WellPoint CEO enjoys healthy 51% pay hike

[shadow9d9]

[/I]



Really? You dont understand the difference? I know youre smarter than that...

If A causes B and B causes C, then in my world, A causes C. Only when you have no argument do you need to resort to semantics.

 

[nonlnear]

Why are those "entitlements"?

Wait, you're bitching at everyone else for quibbling over semantics and you have the nerve to split hairs with me about the alleged imprecision of an incredibly common term in American political discourse, when you knew exactly what I meant? Oh the iron knees!

 

[Genx87]

http://www.visualeconomics.com/healthcare-costs-around-the-world_2010-03-01/

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/03/health-care-expenses-vs-life-expectancy/

http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/universal.htm

Pesky facts get in your way. See how all the countries with government control have half our cost? That is called facts. This is reality, right there in front of you. What reality do YOU live in?


SOVIET UNION is the equivalent of saying HITLER. It isn't a valid argument, just makes you look like a child.

You do realize these countries ration at higher rates than we do right? Now how well do you think politicians in this country will do the same?

 

[ElFenix]

You do realize these countries ration right? Now how well do you think politicians in this country will do the same?

the US already rations.

 

[Genx87]

the US already rations.

Yes I have acknolwedged that in this very thread. But I typed too quickly and edited my response.

 

[her209]

Insurance companies do not provide Health Care.

They provide payment back to the provider after the care has been done.

Banks do not build cars either.

They provide payment to the car dealer when the purchase is agreed upon.

Of course, the bank could refuse to finance you, in which case you'd have to come up with the money by some other means or forget about purchasing a car.

 

[shadow9d9]

Wait, you're bitching at everyone else for quibbling over semantics and you have the nerve to split hairs with me about the alleged imprecision of an incredibly common term in American political discourse, when you knew exactly what I meant? Oh the iron knees!

Huh? I'm asking you to explain why you think they are entitlements and whether you know the history of their creation(why they were created). Why should I accept a talking point as fact? Just SAYING they are entitlements doesn't MAKE THEM entitlements.

Are you arguing that public roads or our public school system are entitlements? What separates them?

 

[shadow9d9]

You do realize these countries ration at higher rates than we do right? Now how well do you think politicians in this country will do the same?

They ration more than 30-40 million out of a 300 million person populace while exempting millions of others from getting covered completely, while rescinding others? Proof?

 

[nonlnear]

Huh? I'm asking you to explain why you think they are entitlements and whether you know the history of their creation(why they were created). Why should I accept a talking point as fact?

Newsflash: The term "entitlement spending" is commonly used EVERYWHERE including the halls of Congress to refer to a slew of programs including Social Security, Medicare. Medicaid, etc. If you expect me to play along with the ruse that you have some intelligent objection to my use of the term, well you can have your sandbox to yourself. You bore me.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

All the insurance company apologists and defenders in this thread make me wanna puke.

1. Insurance is not an industry it is an administrator of funds and provides or produces nothing. They are glorified bookies doing nothing more than raking juice off the top, and totally distorting and controlling healthcare costs to their benifit.
2. Those that defend them are not defending free enterprise, they are promoting greed and graft over common sense and human dignity.

So you guys quit trying to pretend your defending some glorious principle, and admit your just whores for money and would send your own Grandma up before the insurance company death panels if it meant a few more bucks in your pocket

 

[ElFenix]

Yes I have acknolwedged that in this very thread. But I typed too quickly and edited my response.

what do you mean by "rations at a higher rate"?

 

[CycloWizard]

Go buy oil/gas elsewhere if you don't like their prices. Go buy electricity elsewhere if you don't like them.

Government will eventually take over the profit hungry companies and turn the hospitals and insurance non profit. Everyone will then be covered for everything at half the price.

Such stupid, it hurts.

I think your last sentence pretty much sums it up. I have nothing else to add.

 

[shadow9d9]

Newsflash: The term "entitlement spending" is commonly used EVERYWHERE including the halls of Congress to refer to a slew of programs including Social Security, Medicare. Medicaid, etc. If you expect me to play along with the ruse that you have some intelligent objection to my use of the term, well you can have your sandbox to yourself. You bore me.

