Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

Post by learc83 » Tue, Jan 30, 2018, 5:03 PM UTC

e40 wrote: post #236

mapgrep wrote: post #176

As some other people have mentioned below, the much lauded[1] vertically integrated health provider Kaiser Permanente started this way, as the health provider caring for the workers of an enlightened large employer, Kaiser Steel, which at the time was a massive shipbuilder for the Navy and others headquartered in California with a major presence in the SF Bay Area. I was briefly covered by a Kaiser plan, and have a l…

Kaiser is no longer a low-cost provider. They actually are quite expensive. We go through a very large group to get a better rate but it's still much higher than many of the other options that we have in our plan. When you look at how Kaiser is structured, they should be cheaper. I think they're just pocketing the difference between the market rate and what their costs are.

Post by hidenotslide » Tue, Jan 30, 2018, 5:06 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #146

nojvek wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Single payer healthcare is the best soln. Agreed, However I can’t see it working more than a presidential term. America is too politically unstable. What i’d love to see is a commercial business having vertical integration. Insanely cheap basics like X-rays, mris, and other checks. Heavy use of AI based diagnosis confirmed by doctors, and a big insurance pool where profits go back into scaling healthcare. Basically c…

Who is going to develop AI-based diagnosis platforms if there's no profit to be made?

Post by johnrob » Tue, Jan 30, 2018, 5:07 PM UTC

robbiemitchell wrote: post #13

jawns wrote: post #7

> The three companies said they plan to set up a new independent company "that is free from profit-making incentives and constraints." I wonder if they will be setting it up as a health insurance cooperative, an organizational structure in which the primary goal is to serve its members, rather than to generate value for external shareholders: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_insurance_cooperative It's not at all…

One of the benefits a profit motive brings to insurance companies is pushing back on improper billing by providers (doctors/hospitals) and negotiating lowest possible care and drug rates. Tech-focused insurers like Oscar also invest heavily to help guide members toward better care paths, which if done well lead to better care at less expense (for both the member and insurer). Unrelated: one of the worst parts of insu…

Post by jklein11 » Tue, Jan 30, 2018, 5:09 PM UTC

prklmn wrote: post #190

jonknee wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want an investment you can invest, if you want insurance you can get insurance. I'm not sure why you think overpaying for insurance and getting a dividend back sounds like a great way to do both. If you pay for insurance for 40+ years you certainly got something out of it--you have been insured for 40+ years!

>> If you want an investment you can invest, if you want insurance you can get insurance. Most people used to do both at the same time and it seemed to work pretty well before Buffett came along. And there's a good analogy to your last point - someone who rents an apartment for 40 years when they could have bought an equivalently valued home two times over. They shouldn't complain when they die with a net worth of ze…

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jan 30, 2018, 5:10 PM UTC

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…