No wonder you don't agree with Tort Reform, you don't even know what it means. here let me help you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort_reform Tort reform refers to proposed changes in the civil justice system that would reduce tort litigation or damages. Tort is a system for compensating wrongs and harm done by one party to another's person, property or other protected interests (e.g. reputation, under libel and slander laws). Tort reform advocates focus on personal injury in particular. Accident compensation procedures, compensation, and reform proposals vary greatly among jurisdictions, with a general upwards trend in compensation.[1] In the United States tort reform is a contentious political issue. US tort reform advocates propose, among other things, procedural limits on the ability to file claims, and capping the awards of damages. According to Forbes reporter Daniel Fisher, tort reform is "A catchall phrase for legislative measures designed to make it harder for individuals to sue businesses." It's not that I want to impede lawyers from making money, it is so that doctors are not so prone to being sued up the WAZOOOO As a result of Doctors being sued so heavily, health insurers have had to raise premiums, not just because of litigation, but also because of defensive medicine that is practiced amongst doctors just so they don't get taken to court. The CBO recently came out with a study saying that Tort Reform would save $54 Billion over the next 10 years. The Lawyer argument isn't so that they don't make money, it's that the Democrats have always sided with them, and that is one of the special interest groups that they are protecting. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...on-report-says/ oh looky, look who doesn't want to do it: Two Democratic senators told CNN's "State of the Union with John King" on Sunday that regulating malpractice lawsuits is a flawed solution. "I don't think the way to go is to limit the rights of Americans who are injured by negligent or intentional conduct," Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey told CNN. "A $250,000 cap on damages, in my humble opinion, is insulting to our system of justice." Michigan Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow suggested that the Republican approach to malpractice reform was too simplistic. She said damages caps imposed in Michigan had not stemmed increases in the malpractice insurance rates paid by doctors. shocker Man, you really need to do your homework before you say anything. Kinda makes ya look uninformed. Actually, I don't think it is as much making you look uninformed as that you are uninformed. I'm awaiting your next response that I can help better inform you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Fluff is a mainstay in the typical liberal's arsenal. Since you dont have an avatar, I found you one. http://itn.co.uk/story3440b6ec4069852964a078570be18bce.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Oh God! No wonder you don't agree with Tort Reform, you don't even know what it means. here let me help you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort_reform Tort reform refers to proposed changes in the civil justice system that would reduce tort litigation or damages. Tort is a system for compensating wrongs and harm done by one party to another's person, property or other protected interests (e.g. reputation, under libel and slander laws). Tort reform advocates focus on personal injury in particular. Accident compensation procedures, compensation, and reform proposals vary greatly among jurisdictions, with a general upwards trend in compensation.[1] In the United States tort reform is a contentious political issue. US tort reform advocates propose, among other things, procedural limits on the ability to file claims, and capping the awards of damages. According to Forbes reporter Daniel Fisher, tort reform is "A catchall phrase for legislative measures designed to make it harder for individuals to sue businesses." It's not that I want to impede lawyers from making money, it is so that doctors are not so prone to being sued up the WAZOOOO As a result of Doctors being sued so heavily, health insurers have had to raise premiums, not just because of litigation, but also because of defensive medicine that is practiced amongst doctors just so they don't get taken to court. The CBO recently came out with a study saying that Tort Reform would save $53 Billion over the next 10 years. The Lawyer argument isn't so that they don't make money, it's that the Democrats have always sided with them, and that is one of the special interest groups that they are protecting. Man, you really need to do your homework before you say anything. Kinda makes ya look uninformed. Actually, I don't think it is as much making you look uninformed as that you are uninformed. I'm awaiting your next response that I can help better inform you Insulting me isn't making you look good, that is for sure... true arguments aren't built on insults; kind makes you look like a jacka$$, you know? If you can't make the connection between tort reform and the profits of lawyers, then I suggest YOU be better informed- I'm not going to spell out the connection for you. Who do you think gets a high precentage of these awards by the courts? Come now... Matter of fact, despite how you rationalize it, I'm just ignoring you.. I don't like being insulted during a simple argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Since you dont have an avatar, I found you one. http://itn.co.uk/story3440b6ec4069852964a078570be18bce.jpg Thanks, but I could never have his picture adorning anything connected to me. That does give me an idea though---I'll have to find a good picture of the "Great Communicator". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Hmmm, and lawyers making profits due to malpractice is evil? Please tell me how lawyers making profits is evil and insurance companies doing it is not evil... this I MUST hear!!!!! Lawyers make 40%. The insurance industry make 3%. The difference is what I believe your party calls "windfall profits" and wants to confiscate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Lawyers make 40%. The insurance industry make 3%. The difference is what I believe your party calls "windfall profits" and wants to confiscate. Apple profits increase 47%!!!! Let's get to taxing those greedy capitalist pigs!!!! We can't have people making that much money! When Michael Moore reads this article, he's going to crap purple Twinkies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Apple profits increase 47%!!!! Let's get to taxing those greedy capitalist pigs!!!! We can't have people making that much money! When Michael Moore reads this article, he's going to crap purple Twinkies. We like Apple, though. They're not evil corporate pigs, they're egalitarians who provide the important service of bringing computer equipment and music to the masses, so they're entitled to turn a small profit. But we know they're nice, fine, upstanding populists because they've used U2 in their commercials, and U2 has NEVER sold out and profited on their music or name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 We like Apple, though. They're not evil corporate pigs, they're egalitarians who provide the important service of bringing computer equipment and music to the masses, so they're entitled to turn a small profit. I never thought of it that way. Come to think of it, if I had a nickel for every street-corner homeless dude listening to music on an Ipod... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Lawyers make 40%. The insurance industry make 3%. The difference is what I believe your party calls "windfall profits" and wants to confiscate. Where did you get the numbers of 40% and 3%? I haven't seen that before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 20, 2009 Author Share Posted October 20, 2009 Where did you get the numbers of 40% and 3%? I haven't seen that before. it's like you don't read, it's been provided to you 3 times now. http://biz.yahoo.com/p/522qpmd.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 it's like you don't read, it's been provided to you 3 times now. http://biz.yahoo.com/p/522qpmd.html If he reads what you post, how can he keep arguing with you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I have him on ignore.. he didn't read when I said that, so we're even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Where did you get the numbers of 40% and 3%? I haven't seen that before. 3% I looked up, it wasn't difficult (I used Yahoo Finance - off the top of my head, I could suggest Google, MSNBC, Bloomberg, CNBC, and Motley Fool for the same info). I actually looked it up a couple months ago, when I had this exact same discussion with someone else - the industry average net margin is 3% plus a small fraction - something like 3.2% 40%...based on personal experience and knowledge. I know a lot of lawyers (not just in DC), and know what the PI ones usually take. My wife's PI attorney (we're suing the woman that rear-ended us this past July) is a friend of my wife's boss, and gave us a 10% discount...and is still taking a third. Another thing to consider, too, is that the lawyer's take has an effect ALL out of proportion to the actual amount. Health insurers' cash flow is pretty stable and predictable, which means their net margin can be low. Indemnification against malpractice is just the opposite - predicting the payout on malpractice suits decided by the consideration of arcane medical science by twelve people too stupid to avoid jury duty is inherently unpredictable, which means that not only does malpractice insurance carries a huge risk premium (again, talk to an OB/GYN - it's not unheard of for their insurance premiums to run in the mid-six figures), but extra cost is incurred in a largely futile attempt to minimize risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 20, 2009 Author Share Posted October 20, 2009 If he reads what you post, how can he keep arguing with you? It's easy LA Billz, he doesn't read, and he just makes **** up. I provide him facts and numbers and he says: Na uh, no more status quo, Then I provide him some more facts and links, then he says: Na uh, health insurance companies are greedy and evil Then I provide more facts and links, then he says: Na uh, health reform will bring down costs Then I provide even more facts and links to dispute that, and offer some solutions then he says: Na uh, those solutions won't work, because I say so I'll just take his "ignore" as a submission of being beat down with actual facts and numbers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts