The ACA: reducing employer costs already

#1
lawgator1

lawgator1

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
72,840
Likes
42,967
#1
Firm just got a check for about $2k from bcbs. Why?

ACA requires insurers use 80 pct of premiums for insured care. If they fall below that, they refund the difference.

That's $2k we will be able to add to employee bonuses end of year. If no ACA, that money just goes into bcbs coffers.
 
#2
#2
{sigh}

This does nothing to lower the cost of HC. What happens when insurers use 110% of your firm's premiums?
 
#5
#5
Take that 2K and ask Mitt for some investment advice so when 2014 rolls around and BCBS bumps you 30 to 35% your firm can keep your insurance.

By the way what kind of law firm do you work at where 2 grand is anything more than piss away money?
 
#8
#8
I just got a rebate check, too.

Sadly, it was not for $2,000.

So in Tennessee, BCBS paid out 76.6% of premiums for health care, and is having to refund 3.4%.

It paid out a lot less than 76.6% for my health care this past year, so I'm still getting gypped.
 
#9
#9
Velo Vol said:
I just got a rebate check, too.

Sadly, it was not for $2,000.

So in Tennessee, BCBS paid out 76.6% of premiums for health care, and is having to refund 3.4%.

It paid out a lot less than 76.6% for my health care this past year, so I'm still getting gypped.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand how insurance works.
 
#11
#11
I've always had a problem getting mad about an industry that typically only runs profit margins around 6%.
 
#12
#12
GAVol said:
I've always had a problem getting mad about an industry that typically only runs profit margins around 6%.
Click to expand...

Most people dont realize this.

They have no idea the TCR is roughly around a nickle. In a bad economy, sometimes they TCR is reverse and instead of running at 94% they run at 102% and have to make sure they are able to churn returns on their money through investments.
 
#13
#13
GAVol said:
I've always had a problem getting mad about an industry that typically only runs profit margins around 6%.
Click to expand...

Same with oil though. If they weren't raking in the money with economies of scale, they wouldnd't be in business.

Who wouldn't want make $100's of millions with 6% profit margin on massive sales protected through lobbied legislation, as opposed to 99% profit margin, making a couple $100 thousand?

To me, it isn't the profit margin or money that is irritating, it is the lobbyiest in Washington buying legislation to game the system.
 
#14
#14
I'm not sure I'm following. If you pay out 14k in premiums and you only cost them 6 you get 8 back? If that's the case how to they stay in business when the customer down the road cost the insurance company 1 million bucks for cancer treatments? I am of the belief this is the entire intent of ACA is to put the insurance companies under so the true democratic vision of single payer can emerge... but if the above is accurate that may happen much faster than I thought...
 
#15
#15
OrangeYankee said:
I'm not sure I'm following. If you pay out 14k in premiums and you only cost them 6 you get 8 back? If that's the case how to they stay in business when the customer down the road cost the insurance company 1 million bucks for cancer treatments? I am of the belief this is the entire intent of ACA is to put the insurance companies under so the true democratic vision of single payer can emerge... but if the above is accurate that may happen much faster than I thought...
Click to expand...


No. They have to spend 80 pct on reimbursing for care. That means 20 pct covers overhead and profit.

If I remember the letter correctly, bcbs collected over $1 billion in premiums in Florida. So they were allowed to net From premiums minus expense of care $200 million for overhead and profit.
 
#16
#16
GAVol said:
I've always had a problem getting mad about an industry that typically only runs profit margins around 6%.
Click to expand...

That's on top of all the bureaucratic/operating costs it adds.

And what do insurance companies add to health care? Nothing. We're paying 20%+ of health care $$ for a fancy financing system.
 
#17
#17
lawgator1 said:
No. They have to spend 80 pct on reimbursing for care. That means 20 pct covers overhead and profit.

If I remember the letter correctly, bcbs collected over $1 billion in premiums in Florida. So they were allowed to net From premiums minus expense of care $200 million for overhead and profit.
Click to expand...

That will only work long term if they can assess policy holders in a year that they spend 90% of premiums reimbursing for care.

You really don't understand business operations do you?
 
#20
#20
My sister buys individual insurance. She just got a check in the mail and said it was because of the ACA
 
#21
#21
Velo Vol said:
That's on top of all the bureaucratic/operating costs it adds.

And what do insurance companies add to health care? Nothing. We're paying 20%+ of health care $$ for a fancy financing system.
Click to expand...

You're joking right? Do you have health insurance?
 
#22
#22
lawgator1 said:
No. They have to spend 80 pct on reimbursing for care. That means 20 pct covers overhead and profit.

If I remember the letter correctly, bcbs collected over $1 billion in premiums in Florida. So they were allowed to net From premiums minus expense of care $200 million for overhead and profit.
Click to expand...

Ok I think I understand how this works now... still highly skeptical on how this would help things long term. IE ok you saved this year, but with the insurance company being forced to send "rebates" back what's to stop them from compensating by increasing rates?
 
#25
#25
OrangeYankee said:
ok you saved this year, but with the insurance company being forced to send "rebates" back what's to stop them from compensating by increasing rates?
Click to expand...

(1) Competition (to the extent that it exists)

(2) They'll have to refund again next year
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top