freedomdwarf1
Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The 80% is what they have to pay out towards care. The 20% is where operating costs come from. So, all the people that work for the insurance company get paid out of that. All the administrative overhead (paper, utilities, rent, etc.) get paid out of that, too. So, your "20% profit" isn't actual profit. But, the rest of your paragraph is correct. If the cost of care (the amount billed out) increases, premiums will increase, too.
I am willing to bet that insurance company accountants use some pretty creative accounting to make sure that silly (but expensive) recurring costs like basic staff salaries, most of the overheads and other stuff get headed under the ambiguously titled 'towards care'".
Simple argument: if it weren't for people taking calls and coordinating resources, the care wouldn't happen. And for them to operate efficiently and properly they need desks, chairs, phones, pens, pencils, paper, computers etc etc.
A good and clever accountant would have those under wraps of 'care components'.
Insurance companies have to report to the Department of Health and Human Services. That stuff will be caught.
You really think so Desi??
The rich don't get rich by being scrupulously honest. That's a known fact.
They exploit every known advantage and loophole in the tax system to avoid paying tax on their income.
One of the known ways to exploit that is to get things "buried" or mis-labelled under a legit and claimable expense so it isn't taxed.
I know that for a fact because in the good old days when I was earning over £3,000 a week, I paid virtually no tax because of 'creative' accounting. And yes, those accounts were scrutinized by the Tax and VAT inspectors every year. For the cost the accountant (about £500), they saved me at least £80,000 in tax payments alone and by claiming back most of my VAT payments, I used to get a £20,000+ windfall every year from the VAT man in rebates.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Now, what would happen if an insurance company owned care providers?
Nothing whatsoever.
They would be separate and fiscally independent entities.
What a great way to rip-off customers.
Overcharge on premiums. Overcharge on services. etc etc.
Pay massive salaries to CEO's and senior staff and board members.
Then bang up the prices in their own care centres to maximize profits - double whammy.
One part of their organization bills the other at horrendously exorbitant costs knowing the patient/co-pay foots the bill and the premiums are pushed up to cover those costs - paid for by the individual or employer.
Two lots of income from one patient.
What a fucking rip-off.
And because there is no incentive to curb the costs at all..... Joe Schmoe has to foot the bill.
Nothing whatsoever? And, then, you go on a rant that points out what could happen?!? LMAO!
That's what happens. Insurance companies are limited in how much of a profit they can make, but all they need to have happen is for prices to rise, increasing the amount they pay out. When the same corporation owns both the insurance and the provider, they can raise prices at the provider level, which is exactly what the insurance company needs to have happen so it can raise premiums. And, hospitals get to claim a greater $ amount of charity care even if the actual true cost of care given doesn't change from year to year.
The two entities would be completely independent of each other in every way.
But that doesn't stop the care provider billing the other sister company hugely inflated and artificially high prices. And that's where the double-whammy comes in.
How do you think they charge $10 for an Aspirin tablet???
It only costs $1 for a whole fucking box of Aspirin, yet they get away with billing each pill at $10 or more.
That's why social healthcare is waay cheaper and it works.... the health department (NHS) refuse to pay above the retail market price for such things. And no, they don't run short.
This whole concept is something you can't seem to wrap your head around and also why so many Americans don't grasp it either - and that is why you pay through the nose for everything in healthcare.
ETA: eulero makes some good points about public and private healthcare - competition. The US doesn't have any so it's a free-for-all system where everyone grabs every cent they can from the system because Joe Schmoe has to pay for it regardless.
< Message edited by freedomdwarf1 -- 11/26/2014 2:17:56 AM >
_____________________________
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” George Orwell, 1903-1950
|
RE: US Health Care Costs - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread