In article <dFT5Q.466924$
x6q4.457061@fx46.iad>,
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> writes:
In article <eXF5Q.1406067$qmJf.236143@fx16.iad>,
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
(SNIP!)
Perhaps you might consider eliminating the vast overhead of
the insurance companies, physician holding companies and
pharmacy benefits managers that consume better than 50%
of every healthcare dollar spent. Pure overhead with
absolutely no benifit.
Citation on this? I have seen outrageous claims on the overhead of >insurance companies (they don't have enough employees to suck up even
20%).
https://www.unitedhealthgroup.com/content/dam/UHG/PDF/investors/2023/UNH-Q4-20
23-Form-10-K.pdf
If you are going to point me at an 80 page PDF, you really should list
the pages with the important numbers. Let's see now, the Medical Care
ratio for 2023 suggests an overhead of 17.8%. I can't see how physician
holding companies and pharmacy benefits managers could pile up similar
amounts of money (I will not be amused if the numbers for physician
holding companies include their salaries or liability insurance
payments). Again, not enough employees.
Me, I blame the makers of medical equipment. Hospitals must have all the
newest gadgets to be considered to be first class and must use them to
avoid liability judgements if they weren't used.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. ‹-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward
robertaw@drizzle.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)