It is used as a talking point by some members of congress... that doesn't actually MAKE them entitlement programs.. you are just parroting a talking point. Obama is called a socialist, Kenyan, Muslim... does that MAKE him one?

If you are going to bring up a term of generalization, be prepared to actually back up what makes it so. Politically biased generalizations don't amount to facts.

Again, are public school systems "entitlement"?

 

[shadow9d9]

I think your last sentence pretty much sums it up. I have nothing else to add.

Derp derp?

I proved that other countries cover EVERYONE at half our cost to dispel your bogus claim that because the Soviet Union didn't accomplish this, that it was invalid. I accomplished this with facts showing their cost at half of our cost.

Then you made the bogus claim that they ration more and I asked if they rationed more than 10% of their population off of healthcare completely, while limiting access via pre-existing conditions to millions, while rescinding coverage, all for double the price.... You ran for the hills.

It helps to come to an argument with facts rather than derp derp.

 

[CycloWizard]

All the insurance company apologists and defenders in this thread make me wanna puke.

1. Insurance is not an industry it is an administrator of funds and provides or produces nothing. They are glorified bookies doing nothing more than raking juice off the top, and totally distorting and controlling healthcare costs to their benifit.
2. Those that defend them are not defending free enterprise, they are promoting greed and graft over common sense and human dignity.

So you guys quit trying to pretend your defending some glorious principle, and admit your just whores for money and would send your own Grandma up before the insurance company death panels if it meant a few more bucks in your pocket

They provide financial risk reduction for their clients, just like every other form of insurance.

 

[shadow9d9]

They provide financial risk reduction for their clients, just like every other form of insurance.

Up until they rescind your coverage when you get sick or deny coverage of cancer because you once had acne.

""They confuse their customers and dump the sick — all so they can satisfy their Wall Street investors," said Wendell Potter, who retired as CIGNA's vice president of corporate communications last year. He spent nearly 15 years at the company and four years at Humana."

"Potter, for instance, recalled a trip on a corporate jet from Philadelphia, where CIGNA is headquartered, to Connecticut, where the company's health insurance business is based in Bloomfield. During the flight, he was served lunch on gold-rimmed china with a gold-plated knife and fork.

"I realized for the first time that someone's insurance premiums were paying for me to travel in such luxury," he said on his blog."

"He condemned insurers' efforts to get rid of unprofitable customers, sell policies that can mislead consumers and offer very limited coverage, and pay out as small a portion of premiums as possible for claims in order to boost profits and please Wall Street."

"Potter described in written testimony how insurers use "purging" — unrealistic rate increases — to drive off less profitable employers. Citing a USA Today report, he recalled how CIGNA boosted rates in 2006 for the Entertainment Industry Group Insurance Trust so much that for some family plans, premiums would have topped $44,000 a year."

"CIGNA, responding to Potter's testimony, said Wednesday, "Although we respect that there are different opinions on the solutions, we strongly disagree with the suggestion that, motivated by profits, the insurance industry has deliberately attempted to confuse or unfairly treat covered individuals.""

http://www.courant.com/business/hc-cigna-potter.artjun25,0,4107201.story


"Among the other testimony heard by the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation was that of Robin Beaton. It reflected some of the insurance company tactics condemned by Potter.

It was a nightmare scenario. The day before she was scheduled to undergo a double mastectomy for invasive breast cancer, Robin Beaton's health insurance company informed her that she was "red flagged" and they wouldn't pay for her surgery. The hospital wanted a $30,000 deposit before they would move forward. Beaton had no choice but to forgo the life-saving surgery.

Beaton had dutifully signed up for individual insurance when she retired from nursing to start a small business. She had never missed a payment, but that didn't matter. Blue Cross cited two earlier, unrelated conditions that she hadn't reported to them when signing up — acne and a fast beating heart — and rescinded her policy.

Beaton pleaded with the company and had her doctors write letters on her behalf to no avail. It was not until Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) personally called Blue Cross that her policy was reinstated and she could undergo surgery. In that year, Beaton's tumor doubled in size, leading to further complications necessitating the removal of her lymph glands as well."


http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/profile.html

 

[CycloWizard]

Up until they rescind your coverage when you get sick or deny coverage of cancer because you once had acne.

