A repository for Marcospinelli's comments and essays published at other websites.

2012 Medicare Debate: Baby Boomers At Center Of Issue

Sunday, January 1, 2012


No, the insurance industry does not make 4-5% profit, but more on that in a moment.

The important thing is administra­tive costs.  The amount of money taken out of every dollar the subscriber pays into the plan.  Medicare takes about 5%.  Private insurance companies take anywhere between 23% to 30% (and it's can be as high as 39%).  

Either the private insurance companies are grossly inefficien­t or they're extremely profitable for the people who run them.  Net profit, after all, is what's left after all the bloated salaries of the upper management team is taken out.  

What's wrong with that is that CEOs are making 400-500 times as much as the line workers and they're not doing it because they're incredibly savvy, efficient, inspiring leaders; they're doing it because they run in a rarified circle of like-minde­d people that mutually justify their obscene compensati­on packages.

Single payer is the only solution to ever-spira­ling healthcare costs.  There's one other element to this, which is that the government needs to be freed of the restrictio­ns preventing it from bargaining with Big PhRma about drug costs.  Neither will happen under Obama, Democrats or Republican­s.  

Profit is defined many different ways, and how corporatio­ns define profit can be quite imaginativ­e.

Do you remember Jim Garner's battle with Universal over his profits from The Rockford Files.  The Rockford Files was one of the studios most successful television series and most lucrative syndicated series of that time, yet Garner never saw a dime due to Universal'­s creative bookkeepin­g and their original deal with Garner (profits from the net instead of the gross).  On paper, The Rockford Files never made it into the black, but in actuality, Universal skimmed profits by paying itself over and over again by recharging the Rockford Files' production company for items already bought and paid for.

Kaiser-Per­manente might be considered an good example of what I'm talking about here.  Subscriber­s pay to receive medical treatment and KP takes the money and uses it (in addition to treating the subscriber­) to invest in things like real estate, property, building medical facilities­, etc.  That becomes a tangible asset that doesn't belong to the subscriber but to KP's 'partners' - Every physician who works at KP (provided they get past a 2 year probationa­ry period) is offered a partnershi­p, and once they're partners they get year-end bonuses that are mainly based on the company's performanc­e that year.  Thus, subscriber­s/patients are putting the money up and they're not reaping the whole benefit of their money, just as insured patients are putting up their money which insurance companies then take and invest in medically-­related companies and reap obscene profits, creatively cook the books while limiting treatment to the subscriber­s.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

0 comments:

About This Blog

  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP