Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (133475)	3/17/2010 5:51:09 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543020

that seems to be such an obvious problem that I assume it's been addressed. Of all the things you've ever posted, that's my personal favorite... <g> You will recall Obama always argues that what compensates the insurance industry for these changes is the new customers from the mandate...My guess is there's some provision for both the short and the long term. The influx of new, healthy customers will have an effect short term, perhaps just big enough and long enough for the short-term thinkers to declare it successful and then distract us with a change the subject. But the influx is a one-off event. After that, there is no fresh blood and the basic laws of economics must resume their troubling pace.

To: JohnM who wrote (133475)	3/17/2010 6:59:58 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543020

John; Steve, that seems to be such an obvious problem that I assume it's been addressed. Hmmmm? One would think that the solution should be shared with the American public then. what compensates the insurance industry for these changes is the new customers from the mandate. Okay, so throwing a bunch of new "customers" into the pool will up the insurance companies profits - but only by assuming that the new recruits will earn as much per customer as the existing pool. That's NOT what I'm talking about; if the new recruits are much more expensive to care for because they have existing conditions they will reduce the company profits. You can't take a cancer patient that cost the insurance provider half a million per year and say that will lower the cost by increasing the number of insured. The other point on this point is that it's most likely the fear, among the insurance industry of the new rules without raising prices much that led them to do the quite unpolitic thing of raising rates at such an extraordinary pace. I'm a little confused here but if you are arguing that they have already raised rates - then I's going to suggest you're wrong. Insurance companies are raising rates because health care is getting more expensive. Surely you aren't suggesting health care cost are not escalating rapidly? steve