• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

First victim of health care overhaul?

I haven't seen anything over 7 on my end.

I saw double digit profits, though it may have been 2007 or 2008.

Absolutely not. Increased regulation increases compliance costs, I mentioned earlier that most health companies are spending more time adjusting to the bill that passed than they are on client service, this cannot possibly be good for people.

And as I said, this may be more costly in the short term, but in the long term, the regulations will force service to improve. There are certainly things about the bill that I am not thrilled with, and things that are missing that should have been included, however, some of the regulations are sorely needed and I am fine with the compliance costs going up, temporarily because certain services have become mandated.
 
My research disagrees and indicates that the profit margin of insurance companies is fairly substantial.

Total revenues and market cap are substantial but after you accounts costs, they are kinda pathetic on their margin of profit.
I was looking into it to buy shares of some companies but their profits don't justify a dividend and I can't see it doing so in the future either.

Usually, within an industry segment, you'll have some who pay dividends and some who don't, so far I haven't found one that does.
I don't mean to harp on dividends but they are great indicators of continued profitability and stability.
 
I saw double digit profits, though it may have been 2007 or 2008.
If you can dig it up Cap I'll take a look at it. But I have a sneaking suspicion that any company over 6% has a high dissastisfaction rating and is cheating on the high side for denials.

And as I said, this may be more costly in the short term, but in the long term, the regulations will force service to improve. There are certainly things about the bill that I am not thrilled with, and things that are missing that should have been included, however, some of the regulations are sorely needed and I am fine with the compliance costs going up, temporarily because certain services have become mandated.
You really need to sticky your plan, that was very good. As for regulations, my biggest problem are those that get in the way, as well I've found that by the time you adjust to regs a whole new set all of a sudden pop up, it's the gift that keeps on giving.
 
Total revenues and market cap are substantial but after you accounts costs, they are kinda pathetic on their margin of profit.
I was looking into it to buy shares of some companies but their profits don't justify a dividend and I can't see it doing so in the future either.

Usually, within an industry segment, you'll have some who pay dividends and some who don't, so far I haven't found one that does.
I don't mean to harp on dividends but they are great indicators of continued profitability and stability.
Add P/E ratios to that. you don't usually want anything over 10%
 
I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed reading this debate. For the first time in quite a while we had up to three individuals with differing views (and perhaps on different sides of the political spectrum) going point for counterpoint on the issues and not once did we see a partician slam or personal insult. I suppose Capt Courtesy being a moderator had alittle something to do with maintaining decorum. :lol: Still, this was a refreshing change from what I'm use to seeing on this board.

Thanks, CaptainCourtesy, LaMidRighter and Harry Guerilla.
 
I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed reading this debate. For the first time in quite a while we had up to three individuals with differing views (and perhaps on different sides of the political spectrum) going point for counterpoint on the issues and not once did we see a partician slam or personal insult. I suppose Capt Courtesy being a moderator had alittle something to do with maintaining decorum. :lol: Still, this was a refreshing change from what I'm use to seeing on this board.

Thanks, CaptainCourtesy, LaMidRighter and Harry Guerilla.
Cap and I always have good debates on healthcare, the partisans always come in and muck it up. I think it has alot to do with the fact that we're on different sides of the industry and the perspective sharing makes for informative discussions.
 
I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed reading this debate. For the first time in quite a while we had up to three individuals with differing views (and perhaps on different sides of the political spectrum) going point for counterpoint on the issues and not once did we see a partician slam or personal insult. I suppose Capt Courtesy being a moderator had alittle something to do with maintaining decorum. :lol: Still, this was a refreshing change from what I'm use to seeing on this board.

Thanks, CaptainCourtesy, LaMidRighter and Harry Guerilla.

Cap and La are my home boys, even when we disagree.
They make good arguments and are generally tough customers to debate with.
 
Back
Top Bottom