Study say privitization would raise premiums


"Legislators critical of the privatization idea predicted premium costs would rise.
Chaffe also made that assumption, concluding that a private company would raise premiums to maintain a pre-tax operating margin of 4.5 to 7 percent."
In-other-words.....

:eusa_whistle:

*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6aZPPSsryw]YouTube - ‪Health Care Behind The Scenes w/ Wendell Potter‬‏[/ame]
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QwX_soZ1GI]YouTube - ‪BILL MOYERS JOURNAL | Wendell Potter | PBS‬‏[/ame]​
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
Your politically failed ideas will not help the people.

They are corporate driven so that the corporate healthcare system can keep making bank off the sick
 
Privatization is republican code word for handing out no-bid contracts to your cronies.

It is not a free market solution.
 

The plan is already costing the taxpayers a fortune. All this means is that employees will have to contribute more for their health insurance.

So? Where is it written that low cost or free health insurance is a right?
Where is it written that health-care insurance must be for-profit?​

BILL MOYERS: Why is public insurance, a public option, so fiercely opposed by the industry?

WENDELL POTTER: The industry doesn't want to have any competitor. In fact, over the course of the last few years, has been shrinking the number of competitors through a lot of acquisitions and mergers. So first of all, they don't want any more competition period. They certainly don't want it from a government plan that might be operating more efficiently than they are, that they operate. The Medicare program that we have here is a government-run program that has administrative expenses that are like three percent or so.

BILL MOYERS: Compared to the industry's--

WENDELL POTTER: They spend about 20 cents of every premium dollar on overhead, which is administrative expense or profit. So they don't want to compete against a more efficient competitor.

BILL MOYERS: You told Congress that the industry has hijacked our health care system and turned it into a giant ATM for Wall Street. You said, "I saw how they confuse their customers and dump the sick, all so they can satisfy their Wall Street investors." How do they satisfy their Wall Street investors?

WENDELL POTTER: Well, there's a measure of profitability that investors look to, and it's called a medical loss ratio. And it's unique to the health insurance industry. And by medical loss ratio, I mean that it's a measure that tells investors or anyone else how much of a premium dollar is used by the insurance company to actually pay medical claims. And that has been shrinking, over the years, since the industry's been dominated by, or become dominated by for-profit insurance companies. Back in the early '90s, or back during the time that the Clinton plan was being debated, 95 cents out of every dollar was sent, you know, on average was used by the insurance companies to pay claims. Last year, it was down to just slightly above 80 percent.

So, investors want that to keep shrinking. And if they see that an insurance company has not done what they think meets their expectations with the medical loss ratio, they'll punish them. Investors will start leaving in droves.

I've seen a company stock price fall 20 percent in a single day, when it did not meet Wall Street's expectations with this medical loss ratio.

For example, if one company's medical loss ratio was 77.9 percent, for example, in one quarter, and the next quarter, it was 78.2 percent. It seems like a small movement. But investors will think that's ridiculous. And it's horrible.

BILL MOYERS: That they're spending more money for medical claims.
WENDELL POTTER: Yeah.

BILL MOYERS: And less money on profits?

WENDELL POTTER: Exactly. And they think that this company has not done a good job of managing medical expenses. It has not denied enough claims. It has not kicked enough people off the rolls. And that's what-- that is what happens, what these companies do, to make sure that they satisfy Wall Street's expectations with the medical loss ratio."

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QwX_soZ1GI]YouTube - ‪BILL MOYERS JOURNAL | Wendell Potter | PBS‬‏[/ame]​
 
Your politically failed ideas will not help the people.

They are corporate driven so that the corporate healthcare system can keep making bank off the sick

You're an idiot, you really are. The only reason I don't have you on ignore is that I derive a good laugh sometimes from the insanely stupid shit you post.
 
Your politically failed ideas will not help the people.

They are corporate driven so that the corporate healthcare system can keep making bank off the sick

You're an idiot, you really are. The only reason I don't have you on ignore is that I derive a good laugh sometimes from the insanely stupid shit you post.

Why dont you read the article and find out whos study this was?
 
Your politically failed ideas will not help the people.

They are corporate driven so that the corporate healthcare system can keep making bank off the sick

You're an idiot, you really are. The only reason I don't have you on ignore is that I derive a good laugh sometimes from the insanely stupid shit you post.

Why dont you read the article and find out whos study this was?

I live in Louisiana, I know all about this. What difference does it make who's study it is?

:confused:
 
Reminds me of this story from today: Higher administrative costs seen in for-profit Medicaid plans, report finds.

Medicaid managed-care plans owned by publicly traded insurers have higher administrative costs than similar plans owned by providers, according to a report.

For-profit publicly traded plans spent 14% of member premiums on administrative costs, while non-publicly traded plans owned by health systems, local providers and clinics spent 10% of premiums on administrative costs, according to the Commonwealth Fund.

Provider-sponsored plans had the lowest administrative cost ratio, with 8% of member premiums spent on administrative costs.

The report authors compared 225 Medicaid managed-care plans with 23.8 million total enrollees. All plans included at least 5,000 members.

Some 27% of the publicly traded Medicaid-only plans reported quality measures and scored lower on these measures compared to non-publicly traded plans. For-profit publicly traded plans scored 13 percentage points lower for managing chronic illness, and 11 percentage points lower on a composite score measuring preventive care, according to the report.
 

Forum List

Back
Top