Presumably, Ross still fails to grasp that:

1. Corporations are legal entities that exist to maximize profits **for shareholders**. He has not thought through the simple fact that a ’shareholder’ in Premera could be a drug lord in Mexico, an oil sheik in the MidEast, a teacher’s pension fund, or Goldman Sachs.

2. Because of #1, for-profit health care is going to end up like Wall Street — ‘too big to fail’, coming back to a public trough. Problem is: there won’t be enough left in the taxpayer assets to bail them out a few years down the line.

3. Ross also doesn’t recognize the impact that health care costs are having on job creation in the U.S. If he did, he’d be banging a drum for a public option. Suppose you are an employer: you can afford to pay a salary, plus ‘fixed costs’, for the next 10 years. But health care coverage is totally out-of-control, and as an employer you have no control over it. Employers who can’t predict whether they can cover medical aren’t going to be hiring — they’ll continue to use contractors, or do nothing.

4. Ross is basically assisting Wall Street financiers to try and salvage their losses by protecting health care profits. Auto is gone; many sectors are in deep financial trouble. But health care is the one bright spot with profits still to be made.

5. Because of #1, #2, #3, and #4 it’s sure looking as if this fight over health care is a death-match to determine whether or not the US economy will be able to have a shot at recovering. If health care costs are reined in via a public option, we have a shot. If the financiers and lobbyists are able to keep health care in the grip of entities whose existence is predicated upon generating (ever increasing) profits **for shareholders** (even if those ’shareholders’ are retired teachers, drug lords, and oil barons), then we’re going down.

Sorry to be so negative, but as I’ve watched this play out, and looked at some of the background data, I began to realize that Wall Street is probably in a death-match with ‘government’ over health care profits.

Health care profits promise to be the next ‘bubble’, and one thing that a public option would do is deflate that bubble, or bring it under control. This is anathema to financiers whose fortunes have been based on ‘bubble capitalism’, on inflating stock prices and extracting quarterly earnings.

This has very little to do with health care, I finally realize.
It has a lot to do with a screwy economic system based on bubbles, in which many bubbles having burst, the healthCo bubble is one of the few remaining ‘golden tickets’ left in an economy badly damaged by fraudulent accounting, diminishing natural resources, and childlike fantasies of ever-increasing profits.

It’s not about public health.
It’s about whether Wall Street and ‘the investor class’ can continue to chase extravagant profits via corporate structures designed to maximize profits **for shareholders**.

——————-
Thx for letting me wax on forever, masaccio.
I always do ‘a ton of thinking‘ on your threads and get far too wordy…
You’re like a ‘brain coach’ and make me think ;-))

FWIW, I went to a great Town Hall held by Rep Jay Inslee yesterday.
When the ‘angry people’ started hollering and trying to shout him down, he thanked ‘the 99% of the crowd who are being courteous and civil here today.’

That got a pretty thunderous applause.

I got into the hall late, having had to park blocks away (which was cool, in the sense that several thousand people actually showed up). Inslee was giving a presentation with some PowerPoint charts and his data was terrific and informative — I’ll call his office later today and see whether they’re going to put it online.

If they do, I’ll come back and link to it later today.
It showed very clearly the economic impact of health care costs and how that is affecting our larger economy.

Inslee said that he is in favor of a Public Option, but that he doesn’t want to pledge for a piece of legislation that he has not seen and read. (Having been involved in the legislative process myself, and knowing full well the LEGAL differences between ’shall’ and ‘may’ — how one single word can require enforcement, or completely undercut it — I have to say that I respect Inslee’s insistence on not committing to something before he can fully vet it.)

It was nice to see a Congressman who actually appeared to have done a ton of ‘homework’, answered every question asked of him, and seemed genuinely engaged and committed to working for responsible change aimed at improving the overall economy, while improving public health.

Clearly, the public option is too vulnerable to leave in the hands of a few members of Congress. There has to be a national referendum to establish what ought to be done about the health care shambles in America. You know? Like the one in Honduras paving the way to full participation of the citizenry that the U.S. helped quash earlier this year.

Nice rhetorical question about Mike Ross (D-UnitedHealthCare).

Like he said, it helps his constituent(s).

Mike Ross (D-UnitedHealthCare)

**g**

so when ‘progressives’ demand a “Public Option” instead of a solution that makes sense, Single Payer, this is what you are supporting?

wow, watch out what you wish for.

