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

Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 540 posts

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#111

Post by lg »

maxxxxx wrote: post #84
odonnellryan wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel Buffet and Bezos have the technical capacity and certainly the capital to tackle this issue. They can't fix the entire HC market, but they can have a great start.

All involved players are mainly interested in lining their own pockets. The question if this will come at the expense of patients or other players in health care.

let's see, in a battle between employers pushing down on insurance costs and the morass of corruption on the healthcare side, who is the least politically organized? it would be a miracle if individuals don't get screwed.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#112

Post by ThomPete »

odonnellryan wrote: post #62
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #53

It's not just the cost. It's the incredible inefficiency of the operations, and, the gerrymandering of coverage. Under the ACA, I had to choose between allowing my family to continue to see their lifetime care givers, or, paying in network rates, for the full year, because the insurance company I chose gave me incorrect information when they were trying to get my business (my wife is less kind in evaluating their mot…

I feel Buffet and Bezos have the technical capacity and certainly the capital to tackle this issue. They can't fix the entire HC market, but they can have a great start.

Those aren't the problematic areas. its legislation that's the primary hurdle to the curren sitaution we have in the US.

Fortunately they have plenty of lobbyist which can be put to good use.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#113

Post by adventured »

prklmn wrote: post #91
tdees40 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm genuinely fascinated by this comment. You're saying that mutuals offer lower prices (not typically true), but they were out-competed by private companies? I'm not sure that makes sense. In my sector (life insurance), there's no real pattern to mutual vs public company pricing, but maybe it's different in auto insurance, for instance.

It goes beyond pricing. Mutual insurance policy owners were paid dividends based on principle investment. Berkshire pays dividends to shareholders, i.e. Warren Buffet, while policy holders get nothing but insurance coverage.

Not only has Berkshire never paid dividends, as another comment noted, Buffett decided three decades ago to give all of his wealth away to the benefit of less fortunate people.

What's your next premise?

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#114

Post by austenallred »

prklmn wrote: post #91
tdees40 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm genuinely fascinated by this comment. You're saying that mutuals offer lower prices (not typically true), but they were out-competed by private companies? I'm not sure that makes sense. In my sector (life insurance), there's no real pattern to mutual vs public company pricing, but maybe it's different in auto insurance, for instance.

It goes beyond pricing. Mutual insurance policy owners were paid dividends based on principle investment. Berkshire pays dividends to shareholders, i.e. Warren Buffet, while policy holders get nothing but insurance coverage.

Buffet decoupled investments from insurance, because he thought (IMO rightly) they should be different products. And his companies only win to the degree that consumers choose them.

That’s a great thing.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#115

Post by Spoom »

WisNorCan wrote: post #107
maxxxxx wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All involved players are mainly interested in lining their own pockets. The question if this will come at the expense of patients or other players in health care.

There is nothing wrong with “lining your own pockets” as a motivation. It is the fundamental driver of capitalism and the motivation for most entrepreneurs.

I think in healthcare, there is a problem with profit as a motivation, at least insofar as the ability to receive care. I think healthcare professionals should be paid, and paid well. But a for-profit company (or whether or not one can pay the premiums or deductible of any insurance company) should not be a gatekeeper to whether or not one can receive care at all. Inevitably, someone will be left out in the cold, or will end up paying inordinate amounts to receive care due to bureaucracy (or malice), as has been experienced by people elsewhere in this thread.

This is why I believe single payer healthcare is generally the best solution.

However, in the current situation, I think this idea to create a healthcare company dedicated to serving their employees, "free from profit-making incentives and constraints," is a great idea, one which I hope others will attempt if it ends up a success.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#116

Post by weka »

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #53

It's not just the cost. It's the incredible inefficiency of the operations, and, the gerrymandering of coverage. Under the ACA, I had to choose between allowing my family to continue to see their lifetime care givers, or, paying in network rates, for the full year, because the insurance company I chose gave me incorrect information when they were trying to get my business (my wife is less kind in evaluating their mot…

I had the same unfortunate experience that in angers me to even think about it.

- I leave my last employer on July 21, 2017

- My old employer rols me off system on last day of July 2017

- On June 2017, they switch HR providers from TriNET to Namely and now the payment processor is Discovery Benefits and the Dental/Vision are now in Guardian. (So it went from Aetna to Aetna/Guardian and two other companies).

Since my wife is high-risk and I have thyroid issues, our best bet was COBRA ($1,000 / mo) because the new startup I joined did not offer group health coverage.

What followed next was this:

- The HR person who was handling my COBRA papers left during all of this. Switched jobs.

- Thanksgiving break

- Weeks of "the system will update this weekend with your information."

- "They were suppose to process your dental, but they never did"

My wife and I tried using our new AETNA IDs once we had gotten them and they still told us that it did not work. I had to have an expensive thyroid blood test pushed back. Multiple dentist appointments postponed. Everything.

FINALLY, once I got my SSN and ID for my coverage on AETNA, I had to pay back premiums all the way back to August 2017 just to keep using my coverage. So that's $4,000 USD for services I could not essentially render. $4000 of my hard-earned money. Gone. For nothing -- basically.

They had the gall to tell me (AETNA did) "Sir, if you paid for anything out of pocket during the time of your retroactive coverage, we can pay you back any cost you incurred."

The whole reason we get insurance is to avoid those high prices.

I'm so spent. I'm not an angry man but these health insurance companies really drove it home for me.

I feel taken advantaged of and it really stinks.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#117

Post by austenallred »

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #53

It's not just the cost. It's the incredible inefficiency of the operations, and, the gerrymandering of coverage. Under the ACA, I had to choose between allowing my family to continue to see their lifetime care givers, or, paying in network rates, for the full year, because the insurance company I chose gave me incorrect information when they were trying to get my business (my wife is less kind in evaluating their mot…

You’re right, but respectfully, in the long term, “I want this specific provider at any cost” is somewhat of an edge case. A lot of (most?) people just want good healthcare and a low cost. That’s a complex but solveable problem.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#118

Post by csours »

WisNorCan wrote: post #107
maxxxxx wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All involved players are mainly interested in lining their own pockets. The question if this will come at the expense of patients or other players in health care.

There is nothing wrong with “lining your own pockets” as a motivation. It is the fundamental driver of capitalism and the motivation for most entrepreneurs.

The problem comes from the drive for increased profit as time goes on, especially in healthcare.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#119

Post by maxerickson »

adventured wrote: post #113
prklmn wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It goes beyond pricing. Mutual insurance policy owners were paid dividends based on principle investment. Berkshire pays dividends to shareholders, i.e. Warren Buffet, while policy holders get nothing but insurance coverage.

Not only has Berkshire never paid dividends, as another comment noted, Buffett decided three decades ago to give all of his wealth away to the benefit of less fortunate people. What's your next premise?

In the abstract, giving away the proceeds to a cause you support isn't really a tremendous excuse for bad behavior.

I'm not evaluating Buffett either way with that statement, just pointing out that it is possible and probably necessary to evaluate his behavior without giving consideration to his pledge.

Post reply on HN