3M Co. will drop retirees from health plans, steer to Medicare

[tlmorg02]

Doesn't wash since car insurance companies are allowed to compete across state lines and car insurance premiums are quite low per person. The government controls were put into place in order to dictate the price of goods and services in health care. Of course, doing this caused health care providers to commit fraud in order to earn the money that they should have originally. I want you to provide proof that insurance companies have huge profits, so I want a source.

PolitiFact | One health insurance company turned a profit, but not a record

Now, before you say that the source says that insurance comapnies are not making a profit, remember it is simply stating that they are not making record profits and base this on the economic downturn that started in 2008.

Of these companies, only UnitedHealth has announced its second quarter earnings. Coventry Health Care is set to announce earnings on July 28; Aetna and WellPoint on July 29; Cigna on July 30 and Humana on Aug. 3.

Still, UnitedHealth did make healthy profits, and we asked Steve Shubitz, a health care financial analyst with the investment firm Edward Jones, about it.

"The profits are still significant, there's no question about that. But the reality is they're losing a lot of customers in this economy," Shubitz said.
When companies lay off workers and the workers lose their health insurance, the insurance companies lose customers, and that's why UnitedHealth has seen declining enrollments, he added.

Thus, if you read the article, companies were making "record profits," prior to the economic downturn and the loss of employment that has cut the number of insured.

 

[Erod]

So let me get this straight.

Obama said I can keep my current insurance, but now I can't if I work for 3M, but I'm going to HAVE to buy it, or I'll be penalized in my taxes. And the cost that was going to go down, is actually going up, and in the end, I'm going to be entirely dependent on the bureaucracy of federal government to provide healthcare for my kids.

Did I miss something?

 

[tlmorg02]

The government controls were put into place in order to dictate the price of goods and services in health care. Of course, doing this caused health care providers to commit fraud in order to earn the money that they should have originally.

And to this point Patriot, go and actually talk to any doctor and ask them who dictates how they practice medicine and they will tell you "The insurance companies." I know many physicians as personal friends and they all same the same.

 

[tlmorg02]

So let me get this straight.

Obama said I can keep my current insurance, but now I can't if I work for 3M, but I'm going to HAVE to buy it, or I'll be penalized in my taxes. And the cost that was going to go down, is actually going up, and in the end, I'm going to be entirely dependent on the bureaucracy of federal government to provide healthcare for my kids.

Did I miss something?

Wrong, if you work for 3M you can keep your insurance, you just will not if you are no longer an employee there.

 

[apdst]

It slows the rate of increase that exists only to feed greed. I do not argue that capitalism is bad, but I do argue that capitalism should never come before human life.

Obviously, it doesn't slow the rate of increase.

I would be quicker to argue that putting politics ahead of human life is even worse.

 

[Boo Radley]

This reform is really evil. business were doing this before reform, so decades ago, they must have known this was coming and got an early start.

These people report that 44,230 people a week were losing insurance before reform (though I think they were including unemployment in the equation).

And that premiums rose from 5,791 in 1999 to 12,680 in 2008. That had to be Obama's fault. They knew what was coming, right?

Powered by Google Docs

Private Pension Plans And Retirement Funds

This report in 2003 predicted losses for retirees:

http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/reprint/hlthaff.w3.334v1.pdf

And in the late 90's:

As older workers' insurance becomes more expensive and the government's Medicare program continues to be the secondary payer in the presence of employer health insurance for older workers, firms may try to maintain incentives for early retirement and reduce the scope of health insurance coverage for their retirees. A recent survey by Hewitt Associates (1997), using a constant sample of approximately 600 large firms, found that firms' health insurance coverage for retirees declined from 92 percent to 87 percent between 1991 and 1996. The proportion of firms requiring pre-65 retirees to pay a premium increased from 85 percent to 95 percent in the same period (72 percent to 88 percent for post-65 retirees). Firms also have tightened the requirements to access postretirement health care coverage by imposing increases in age and service requirements.

(snip)

For example, discouraging retiree health insurance may decrease the incentive for early retirement, but it will also decrease the access to adequate health care for those workers who have to leave an employer before age 65, for whatever reason.

Incentives for Early Retirement in Private Pension and Health Insurance Plans

And if you're interested, you might read this take on today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/business/economy/06leonhardt.html?_r=1&hp

 

[tlmorg02]

Obviously, it doesn't slow the rate of increase.

I would be quicker to argue that putting politics ahead of human life is even worse.

How is wanting everyone to be able to recieve medical treatment putting politics first?

 

[tlmorg02]

Boo, from the NYT's piece, this is my favorite line!

But should the litmus test for American health care really be better than nothing?

 

[Boo Radley]

Boo, from the NYT's piece, this is my favorite line!

I liked that as well.

 

[The_Patriot]

PolitiFact | One health insurance company turned a profit, but not a record

Now, before you say that the source says that insurance comapnies are not making a profit, remember it is simply stating that they are not making record profits and base this on the economic downturn that started in 2008.



Thus, if you read the article, companies were making "record profits," prior to the economic downturn and the loss of employment that has cut the number of insured.

I see no data in this opinion piece to back up your statements that they made record profits. I want the numbers not an opinion piece.

 

[The_Patriot]

And to this point Patriot, go and actually talk to any doctor and ask them who dictates how they practice medicine and they will tell you "The insurance companies." I know many physicians as personal friends and they all same the same.

I didn't say anything about how they practice medicine, so this is an invalid comparison. I stated that the federal government mandated price controls on health care goods and services. However, on this point I will state that the government again dictates how doctor's practice their profession. Look at the state medical boards, the regulations put into place by the government at all levels, etc... Funny, but I don't see insurance companies having the same amount of power as the government.

 

[tlmorg02]

I didn't say anything about how they practice medicine, so this is an invalid comparison. I stated that the federal government mandated price controls on health care goods and services. However, on this point I will state that the government again dictates how doctor's practice their profession. Look at the state medical boards, the regulations put into place by the government at all levels, etc... Funny, but I don't see insurance companies having the same amount of power as the government.

Really? The one who pays possesses no control? Are you serious?

 

[Boo Radley]

I see no data in this opinion piece to back up your statements that they made record profits. I want the numbers not an opinion piece.

The 2009 financial reports from the nation’s five largest insurance companies reveal that:

The firms made $12.2 billion, an increase of $4.4 billion, or 56 percent, from 2008.
Four out of the five companies saw earnings increases, with CIGNA’s profits jumping 346 percent.
The companies provided private insurance coverage to 2.7 million fewer people than the year before.
Four out of the five companies insured fewer people through private coverage. UnitedHealth alone insured 1.7 million fewer people through employer-based or individual coverage.
All but one of the five companies increased the number of people they covered through public insurance programs (Medicaid, CHIP and Medicare). UnitedHealth added 680,000 people in public plans.
The proportion of premium dollars spent on health care expenses went down for three of the five firms, with higher proportions going to administrative expenses and profits.

NOW! Blog » Report: Insurers enjoy record-breaking profits as they cut 2.7 million people from their rolls

http://hcfan.3cdn.net/a9ce29d3038ef8a1e1_dhm6b9q0l.pdf

 

[The_Patriot]

The 2009 financial reports from the nation’s five largest insurance companies reveal that:

The firms made $12.2 billion, an increase of $4.4 billion, or 56 percent, from 2008.
Four out of the five companies saw earnings increases, with CIGNA’s profits jumping 346 percent.
The companies provided private insurance coverage to 2.7 million fewer people than the year before.
Four out of the five companies insured fewer people through private coverage. UnitedHealth alone insured 1.7 million fewer people through employer-based or individual coverage.
All but one of the five companies increased the number of people they covered through public insurance programs (Medicaid, CHIP and Medicare). UnitedHealth added 680,000 people in public plans.
The proportion of premium dollars spent on health care expenses went down for three of the five firms, with higher proportions going to administrative expenses and profits.

NOW! Blog » Report: Insurers enjoy record-breaking profits as they cut 2.7 million people from their rolls

http://hcfan.3cdn.net/a9ce29d3038ef8a1e1_dhm6b9q0l.pdf

Not good enough since this lumps all insurance companies together to make the argument that the individual insurance companies are making record profits. I want a list of the profits each company made.

 

[MaggieD]

I didn't say anything about how they practice medicine, so this is an invalid comparison. I stated that the federal government mandated price controls on health care goods and services. However, on this point I will state that the government again dictates how doctor's practice their profession. Look at the state medical boards, the regulations put into place by the government at all levels, etc... Funny, but I don't see insurance companies having the same amount of power as the government.

Those who control the medical purse strings control the practice of medicine. That would be the government for Medicare, Medicaid and Veterans medicine -- and insurance companies for everyone else. Regulations have little to do with how medicine is practiced in the doctor's office. It's all about, as usual, the money.

 

[Erod]

The 2009 financial reports from the nation’s five largest insurance companies reveal that:

The firms made $12.2 billion, an increase of $4.4 billion, or 56 percent, from 2008.
Four out of the five companies saw earnings increases, with CIGNA’s profits jumping 346 percent.
The companies provided private insurance coverage to 2.7 million fewer people than the year before.
Four out of the five companies insured fewer people through private coverage. UnitedHealth alone insured 1.7 million fewer people through employer-based or individual coverage.
All but one of the five companies increased the number of people they covered through public insurance programs (Medicaid, CHIP and Medicare). UnitedHealth added 680,000 people in public plans.
The proportion of premium dollars spent on health care expenses went down for three of the five firms, with higher proportions going to administrative expenses and profits.

