Hit men aren't what you think • Hacker News Board

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#181

Post by bluefirebrand » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 5:22 AM UTC

nradov wrote: post #172

cdelsolar wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a specious argument. A healthcare provider has a special responsibility because of the nature of their work. By definition, their role involves providing essential care to those in need. Their professional mission and the ethical codes guiding them (e.g., the Hippocratic Oath for physicians) emphasize patient welfare above all. An average person, while still morally capable of altruism, does not have a profes…

Food is even more essential than healthcare. It's a critical social good. Do farmers and grocers therefore have a special responsibility because of the nature of their work?

Yes actually

Do you remember a couple of years ago when grocers were still operating when everything else was shut down because they were considered critical workers during a global pandemic?

I mean come on, it wasn't even that long ago did you forget?

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#182

Post by mancerayder » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 5:22 AM UTC

stevenwoo wrote: post #174

burningChrome wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Zuckerberg is a bad example IMHO, various sources reported on this but Facebook created a space that tolerated and spread incitement to violence that led to thousands of rapes and murders. They saw engagement on hate speech, and promoted the hate speech. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-faceb...

That puts Facebook as the cause and not the people who committed the violence. It provided a technological meeting place, as there are many now, but what did it promote that lead to violence?

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#183

Post by mancerayder » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 5:27 AM UTC

avalys wrote: post #60

aijdosaijd wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personal income, that which sustains someones family, is vastly different then the billions made by United off the backs of those suffering. What, are you some healthcare exec or something? This is not the own you think it is.

United Healthcare is a publicly-traded company which makes a 6% profit margin and pays a dividend, which means that those profits ultimately benefit people's retirement accounts, pensions and middle-class investments. The person who was killed made $10M last year, while UHC provided care to 52 million patients. So, the CEO was paid approximately $0.20 per patient treated last year. What part of all this do you believ…

It has 52 million clients, but how much care was provided to clients is the open question that could be debated. It's certainly one of the big thoughts going around that the company denies payment for service unjustifiably and causes suffering for some number of these 52 million. Whether or not that's true is one of the questions for consideration in these debates.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#184

Post by mancerayder » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 5:29 AM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #165

runako wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I pay my health insurance because it covers the services I need I think that, aside from the cost, this is probably the biggest issue most people have with health insurance in the US. UHC makes a lot of money specifically in part by not covering services you need, for example by having accountants override your doctors's orders. If it were as simple as getting the services you need in exchange for money, I don't th…

> If it were as simple as getting the services you need in exchange for money, I don't think as many people would hate the system as much. That's exactly how simple it is to be uninsured. The problem is the risk is not something people can absorb.

How many Go Fund Me sites were brought up because of high medical costs for some accident or cancer? Is foregoing insurance an improvement over that if it isn't even possibly one of the big causes?

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#185

Post by lern_too_spel » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 5:53 AM UTC

michaeljx wrote: post #113

I don't understand the comments excusing the CEO of his responsibility. I work for a scale-up insurance company, and the CEOs are pretty clear with their mandate: customer service is paramount, we make money by streamlining our processes, negotiating hard with our network, and pricing properly our products. NOT by denying claims. This philosophy is enforced from the top all the way down, with Chinese walls between pr…

UHG is notorious for Medicare Advantage fraud. Ask any cardiologist, and they'll tell you that this is still happening. It's not as bad for the patient as denying claims, but it's plenty bad for taxpayers and the healthcare system as a whole. It's not going to get fixed because some of those fraudulently acquired dollars buy legislators, and nobody who wants to fix it is going to spend anywhere near as much.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-intervenes-fals...

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-intervenes-seco...

https://kffhealthnews.org/news/article/medicare-advantage-ov...

https://medtrade.com/news/billing-reimbursement/medicare-adv...

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#186

Post by 1123581321 » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 5:57 AM UTC

wds wrote: post #179

1123581321 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wouldn't work. There are many people who hate anyone famous and think they are responsible for bad things. They would all use that defense. This includes people who seem obviously good to you.

