• 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!

FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat

winston53660 said:
Considering labor costs are proportionate what would you rather make? 6% on a 100k or 6% on 1 billion.
Click to expand...

You're missing the whole point. It's irrelevant what your gross figure is, the point is, that a company has to have a safe amount of operating capital for the upcoming year. 6% profit, even on a gazillion dollars, isn't what would be called a safe profit margin.
 
apdst said:
You're missing the whole point. It's irrelevant what your gross figure is, the point is, that a company has to have a safe amount of operating capital for the upcoming year. 6% profit, even on a gazillion dollars, isn't what would be called a safe profit margin.
Click to expand...

Oh so you are calling for some form of regulation.
 
They’re not hurting when they can cough up a bonus like this to a CEO. Note the bolded part about backdating stocks.



<n March, the Wall Street Journal raised questions about possible options backdating at UnitedHealth (a practice that, while permissible under certain circumstances, can amount to outright theft of shareholder assets.>


<No wrongdoing has so far been established, but the company, the SEC, and government prosecutors are all still investigating. Even so, the stock is down 22%, a drop that has lowered the value of McGuire's trove of in-the-money options from $1.6 billion in December to a still hefty $1 billion today.>

FORTUNE: The real CEO pay problem - July 10, 2006
 
donc said:
They’re not hurting when they can cough up a bonus like this to a CEO. Note the bolded part about backdating stocks.



<n March, the Wall Street Journal raised questions about possible options backdating at UnitedHealth (a practice that, while permissible under certain circumstances, can amount to outright theft of shareholder assets.>


<No wrongdoing has so far been established, but the company, the SEC, and government prosecutors are all still investigating. Even so, the stock is down 22%, a drop that has lowered the value of McGuire's trove of in-the-money options from $1.6 billion in December to a still hefty $1 billion today.>

FORTUNE: The real CEO pay problem - July 10, 2006
Click to expand...

If the guy made a profit for the company, when thy only expect a 6% profit margin, then he most certainly earned it.
 
winston53660 said:
Oh so you are calling for some form of regulation.
Click to expand...

No, if anything, I'm calling for de-regulation of the insurance industry, to spur competition and lower insurance rates. That would make too much sense and be waaaaaay too easy, so of course the Libbos aren't going to do that.
 
donc said:
Evidently you approve of backdating (stockholder theft in my book) stocks.

CEO of St. Louis-based Engineered Support Systems sentenced for backdating stock options

CEO of St. Louis-based Engineered Support Systems sentenced for backdating stock options | North America > United States from AllBusiness.com
Click to expand...

I don't approve of it if it's illegal. Looks like this guy broke the law, got busted, got sent to the pokie. The problem? Or is this some kind of exmaple why we should start a corporate witch hunt in this country?
 
apdst said:
I don't approve of it if it's illegal. Looks like this guy broke the law, got busted, got sent to the pokie. The problem? Or is this some kind of exmaple why we should start a corporate witch hunt in this country?
Click to expand...

The problem? I guess its no problem if you have no ethics and anything goes, including stealing stockholder money.

Sounds to me like you would be perfect CEO material, see where the line is , tap dance up to it and when you think no one is looking stick you foot over the line…..right Bernie. ;)
 
donc said:
The problem? I guess its no problem if you have no ethics and anything goes, including stealing stockholder money.

Sounds to me like you would be perfect CEO material, see where the line is , tap dance up to it and when you think no one is looking stick you foot over the line…..right Bernie. ;)
Click to expand...

I would like for you quote me, paying special attention to the part where I said any of that. thanks in advance.
 
apdst said:
And, that's not illegal. What is illegal, is for the government to go on a witch hunt because of it. I know it may come as a shock to most on the Left, but this is America and there's nothing wrong with making money.
Click to expand...

Did I say it was illegal? Nope

The sad thing is that nobody has went after these crooks before now:2razz:
 
Kali said:
Did I say it was illegal? Nope

The sad thing is that nobody has went after these crooks before now:2razz:
Click to expand...

