Live data from Hacker News

That “distressed baby" Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter

slate.com

31–40 of 280 posts

Re: That “distressed baby" Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter

#31
I'm delighted to hear that this child is doing well, and I'm utterly appalled at Tim Armstrong's attitudes towards the lives of his employee's children. Apparently it's possible to pay a programmer $100K/year, but spending ten times that to save the life of one of his employee's children is absolutely unacceptable. I'll be sure to keep that in mind the next time I hear from an AOL recruiter.

The whole point of insurance is that a middle-class family can afford to pay $12,000 or $18,000 in premiums per year, but they can't easily afford a $1M black swan medical event. So the insurance company spreads the risk out over a large pool. The system breaks down, of course, if the pool is too small. A company with 10 employees probably can't absorb a $1M expense either. But AOL has 5,600 employees and it had $1.05B in net income in 2012. They can afford it to cover expenses, even if they decide to self-insure.

Of course, another solution is to make the risk pool as big as humanly possible and to get employers out of the insurance business completely, so that no startup needs to worry about medical expenses. The AMA is a messy political compromise to do exactly that. But Tim Armstrong is also upset about the AMA. So I'm not quite sure what his ideal outcome is here.

Re: That “distressed baby" Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter

#32
post #12

Another interesting quote from the article: > Let’s set aside the fact that Armstrong—who took home $12 million in pay in 2012 Assuming the above is factual (and I have no reason to doubt it), he wanted to cut the 401(k) plan for everyone because of an expense that was one twelfth the size of his own pay that same year. Just a wee bit hippocritical there on his part.

One sixth. There were two "distressed babies".

Re: That “distressed baby" Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter

#36

Tim Armstrong has an incredible ability to say the wrong thing. The underlying topic, however, is fascinating. I do healthcare analytics for a living so I see how often a single neonatal ICU incident can consume 30% of an entire company's healthcare budget for the year (note: if you don't really understand healthcare, e.g. what self insuring means, please don't respond with comments that the insurance company pays th…

The race to keep younger and younger babies alive is fueled with ego and dollars.

If you actually look at the global data on neonatal mortality [1], that doesn't seem to be true.

Countries like Finland, France and Cuba perform better than the United States on this metric. These countries offer completely free healthcare to babies and pregnant mothers.

Frankly, I find your assumption borderline offensive. Maybe you should take your USD-tinted healthcare analytics glasses off for a while and contemplate the possibility that human lives are worth saving.

[1] http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.DYN.NMRT

Re: That “distressed baby" Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter

#37
"We had two AOL-ers that had distressed babies that were born that we paid a million dollars each to make sure those babies were OK in general."

Is this how health insurance works? Maybe AOL is "self-insured"? I don't understand AOL having anything to do with paying directly for medical treatment. Except, by virtue of making claims and costing an insurer money, the premiums increase. It's as if the insurers, ever-faithful capitalists they are, want to sell us insurance and can't believe we have the gall to make claims against our policies, and have convinced our employers to be equally appalled.

Re: That “distressed baby" Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter

#38
post #22

This guy is a walking disaster. How is it anyone is willing to work for him?

Well, if you work for him, you apparently get Compensation, including salary, 401(k) matching, and a health plan that'll cover your infant's medical expenses even if they run to like a million dollars. For someone or another, that's probably the best deal they were offered.

Re: That “distressed baby" Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter

#39
I also had a distressed baby a few years ago that spent months in the NICU of one of the best children's hospitals, had multiple surgeries, was in and out of the hospital for the first few months of his life. Ultimately an incident occurred that left him brain dead and on life support before he was 6 months old. We decided to remove life support and held him as he died in our arms. The family insurance plan offered by my ~1000 employee public tech company covered everything. I never saw a single bill and only had to pay the requisite co-pays. Always wondered how much it all costs...

Re: That “distressed baby" Tim Armstrong blamed for benefit cuts? She’s my daughter

#40

Curious that AOL had to pay millions of dollars for insurance claims. Isn't that the insurance company's responsibility?

The entire point of this issue is that AOL chose to self-insure. That means there was no insurance company.
Post reply on HN