Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

huffingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 353 posts

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#191

Post by Randgalt »

ashark wrote: post #185
Randgalt wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"'Rights' are basically just freedoms we've decided we like a whole lot and want the government to guarantee" - as I said below, the logical conclusion of that argument is not a world you'd want to live in. -- "is there any such thing as a government that does not force people to do things they wouldn't voluntarily do?" - no there isn't. That's why it should be limited to protecting other people's rights.

> "'Rights' are basically just freedoms we've decided we like a whole lot and want the government to guarantee" - as I said below, the logical conclusion of that argument is not a world you'd want to live in. How is that not the world we live in? What is the alternative? At some point someone's deciding what's a right and what isn't. Other people may disagree. Rights aren't a law of nature, they're a fuzzy category,…

"What is the alternative?" - a system of rights based on the nature of human beings. Human beings survive by producing the things we need to survive. We need governments to protect others from initiating force against us in opposition to our primary needs of living.

Will we ever see this in reality? No. But, the closer humans have gotten in history the better off they've been.

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#192

Post by harryh »

jlmorton wrote: post #188
harryh wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's fair to categorize Aetna's annual loss of ~300M as trivial. That represents about 12.5% of their profits. If someone cut your salary by 12.5% I don't think you would think that was trivial.

I should clarify, I didn't mean it was trivial to Aetna. I meant it was trivial compared to the cost of the existing subsidies and risk corridors in the ACA, and that this is not an existential problem for ACA. Over the past few months, several major insurers have either reduced or ended their participation in the ACA exchanges. That is troubling news. However, setting aside the political feasibility, it's hardly an…

OK that's fair. I pretty much agree with everything you say here.

I think I am more concerned than you are that the structure of the exchanges will make them untenable in the long term but that's certainly a judgement call and we won't know the real answer for several years at least.

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#193

Post by gozur88 »

seibelj wrote: post #2

Can anyone succinctly explain the benefits of having a market for private health insurance companies, rather than a single provider of health insurance (government, aka "public option")? Can a capitalist case be made for their existence? Does the lack of a large private insurance market in countries with government-provided health insurance cause lots of inefficiencies and waste?

If the government is going to be making all the decisions there's no benefit. But I doubt we would have had Obamacare at all if he'd proposed a single-payer plan. Insurance companies, which have a lot of clout in Washington, helped push it through because they expected to make more money.

Which, quite frankly, was stupid. It was pretty clear from the outset the ACA would break the US health care system so badly single-payer is the only option going forward.

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#194

Post by zeveb »

csallen wrote: post #104
warfighting wrote: post #77

How long would a government run tech company survive in the valley? Now tell me again why you want them centrally planning your healthcare?

I never understood this mindset. It assumes that the govn't is incompetent (which it often is in many areas, fair point), but then ignores the most obvious response, which is to diagnose and fix the problems at hand. Simply abandoning the government solution is not the only option. In fact, one of the government's biggest problems is that so many people are obsessed with neglecting/sabotaging it just to prove some po…

> It assumes that the govn't is incompetent (which it often is in many areas, fair point), but then ignores the most obvious response, which is to diagnose and fix the problems at hand.

It's utterly impossible to fix the problems of government competence because Americans don't want their government to be competent. They want it to be supportive, and diverse, and all sorts of things, but competence is not one of them.

If American government were competent, it would hire precisely the people whose unions donate so much to American politicians.

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#195

Post by zedzedb5 »

harryh wrote: post #156
nfriedly wrote: post #4

Good riddance. Heath insurance in the US seems to benefit the insurance companies more than anyone else.

That's silly. Insurance is a great method of hedging risk. If my apartment burns down it would cost me A LOT of money to replace my stuff. But the chances of it burning down are really small. So I can purchase renters insurance for just a couple hundred bucks a year, an expense I can easily afford. That benefits me a great deal! Maybe when you said insurance you meant to say "health insurance" but the same principle…

RISK seems to be the least mentioned word in this entire thread. "Insurance is a great method of hedging risk." Spot on. I wish we had education in RISK Management rather than what we have now.

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#197

Post by coredog64 »

uptown wrote: post #83
addicted wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "leaked" numbers have always been higher than what actually happens. The insurance companies always propose higher increases in order to have a stronger bargaining position, and those numbers have historically been bargained down to something decent.

Absolutely. But I'd wager the vast majority of the increases land well above the rate of inflation. And since open-enrollment begins a few days before the Presidential election, it'll be interesting to see how those numbers are managed given that Hillary has hitched her campaign to the Affordable Care Act as an extension of her original campaign for universal health insurance when she was First Lady.

As it's unlikely to be a competitive race by then, I would expect that certain people will be reminded of certain aspects of the power of the executive branch and that will be that.

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#198

Post by eecc »

harryh wrote: post #166
Frondo wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, I'd agree completely that, as an implementation of universal health care, Obamacare falls far short. I always say, it's better than what preceded it, but that is a pretty low bar to achieve. (My own story: I had my gallbladder out in 2004, and from that time on was denied personal health insurance for BS "pre-existing condition" reasons...until Obamacare.) But while the implementation is pretty poor, the idea beh…

(My own story: I had my gallbladder out in 2004, and from that time on was denied personal health insurance for BS "pre-existing condition" reasons...until Obamacare.) Probably you were denied personal health insurance not for BS reasons, but because the insurance companies knew they would (probabilistically) lose money insuring you. But now under Obamacare, if they participate on the exchanges, they are obligated to…

you're suggesting the guy should throw himself off a cliff?

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#199

Post by X86BSD »

Randgalt wrote: post #152
gnaritas wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong, it's exactly the world I want to live in and the Constitution happens to agree, which is why we've amended it many a time, because the governed decided it was outdated. The notion that we should still be living by the dictates of men long dead is simply absurd, every generation has a right to decide for itself how its government works as it should, and as we have done.

So, if the majority votes to take away the rights of, oh I don't know, Japanese citizens -- that's a world you want to live in? You're not thinking clearly about the issue.

This is not uncommon for those like the above poster that think the constitution is a "living document".

Re: Aetna CEO Threatened Obamacare Pullout If Feds Opposed Humana Merger

#200

Post by parasubvert »

pseingatl wrote: post #130

This is precisely why single payer is desperately needed. And proof that Obamacare is a Rube Goldberg machine. I remember listening to a Kentucky senator who said they were gobsmacked that no insurance company signed up in his state. The program is based on wishes, not good practices. Having Justice tinker with antitrust to keep it alive will never work. Insurance companies could give a F about their policy holders,…

I'd say a public option would be the way to "soft introduce" single payer. Just expand Medicare to anyone who wants it on the exchanges. Once the premiums shake out, "big bloated government" likely will be pretty competitive.

Of course that would require a major shift in the House of Representatives, which probably won't happen until the 2022 election, after electoral maps are redistricted in 2020 post-census, and the rampant gerrymandering might be fixed. And some kind of political cover from the caterwauls sure to emanate from the health insurance industry.

Post reply on HN