Republicans - Delusional or Desperate

[William Thornton]

[Haruo]

[Tim Bonney]

[Haruo]

[Haruo]

And now I see a Russian parliamentarian has proposed making it illegal for Russians to own dollars. Because of the potential instability. Frankly I think that (no matter how unstable our government and financial structure may be) it would make sense to outlaw owning stocks in American corporations (and international corporations doing at least 25% of their business in the US) first.

[Sandy]

[William Thornton]

Ah, Physicians for a National Health Program. Sounds perfectly fair and balanced to me.

[Sandy]

[Lou]

Sandy, what is this "not for profit insurance" of which you speak, and where might it be found?

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed:

Former insurance company executive; author
GET UPDATES FROM Wendell Potter


I've written frequently in recent weeks about the eye-popping profits the big publicly traded health companies have been reporting. Last year -- as the number of Americans without health insurance grew to nearly 51 million -- the five largest for-profit insurers (Aetna, CIGNA, Humana, UnitedHealth and WellPoint) had combined profits of $11.7 billion.

But that was so 2010.

If the profits those companies made during the first three months of this year are an indication of things to come, 2011 will more than likely be the most profitable year ever for these new darlings of Wall Street.

But lest you think only those big New York Stock Exchange-listed corporations have figured out how to make money hand-over-fist while their base of policyholders is shrinking, take a look at the so-called nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans.

Don't think for a minute that the Blues are any more interested in your health and well-being than the companies that at least own up to being in business to make a hefty profit off of insuring the healthy and shunning the sick.

According to a report by Carl McDonald of Citi Investment Research and Analysis, last year was the most profitable year in history for the Blues plans, which enjoy significant tax advantages because of their claim to be nonprofit and terrific community citizens. Collectively, the Blues reported more than $5.5 billion in net income in 2010.

Not only that, but the Blues now have more than five times that amount in capital above what state regulators require. As McDonald noted in his report, maintaining such a huge reserve should make regulators think twice before approving rate increases in the future.

See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wendell-p ... 56207.html

I presently have a Blue Cross supplemental but as of the first of the year will be changing to a plan offered by a local Area Physicians Group Plan. Co-pays on Prescriptions and services are both lower, and we will still have the same doctors. I will still be getting my major arthritis medication and podiatry treatments through the VA. which means three extra Dr. visits per year, but an overall savings of around $1,000.

[KeithE]

[David Flick]

[William Thornton]

[KeithE]

[William Thornton]

Just call me "Mr. Classic Hypocrisy" if we are into names. I could call Keith "Mr. Moralizer" since his stuff usually hinges not on the latest and greatest graphs but on him imposing his idea of fairness on the rest of us and being willing to use the coercive power of gummit (yes, guns if necessary) to carry that out.

I don't take all this too seriously.

I will say that Keith does an outstanding job with the PP forum - starts a lot of topics, offers a lot of data and links. I commend him for that...just don't buy all of it.

[Sandy]

[Tim Bonney]

[Dave Roberts]

The Blue Cross/Blue Shield comment only works in certain places. In Virginia, for instance, the Blue Cross carrier is Anthem which transitioned to "for profit" status and sold stock in 1995. In turn, they were bought by another company which merged into WellPoint. Needless to say, it's no cheaper. Each Blue Cross state group handles it differently.

[Tim Bonney]

[David Flick]

[Sandy]