Moyer's interview with former health insurance exec

[DblDoc]

I happened to come across some relevant data while googling today:

FactCheck.org: Pushing for a Public Plan


0.005% just doesn't qualify as "mind blowing" in my book. Not even 0.6% qualifies.

Well, maybe it does. Considering all the angst over this supposed gouging of the public,and a few gold-trimmed plates, 0.6% and 0.005% are "mind-blowingly" small numbers.

-ERD50

This is a little misleading as it fails to include the "cost" of providing that health care insurance. Their profit was $13b, but what was their revenue and how much of that was waste to the system? We could hire 2 more doctors for what we pay annually for support staff who just do billing and coding and handle (the many) denials for payment from the insurance companies including Medicare.

DD

 

[Gone4Good]

Yes, can you tell us just what you found "mind blowing" about this clip?

I, for one, found the images of people crowded around tents in bad weather getting medical care in animal stalls to be "Mind Blowing!" (with an exclamation point).

 

[ERD50]

This is a little misleading as it fails to include the "cost" of providing that health care insurance. Their profit was $13b, but what was their revenue and how much of that was waste to the system? We could hire 2 more doctors for what we pay annually for support staff who just do billing and coding and handle (the many) denials for payment from the insurance companies including Medicare.

DD

Agreed - the numbers are rarely apples-to-apples, but I think they are interesting. My following post was commenting on that.

Do you find the that you spend more staff time for the average Medicare claim/denial than private ins, or less? I found a few stats on the web, didn't take the time to check out the background for "agendas" (plenty of those in this issue).

I, for one, found the images of people crowded around tents in bad weather getting medical care in animal stalls to be "Mind Blowing!" (with an exclamation point).

Thanks for providing some context. I agree with you, that part was indeed sad. But with those 0.6% and 0.005% numbers don't justify throwing the blame on the ins cos profits or the executives salaries for that problem.

-ERD50