Masaccio, From my recent experience, an increase of 32% in the cost of my company’s employee health insurance, I think your projections are conservative.

Here is the poll question I would like to see someone have the guts to ask:

If you could join Medicare today, would you?

We’re all in the same boat.

Medicare for all.

Actually, under all the plans Congress has debated premiums rise. Obama has said as much. He wants to slow the growth of rising premiums. Not retract the growth, or stop the growth. Under HR676, 95% of Americans will pay less for health care than they do today. It’s the only plan that cuts premiums.

I think my company pays about $5,400/year for my medical insurance – $250 deductible, max out of pocket is $1,250. I live in Texas. We had some “tort reform” and I see absolutely no reduction as a result.

OMG! Where did you get such low rates? I’m in Texas, too. Currently on COBRA with United Health Care. They have incredibly creative ways to define deductible and out-of-pocket so that we end up owing tons of money in “co-pays” no matter whether we have hit the deductible or not. I think “out of pocket” means out of United Health Care’s pocket.

There is one dirty little fact that you have omitted – the fix is already in. The policies written to cover the uninsured folks won’t be worth the paper they are printed on. Here think donut hole – they will start off fine but quickly get to be nothing. The coverage will be more an illusion than reality. Certainly the US gov will be paying good money for the policies but the coverage will stink. This is a disaster in the making and will be one of the greatest cash cows for the Insurance Industry in the history of mankind.

I at least understand Inslee’s reluctance to sign on to just whatever the Blue Dogs put into the bill. As this post shows, it isn’t hard to gut the thing and leave the shell standing. Ross, or his insurance company proxy, has got a running start on it.

I am not sure if I missed this point… masaccio, do those projections include the rate of growth of the uninsured as the premiums reach rates which individuals and families cannot not afford to maintain and thus, drop their insurance?

Because, based on those projections, our family will not be able to afford health care by 2012 (we barely can now. I would imagine the growth of the uninsured will expand each year exponentially as opposed to a projected percentage?

I am working on a post to show what the public option can do. In the meantime, please look at this. Properly done, the public option makes more sense than you seem to think. Badly done, it really sucks, as this post says.

The original statute requires all policies sold on the exchange to meet certain minimum benefits as set by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. That process is transparent, it has to be done with the administrative rule-making process.

That is a really interesting question. The link I gave doesn’t tell us exactly how that number is calculated. The projection, however, is used a couple of places I didn’t link, so maybe one of them has an explanation. More likely, it is a straight trend line projection, which is certainly open to question for reasons just like the one you give.

Well, the question is a real one. If, for instance, by 2012 we have a growth in the uninsured of 4% due to rising preiums, those who have plans will end up absorbing the “burden on the system” costs due to ER runs by more uninsured. Then 2013, the premium increases may cause 8% growth in the uninsured and of course a continued growth in premiums as the insured absorb costs of the uninsured.

Am I making sense here? My point is, the figures above actually may be understated estimates, dreadfully underestimated.

I suspect the figures do not clearly estimate the growth in uninsured as the premiums increase, which means the premiums will actually have a higher rate of increase than a project 6.2 percent. It may be closer to 10 percent.

It is indeed a problem. I have pointed out several times in posts on insurance company profits that the big insurance companies, in their SEC reports, say that they are losing customers in their employer sponsored plans. Eventually, many of those people will fall into the category of unreimbursed care, which increases the burden on state governments in the short run. In the long run, the costs are transferred to other insureds, which raises the premiums, and makes them more unaffordable.

It’s a cascade effect.

Here’s one of those posts, with links to the 10-Qs. I have to remember to include page numbers for those monsters.

It’s a cascade effect.

That is the bottom line. This is where the sensible pitch of health care comes into the moral reality.

This cascade effect is so clear. I want to hear someone argue against this point. In a bad economy no less.

I keep wondering where the other business/corporate interests are. Why aren’t they lobbying Congress to do something considering their profits and prospects are going down the tubes to higher health insurance costs? It seems like it should be big insurance and big pharma against the rest of the business world, but apparently it is not.