NOW! Blog » Report: Insurers enjoy record-breaking profits as they cut 2.7 million people from their rolls

http://hcfan.3cdn.net/a9ce29d3038ef8a1e1_dhm6b9q0l.pdf

What you call profits can also be called RESERVES.

Insurance companies have to have actual money to pay actual claims. They have to be prepared for a rainy day, which is what the concept of insurance is in the first place.

I realize, in the liberal stimulus world, you don't actually have to HAVE money to spend trillions of it. But in the insurance world, you can't pay claims with money you don't have.

 

[tlmorg02]

What you call profits can also be called RESERVES.

Insurance companies have to have actual money to pay actual claims. They have to be prepared for a rainy day, which is what the concept of insurance is in the first place.

I realize, in the liberal stimulus world, you don't actually have to HAVE money to spend trillions of it. But in the insurance world, you can't pay claims with money you don't have.

No, not reserves, investor dividends. But nice try.

 

[The_Patriot]

Those who control the medical purse strings control the practice of medicine. That would be the government for Medicare, Medicaid and Veterans medicine -- and insurance companies for everyone else. Regulations have little to do with how medicine is practiced in the doctor's office. It's all about, as usual, the money.

So regulations on the approval of new drugs, medical procedures, and equipment plays no part in the price of health care? What about the regulations regarding patient privacy etc? What about the regulations on doctors maintaining training standards and carrying malpractice insurance? Still say that they play no role and have no control over prices?

 

[MaggieD]

So regulations on the approval of new drugs, medical procedures, and equipment plays no part in the price of health care? What about the regulations regarding patient privacy etc? What about the regulations on doctors maintaining training standards and carrying malpractice insurance? Still say that they play no role and have no control over prices?

Point taken. My post was addressing the way a doctor practices medicine; not its cost.

 

[The_Patriot]

Point taken. My post was addressing the way a doctor practices medicine; not its cost.

The regulations imposed by the government far outweigh the ones imposed by the insurance companies. The points I made were about how medicine is actually practiced that is imposed by the government in the form of regulations.

 

[Boo Radley]

What you call profits can also be called RESERVES.

Insurance companies have to have actual money to pay actual claims. They have to be prepared for a rainy day, which is what the concept of insurance is in the first place.

I realize, in the liberal stimulus world, you don't actually have to HAVE money to spend trillions of it. But in the insurance world, you can't pay claims with money you don't have.

Don't make too many leaps. I've made no argument here on this. I only gave you where the numbers are coming from. But if you call them reserves, you too should provide evidence.

 

[Boo Radley]

The regulations imposed by the government far outweigh the ones imposed by the insurance companies. The points I made were about how medicine is actually practiced that is imposed by the government in the form of regulations.

Again, you should give support on this. Insurance companis also worry about cost and also put up restrictions. And without government, how do we know they wouldn't impose even more restrictions? Again, it seems to me you're making a lot of leaps.

 

[MaggieD]

The regulations imposed by the government far outweigh the ones imposed by the insurance companies. The points I made were about how medicine is actually practiced that is imposed by the government in the form of regulations.

Then perhaps we DO disagree. If one is talking about how doctors practice medicine in their offices, with their patients, then money controls the sessions; the tests prescribed; the treatment recommended.

The fact that the government imposes regulation on medications/equipment/insurance/licensing/education has little to do with the patient's experience with his doctor. The only one is my list here that DOES have a profound effect on how a doctor practices is the insurance factor and the risk of malpractice suits.

 

[The_Patriot]

Again, you should give support on this. Insurance companis also worry about cost and also put up restrictions. And without government, how do we know they wouldn't impose even more restrictions? Again, it seems to me you're making a lot of leaps.

I have only history to go by and historically the insurance companies acted reasonably and didn't prohibit people without health insurance from paying for their own medical bills. The problems started when the government interferred with the 90% income taxes in the 40's and companies having to resort to using health insurance as compensation to protect their worker's wages from income taxation. Also, since I'm a Constitutionalist *points to avatar* there is no provision in the Constitution of the United States for the federal government to mandate to the people to buy a good or face severe penalties.

 

[The_Patriot]

Then perhaps we DO disagree. If one is talking about how doctors practice medicine in their offices, with their patients, then money controls the sessions; the tests prescribed; the treatment recommended.

The fact that the government imposes regulation on medications/equipment/insurance/licensing/education has little to do with the patient's experience with his doctor. The only one is my list here that DOES have a profound effect on how a doctor practices is the insurance factor and the risk of malpractice suits.

My point is that it's not just the insurance companies at fault. It's both the government's and insurance companies fault.