"Anyone famous" in the vast, vast majority of cases is completely detached to the cause of anyone's death or further suffering as a health insurance CEO would be.

Yes but now you’re already bringing in a judicial review of the specific people and circumstances involved. You might as well have a regular homicide investigation.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#187

Post by FireBeyond » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 6:08 AM UTC

itsanaccount wrote: post #30

nickff wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This phrase: "responsible for so many deaths" is doing a lot of work in your post. What is your theory of responsibility? Is it legal or ethical, and if it is the latter (as I would suspect), what framework and criteria is it evaluated under? The answer is easy for a serial killer (obviously responsible for willful murder), a little more difficult for a soldier in war (directly responsible, but perhaps defending them…

You know why I don't work for a trapping and pest control company? Because structurally they kill animals. They go around with tools of destruction and end the lives of animals. Its the function of their existence. Do you know why I don't work for a _for profit_ health insurance company, who's stated goals are explicitly to make profit by slicing out some amount of premiums that are not spent to provide healthcare in…

I used to work for a company that wrote software for health insurers to run their businesses, from determining financial responsibilities and amounts, all the way through cutting checks to providers, handling repricing, everything.

I wish I could say I got out of there for ethical reasons (there were good reasons, but if that was the only...)

We did a LOT to be ethical. The amount of requests we turned down from our customers - "If we have a database of familial relationships (who knows what, or from where, be it public records or 23andme), how can we mine the database with that information to determine people's predisposition to certain conditions based on familial diagnoses?"

"You can't."

"Why not, it's in the database?"

"Yes. But that is federally illegal for you to do. And if it's illegal for you to do, we are not going to facilitate it either."

But the writing was on the wall, I'm sure at some point there would be more and more "grey areas".

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#188

Post by FireBeyond » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 6:10 AM UTC

mancerayder wrote: post #184

kube-system wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it were as simple as getting the services you need in exchange for money, I don't think as many people would hate the system as much. That's exactly how simple it is to be uninsured. The problem is the risk is not something people can absorb.

How many Go Fund Me sites were brought up because of high medical costs for some accident or cancer? Is foregoing insurance an improvement over that if it isn't even possibly one of the big causes?

And that the US is the only country in the world where hospital "deathbed divorce" is a thing, to try to avoid family being saddled with ship-anchor levels of debt.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#189

Post by FireBeyond » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 6:14 AM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #164

TinkersW wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UHC does not provide care, they are a leach on society, as all health insurances companies are.

If UNH was approving all their claims, then people would complain about increased premiums/deductibles. People just want to complain about not being able to afford something they want (American healthcare). While UNH does some shameful things, even criminal things, the celebration of a public execution of a second in command guy is embarrassing for HN.

This rather ignores the role of health "insurers", third party administrators, repricing specialists and every other middle man that contributes more significantly to the price of healthcare than the actual cost of providing that care.

Re: Hit men aren't what you think

#190

Post by FireBeyond » Sat, Dec 07, 2024, 6:16 AM UTC

avalys wrote: post #110

jonathanlb wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably the part where people were denied care that they needed in order to provide profits and dividends to its shareholders.

1. Who decides what care is "needed"? Everyone is going to die eventually. I have a relative who believes they "need" ivermectin to prophylactically safeguard against contracting covid. Are insurance companies obligated to provide ivermectin to everyone who demands it, or should they apply some standard of efficacy and cost/benefit analysis? 2. Profits to shareholders and other people contributing their time and reso…

> Who decides what care is "needed"? Everyone is going to die eventually.

When the decision maker is accountant, RN, or AI versus physician, I know who _shouldn't_ be deciding it.

The two experiences I've seen first hand (coincidentally both UHC):

A willingness to deny vastly improved QOL for a simple surgery unless I spend an extended amount of time to determine whether somehow, a nasal spray would straighten the cartilage of a 95% deviation to the septum.

As a paramedic, the realization that UHC routinely denied paying for HEMS (air ambulance) for serious car accident patients to trauma centers because of "lack of pre-authorization".