PaulaT, this is an astute observation. We generally believe that the virtue of capitalism is that every large company is both a seller and a buyer, so it has a reason to drive down the costs of its raw materials and other inputs. The other sellers are trying to increase their prices, so they push back. That doesn’t seem to be happening does it?

Hey, if it takes 10 years to double my premium from my individual policy from BCBS, then it would twice as long as it is increasing now. OUCH!

Well, masaccio’s the expert, but here’s what I’ve gleaned.

The chances that health care reform will pass now is precisely due to the issue you point out: not only can’t many corporations and smaller businesses afford it, but neither can state and local governments.

However, here’s what I’m seeing: Wall Street still calls the shots **in D.C.** While much of the rest of the nation holds Wall Street (aka, ‘finance’) and banksters in increasingly low regard, the key decision makers inside government/DC are aligned with Wall Street. Which badly needs the health care sector for profit maximization that is no longer coming from other, already looted or eviscerated, sectors.

It’s been a couple of years now, but I recall a little info about Howard Schultz (of Starbuck’s), and the CEO of Costco meeting with WA Sen Patty Murray; both Starbucks and Costco have been highly rated as companies to work for and both provide medical to even many P/T employees. (One reason there are so many P/T baristas, I’m told.)

So the Starbuck’s baristas, the Costco cashiers, the teachers, cops, and firefighters are all underwriting — via ‘cost-shifting’ — the Wal-Marts and other companies who don’t provide medical to their employees. So everyone else underwrites excessive ER visits, and you know the drill…

But how is Starbuck’s or Costco really supposed to go up against Merck or Pfizer or Premera or UnitedHealth? Who do you think THEIR customers are…?

So the ball goes to D.C., which is in the clutch of healthCo and pharma and finance.

Which is why the rest of us need to keep the pressure on!

That’s unfortunate klynn, since according to HR 3200, the PO won’t be operative until 2013. At that time, you might perhaps be able to afford the PO, if you’re entitled to a Government subsidy. However, since those will, at most be only 400 % of the poverty level; it’s quite possible that you’ll find yourself without a subsidy yet required by law to buy someone’s insurance. The PO won’t be cheap since, the blue dogs are fixing it so that it will likely be comparable in price to the private plan.

In short, Congress and the President need to cut the crap here. The only thing that’s going to work for real people, in the short run, is HR 676, Medicare for All. We need to pass that, and make it effective in less than a year.

I’ll be very interested in your new post. But isn’t it so that the PO in HR 3200 sucks?

Very good argument klynn. I’ve assumed 8% myself in my writings.

The rest of the corporate world probably just figures that it will drop health insurance as a fringe benefit when it gets too expensive. The only companies that can’t do that are unionized. But that’s less and less of a problem these days.

Very good ROTL.

Here’s where that argument gains more ground. Looking at the “cascade effect”, if my projections are potentially more of the future reality, which from my personal venue, seems a realistic one. Let’s look at this cascade.

If Republicans and Blue Dogs are going to dump the PO now, just wait until 2012-2013 with the rate of premium increases out of many average citizen’s financial reach. Employers do not have any plans on the horizon (with the exception of the financial sector) to offer COL salary increases. So insurance premiums go up (in my estimate 8-10%) while employees receive no cost of living increase. Add to this picture that many of us, nationally, just went through a year filled with furloughs and for many, that will continue into the next year (or two). The cascade will probably happen faster than the health insurance industry realizes; making a public option essential due to the rapid rising rate of uninsured and the loss of productivity with employees due to dropping their coverage because they cannot afford it. Now, I will tell you, economically, our family falls into a middle class category. There will be no safety net for us in terms of health care.

So, we have the forecast of the uninsured rate climbing to record rates within economic classes no one expects it to climb in, and no safety net, all the while we are being faced with the growth in pandemics?

Sounds like the health care “perfect storm” crisis. In the end we’ll end up with such a big public option the private industry will be moot.

If that is how the private industry wants to fight this. They can. They will cut off their nose despite their face and a large chuck of medical research, medical R&D will dissolve in the US as a result (one area where we have been an international leader). It. Makes. No. Sense.

And then PaulaT’s comment at 23 comes into play:

I keep wondering where the other business/corporate interests are. Why aren’t they lobbying Congress to do something considering their profits and prospects are going down the tubes to higher health insurance costs? It seems like it should be big insurance and big pharma against the rest of the business world, but apparently it is not.