Then write a law banning such a practice. What's the problem? Oh, that's right: we need revolutionary change! Common sense is so last century.

 

[cubby1223]

^^^
wouldn't that be covered by contract law?

Aren't these contracts that are written up saying the insurance company pays for medical expenses?

I still have to believe all these individual cases are very rare exceptions.

Even still, go in to each situation and look at what the reason was. I have a hard time believing it is pure greed as "the left" wants to brand it as. Let's look at the reasons why first, instead of just blindly labeling all profits as greedy and immoral.

 

[RearAdmiral]

That's about what I pull in these days.

 

[CycloWizard]

^^^
wouldn't that be covered by contract law?

Aren't these contracts that are written up saying the insurance company pays for medical expenses?

I still have to believe all these individual cases are very rare exceptions.

Even still, go in to every situation and look at what the reason was, and if it truly was "greed" then go after them. Otherwise let's look at the reasons why first, instead of just blindly labeling all profits as greedy and immoral.

I'm sure such laws already exist. However, the real job of the president and the entire executive branch of government is to enforce these laws. Instead of doing this job, they are much too busy trying to write long, convoluted laws.

 

[xj0hnx]

[/I]



Really? You dont understand the difference? I know youre smarter than that...

No, he's not, not many of the loony left are.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
Really what is there to say. Our entire economy tanks and health insurance companies still make out like bandits. I'm not sure I'm entirely against for profit health insurance, but reading stuff like this really turns me off to the idea.

Did you read your own article, do you understand it?

The Associated Press reports that while her base salary rose less than one percent to just over $1.1 million, the bulk of her earnings derived from a $1.5 million dollar performance bonus and $10.2 million in restricted stock and stock options.

I'm no fan of insurance companies, HC or otherwise.

But IMO if you're criticizing, understand what you are complaining about.

Her compensation rose 50%, or $5 million dollars.

Notice that $10.2 million is stock options, that's 2 x the amount of the increase. Firstly that's non-cash. Secondly, unless and until those options are cashed out there's no guarantee she'll actually get that money. If the stock price falls she may end up with none of it. Thirdly, although the article doesn't say, it's quite likely that stock options granted (at least) 3 years ago are now vesting. I.e., that $10.2 million is appreciation in stock 'granted' 3 years ago. Keep in mind what she was granted 3 years ago she had to pay FMV for.

I know the MSM loves to bash CEO's etc, but the only story here is that Wellpoint's stock has been going up.

Now if they raised her base salary, that would be something to complain about. But a rising stock market?

Fern

 

[Pens1566]

Until someone can rebut what Potter has said about the inner workings of the insurance industry, I don't think there's much argument that its a scummy bunch of shitbags making billions off of those they later dump for actually wanting to use the service they think they've already paid for.

Can someone debunk Potter? I'll wait ...

 

[Fern]

Sure thing. Just cite the evidence of the 2.5 billion in profit per quarter, while giving the ceo 13 million in SALARY(not counting travel, which is not part of this salary), while raising rates 39% in a quarter... better yet, show how it has raised rates while covering less people year after year for a decae while you are at it.

Then go on to show how it is reasonable to compare the oldest and sickest in the country being covered with the 20-55 age bracket.

I'll be waiting.

You misread, or misunderstand.

Wellpoint did NOT give the CEO $13 million in salary.

They gave/paid them $2.6 million.

The rest, $10.2 million, was 'given' to them by the rising stock market (increase in value of Wellpoint's stock). None of that $10.2 million will be paid by Wellpoint, nor will Wellpoint get a tax deduction for it.

Fern

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Until someone can rebut what Potter has said about the inner workings of the insurance industry, I don't think there's much argument that its a scummy bunch of shitbags making billions off of those they later dump for actually wanting to use the service they think they've already paid for.

Can someone debunk Potter? I'll wait ...

That's the jist of it, and the sad fact is I think a lot the defenders hope to be part of the scummy bunch of shitbags machine one day making their millions off of the rest of us lowly peasants too. If they aren't already.