You just said it was illegal and in the very next sentence you call them crooks...LMAO!!!!
 
A 6% profit margin?

That means that, for a company to be able to be able to cover it's yearly-forward expenses, without so much as paying the management or investers a single penny, would take a minimum of 17 years (correct me if I am wrong, apst).

So realistically, it could take as long as 20-25 years.

I think it's because the overall enviroment for an insurance company is cruel, the insurance company itself has to be cruel for it to survive. If they hired every jane, payed every joe what their worth, and covered every jack that gets burnt by hot coffee, the company would die within it's first year. My dad's business had 3 times that profit margin and he shut down in 6 months.
 
apdst said:
I would like for you quote me, paying special attention to the part where I said any of that. thanks in advance.
Click to expand...


From post #25 in answer to Kali,s post (They make hidden money.) you answered (and, that's not illegal.)

Hhmm..silly me when I when I mistook your two word sentence followed by a question mark in (The problem?) in post #32 in answer to my post #31 which said (Evidently you approve of backdating (stockholder theft in my book) stocks.)

I don’t know how I could have mistaken you for the upright lad that you evidently are, instead of making a statement like this. :rofl


(Sounds to me like you would be perfect CEO material, see where the line is , tap dance up to it and when you think no one is looking stick you foot over the line)

On second thought this statement stands tall.:2wave:
 
Last edited:
While this is an interesting discussion about what is or is not a legitimate amount of profit or return on investment dollars is it possible the focus would be better if it were on why is Obama attacking the industry as a whole with claims he once again can not back up with facts?
As I see it Obama has lumped Health care and the increasing costs and Health Insurance to together and then lied about both in order to promote his agenda of destroy take over and control.
If he wanted to either slow or reduce Health Care costs leave Health care Insurance out of the discussion and through Malpractice insurance in to the midle of it. Why has Malpractice Insurance gone through the roof? The rising number of sympathy verdicts to people who claim to be vitims of doctors when in fact they are not at all or they have had some unforeseen outcome that could have happened to anyone. People like John Edwards made millions by lying to juries and playing on the heart strings of jurors in cases that were for the most part trumped up, and he's only one of theousands of lawyers who are no better then ambulance chasers. So the amswer here is TORT reform and caps on awards for real, punitive damages, and pain and suffering. If Obama wants the Government to control something here's a place to start. This alone would reduce the cost of Healthe care.

Next Malpractice Insurance could be reduced dramatically not only by TORT reform but by Government take over. Simple and cost effective, and what's more not disruptive or inflationary and economy busting.

Once the insurance problems are addressed the cost of Health Care can come into focus. The costs added by unnecessary tests to cover for malpractice would cut costs as would a comprehensive list of expected or possible difficulties that could arise from each procedure along with the percentage of that chance of a bad outcome would give patients better information before they have problems so they could better know what to expect.

Finally the reduction of papaerwork involved in every level of Health care needs too be streamlined. Are you old enough to remember when you went to a Doctor and there would be one Nurse and at most one or two people working in the office on paper work? Now i know a doctor who has a 6 women working in his office full time because of insurance paperwork both private and Government and most of it unnecessary when push comes to shove.
The problems with Obama and all the health care "Reform" proposals is they are being looked at, not by people with practical Management experience but by bureaucrats and lawyers. I used to get to train graduates from Stanford with MBAs in the practical application of there education in management and they were all amazed how different the real world of executive Management when compred to what they were taught. That is all but one young lady who believed that education could take the place of intelligence. Last I heard she didn't go very far in the real world and went back to school.
These are just a couple of ideas from someone with old school training and experience. Imagine what a group of modern thinkers could come up with.
We need to insist on intelligent ideas based on solving existing problems not draconian measures that only lead to disruption and economic disaster because they are party based ideas and in the end not solutions but more obstacles that will have to be overcome in the future because history has shown they can not survive for very long.
Thank you for taking the time to read this if you did.
 
Last edited:
If health insurances companies are bad investments, where something else pays more and is better in every way, then investors would not invest in health insurance companies. To do so wouldn't be rational, and capitalism relies on rational decisions to function. In which case the market would result in a lack of investment funds and the government should step in and ensure there's enough resources.

And a public option adding competition wouldn't be such a bad thing either, as the investors can put their money into much better investments so government competition doesn't matter.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
A 6% profit margin?

That means that, for a company to be able to be able to cover it's yearly-forward expenses, without so much as paying the management or investers a single penny, would take a minimum of 17 years (correct me if I am wrong, apst).

So realistically, it could take as long as 20-25 years.

I think it's because the overall enviroment for an insurance company is cruel, the insurance company itself has to be cruel for it to survive. If they hired every jane, payed every joe what their worth, and covered every jack that gets burnt by hot coffee, the company would die within it's first year. My dad's business had 3 times that profit margin and he shut down in 6 months.
Click to expand...

Its called credit!!!!! And when it froze last year, you can see why assets began to topple down to cover those same operating expenses you so widely point out, which is why TARP was a very necessary program, even though it began to be abused by some.

Credit, not capital is the life blood of any developed economy.....
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Its called credit!!!!! And when it froze last year, you can see why assets began to topple down to cover those same operating expenses you so widely point out,
Click to expand...
Credit is a liability, not an asset.

/killed.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
Credit is a liability, not an asset.

/killed.
Click to expand...

LOL

So if a business (of any kind) loses it's line of credit, will it not have to either A.) sell assets to pay for fixed costs B.) reduce variable costs to match revenue?

You misread my response. :2wave:
 
donc said:
From post #25 in answer to Kali,s post (They make hidden money.) you answered (and, that's not illegal.)

Hhmm..silly me when I when I mistook your two word sentence followed by a question mark in (The problem?) in post #32 in answer to my post #31 which said (Evidently you approve of backdating (stockholder theft in my book) stocks.)

I don’t know how I could have mistaken you for the upright lad that you evidently are, instead of making a statement like this. :rofl


(Sounds to me like you would be perfect CEO material, see where the line is , tap dance up to it and when you think no one is looking stick you foot over the line)

On second thought this statement stands tall.:2wave:
Click to expand...


You have the understand that hding money and stealing money, are two different things. It's not illegal to hide money. I do it all the time.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Its called credit!!!!! And when it froze last year, you can see why assets began to topple down to cover those same operating expenses you so widely point out, which is why TARP was a very necessary program, even though it began to be abused by some.

Credit, not capital is the life blood of any developed economy.....
Click to expand...

Uh, no, cash flow is the life blood of an economy.
 
apdst said:
Why is it that your garden variety Libbos has zero business sense? I mean, ya'll are all more educated than the rest of us and **** like that, but when it comes to business you folks are clueless. None of you seem to understand the concept of operating capital. Why is that?
Click to expand...
Thats EASY!
All they -need- to know that businesses are a limitless source of tax revenue and an easy target for class-warfare-driven villification.
 
apdst said:
Uh, no, cash flow is the life blood of an economy.
Click to expand...

Diminished credit availability causes spending (necessary for cash flow) to decrease almost in an exponential fashion.
 
Goobieman said:
Thats EASY!
All they -need- to know that businesses are a limitless source of tax revenue and an easy target for class-warfare-driven villification.
Click to expand...

I don't even know if that would do any good...:rofl
 
apdst said:
Why is it that your garden variety Libbos has zero business sense? I mean, ya'll are all more educated than the rest of us and **** like that, but when it comes to business you folks are clueless. None of you seem to understand the concept of operating capital. Why is that?
Click to expand...

.....Yeah...Liberals are dumb. Awesome reply. Why haven't you been banned yet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom