If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Insurance giant Aetna inadvertently discloses that it has dumped more than $7 million this year into two conservative PACs. Gee, can't imagine what issue they thought was worth $7 million to help fight?   (money.cnn.com) divider line 55
    More: Obvious, Aetna, Ethics in Washington, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, campaign contributions, SNL Financial, Melanie Sloan, Vin Weber, Sunlight Foundation  
•       •       •

2104 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Jul 2012 at 5:54 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



55 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-02 04:57:43 PM  
...getting Americans to cut back on smoking?
 
2012-07-02 05:12:38 PM  
isn't obamacare a giveaway to the health insurance industry? i mean 30,000,000 new mandated customers? who wouldn't want that?
 
2012-07-02 05:34:40 PM  

FlashHarry: isn't obamacare a giveaway to the health insurance industry? i mean 30,000,000 new mandated customers? who wouldn't want that?


It's probably all the other stuff like regulating how much profit they can take. It'll be good for them overall, but not as good as they want so....

Better spend that money now while they have it.
 
2012-07-02 05:39:24 PM  

FlashHarry: isn't obamacare a giveaway to the health insurance industry? i mean 30,000,000 new mandated customers? who wouldn't want that?


Trouble is if even just a few of those 30M have pretty expensive pre-existing conditions all that extra cash goes poof.
And the won't have any left to help grease the governmental wheels...
 
2012-07-02 05:55:38 PM  
I'm guessing invading Syria.
 
2012-07-02 05:55:53 PM  
I just assumed this was true for all the HMOs. Cynicism is matching reality on a delay.
 
2012-07-02 05:58:03 PM  
They were trying to pass that law that outlawed miniature ponies for disabled people.
 
2012-07-02 05:58:29 PM  
probably not the reason you're thinking subby
 
2012-07-02 05:59:12 PM  
Hysterical outrage isn't free subby.
 
2012-07-02 05:59:12 PM  
Seven million? That sure puts a dent in the 38 and a half BILLION farking dollars they had in assets as of the end of fiscal 2011!
 
2012-07-02 05:59:26 PM  

vernonFL: They were trying to pass that law that outlawed miniature ponies for disabled people.


Oh, right. HR566 "It Looks Like A Large Dog At A Distance Resolution".
 
2012-07-02 05:59:33 PM  

vernonFL: They were trying to pass that law that outlawed miniature ponies for disabled people.


i.imgur.com
 
2012-07-02 06:06:25 PM  

skullkrusher: probably not the reason you're thinking subby


You mean it isn't nuking Iran? Damnit! Well, can you help me hide from my bookie?
 
2012-07-02 06:07:12 PM  
So everyone rushes to defend the Second Amendment, but no one wants to defend the First?
 
2012-07-02 06:08:22 PM  
They were probably hoping the GOP would find a way to modify the bill a bit, offer an amendment. Something. Anything. But Boner and Cantor came bursting through the door like the Bushwackers and told them their boys on the supreme court had that shiat handled. Oops.
 
2012-07-02 06:09:27 PM  
"We agree that transparency and accountability are important,"

That is a laff riot. Go ahead, pull the other one.
 
2012-07-02 06:10:09 PM  

AliceBToklasLives: So everyone rushes to defend the Second Amendment, but no one wants to defend the First?


Let me guess: you're one of those "Corporations are people and money is speech" types?
 
2012-07-02 06:10:45 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: They were probably hoping the GOP would find a way to modify the bill a bit, offer an amendment. Something. Anything. But Boner and Cantor came bursting through the door like the Bushwackers and told them their boys on the supreme court had that shiat handled. Oops.


images.wikia.com

We got this!
 
2012-07-02 06:11:35 PM  

Serious Black: skullkrusher: probably not the reason you're thinking subby

You mean it isn't nuking Iran? Damnit! Well, can you help me hide from my bookie?


hehe
 
2012-07-02 06:13:12 PM  
AliceBToklasLives

Are you that moronic or are you being paid to post that shiat?

/Bribery is not free speech in most of the world, and all US suprem courts until Roberts agreed with that interpretation
//Unlimited campaign contributions are a form of bribery, which is why democracies don't allow them.
 
2012-07-02 06:13:19 PM  
NO WONDER MY INSURANCE IS SO EXPENSIVE
 
2012-07-02 06:14:21 PM  
They could have gotten Jon Voight for less.
 
2012-07-02 06:19:05 PM  
Holy farking shiat.

In 2008 the right was screaming that Obama bought the election - even though a large majority of his donations were from individuals and under $200.

Now, after Citizens and Speechnow, the right is receiving literally hundreds of millions from a select number of corporations and billionaires and it's farking crickets?

Really?

fark you conservatives.
 
2012-07-02 06:23:44 PM  
7 million is nothing to this type of company. they must not have cared very deeply.
 
2012-07-02 06:27:20 PM  

havocmike: 7 million is nothing to this type of company. they must not have cared very deeply.


There was likely $7M the other way too, we just don't know about it, like we weren't supposed to know about this.
 
2012-07-02 06:27:38 PM  

mpirooz: Holy farking shiat.

In 2008 the right was screaming that Obama bought the election - even though a large majority of his donations were from individuals and under $200.

Now, after Citizens and Speechnow, the right is receiving literally hundreds of millions from a select number of corporations and billionaires and it's farking crickets?

Really?

fark you conservatives.


Oh, that's nothing. Guess who said this:

"We need to have real disclosure. And so what we ought to do is broaden the disclosure to include at least labor unions and tax-exempt business associations and trial lawyers so that you include the major political players in America. Why would a little disclosure be better than a lot of disclosure?"
 
2012-07-02 06:30:02 PM  

FlashHarry: isn't obamacare a giveaway to the health insurance industry? i mean 30,000,000 new mandated customers? who wouldn't want that?


Once the Repubs decide to double-derp on the down and vilify the insurance companies as tools of the IMPOSTOR IN CHIEF, this will likely be their rallying cry.
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2012-07-02 06:37:46 PM  
I'll give them the benefit of doubt and say it might not be about healthcare.

It might be about buying amoral Republicans while they still can until an amendment or smarter Supreme Court overturns Citizens United.
 
2012-07-02 06:48:02 PM  

vernonFL: They were trying to pass that law that outlawed miniature ponies for disabled people.


What a miniature pony might look like:
t1.gstatic.com
 
Ehh
2012-07-02 06:52:35 PM  
Well, Bernice from Accounting came by and said, hey, looks like we have $7 million extra lying around, so the boss said, let's give it to the employees, but the employees said nah, we get paid enough, what we should really do with the money is lobby for legislation that will get people not to staple their bills to their checks. It says right on the envelope not to do that, but they do it anyway!
 
2012-07-02 06:55:47 PM  
Mandated income?
 
2012-07-02 07:07:45 PM  

fusillade762: AliceBToklasLives: So everyone rushes to defend the Second Amendment, but no one wants to defend the First?

Let me guess: you're one of those "Corporations are people and money is speech" types?


birdboy2000: AliceBToklasLives

Are you that moronic or are you being paid to post that shiat?

/Bribery is not free speech in most of the world, and all US suprem courts until Roberts agreed with that interpretation
//Unlimited campaign contributions are a form of bribery, which is why democracies don't allow them.


Sorry, that was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, not successful trolling.

/I am familiar with the investment theory of politics - which is obviously deeply undemocratic
//But of course we're a republic, not a democracy
///[that was tongue-in-cheek]
 
2012-07-02 07:37:06 PM  
The 7 million is to remove the "pre-existing condition" clause from the insurance. Maybe the 20% profit cap.
 
2012-07-02 08:18:59 PM  
Actually in recent years the Health Insurance industry has been giving more to Democrats than Republicans, including Obama has received twice as much as Romney this election. So one company in the Industry goes the opposite way of their buddies. It still doesn't change the fact the the only people who benefit from Obamacare are Health Insurance companies, Drug Companies the Obama and that those Idustries give more to Obama and Dems than the GOP in recent years

cdn.theatlantic.com
Link

Besides the Obamacare bill is 95% of the Max Baccus healthcare bill (there are only 2 changes Obama made). Baccus admitted at the time he never read his own bill but trusted his legislative staff. His chief Legislative aid at the time was Liz Fowler. Who is Liz Fowler? Until late November 2008 (After the Dems took the white house and kept congress) she was the executive VP of Wellpoint, the countries second largest insurance provider, before resigning to become his chief legislative aid. After Obamacare passed she left his staff to be the chief lobbyist for AHIP (American Health Insurance Plans) the lobbying arm for the industry. Most insurance companies like a bill that force people to buy their product and 30% more while covering less
 
2012-07-02 08:28:56 PM  

jedihirsch: It still doesn't change the fact the the only people who benefit from Obamacare are Health Insurance companies


There are a lot of people who think PPACA is going to screw the insurance industry sideways, because the penalties for not buying insurance are too small and easy to avoid; and people won't sign up until they find out they need expensive care.
 
2012-07-02 08:42:43 PM  
Don't worry. They'll pay for it via insurance rate increases placed upon the little people.
 
2012-07-02 09:04:09 PM  

fusillade762: Let me guess: you're one of those "Corporations are people and money is speech" types?


Let me guess, you think corporations don't get to have freedom of speech? So the federal government can seize and destroy video and tapes and erase data at will because it was funded by a corporation? If your answer is yes, then you are essentially supporting the same notion of the government burning books. And you also just confirmed that YOU believe money does equal speech.

That's the breaks. Freedom of speech sometimes means we have to allow the rich assholes exercise it too. It sucks, believe you me, but I would rather have the problems that come with freedom of speech than suffer problems that come from having too little of it.
 
2012-07-02 09:33:16 PM  

pdieten: jedihirsch: It still doesn't change the fact the the only people who benefit from Obamacare are Health Insurance companies

There are a lot of people who think PPACA is going to screw the insurance industry sideways, because the penalties for not buying insurance are too small and easy to avoid; and people won't sign up until they find out they need expensive care.


The increased penalties will come later, they have at least a year to iron that out.

They had to enthuse the base with things like the "public option" and relatively mild penalties. The penalties will most definitely be increased before too much time passes. You know how a lot of democratic party operatives were saying "we're going to go back and fix this (ACA)"? The penalties are going up.

There wont be a public option or single payer, though. As demonstrated now and before, the industry has a lot of money to throw at politicians through lobbyists. Neither party is going to mess with that kind of power, and the American people wont dare look beyond the two party system.
 
2012-07-02 09:59:06 PM  

vernonFL: They were trying to pass that law that outlawed miniature ponies for disabled people.


images3.wikia.nocookie.net

/You should have seen this coming.
 
2012-07-02 10:33:45 PM  
Gee, that must be why my Aetna health insurance premiums went up two farkin' grand this year.

But, according to Turtle Boy McConnell, "we have the best health care system in the world!"

/Fark you, you chinless fuhck.
 
2012-07-02 11:13:37 PM  

zappaisfrank: Gee, that must be why my Aetna health insurance premiums went up two farkin' grand this year.

But, according to Turtle Boy McConnell, "we have the best health care system in the world!"

/Fark you, you chinless fuhck.


Came to baitch about Aetna upping my rates (and my high as hell deductible). Glad to see it was taken care of.
 
2012-07-03 12:07:05 AM  
You want to know why you pay so much for health insurance? It costs a lot to bribe government officials.
 
2012-07-03 12:42:48 AM  
How many denied pre-existing conditions pay for that?
 
2012-07-03 12:47:13 AM  
Should come as a surprise to no one that the ins companies don't like Obamacare.
 
2012-07-03 12:48:50 AM  

jedihirsch: Actually in recent years the Health Insurance industry has been giving more to Democrats than Republicans, including Obama has received twice as much as Romney this election. So one company in the Industry goes the opposite way of their buddies.


Those numbers, like all "industry X gives $Y to Z", are total fiction, because it lumps together everyone from the executives to the person that is washing the floors as though they were of a single mind, even if the executives and employees often have mutually conflicting interests and very different voting and donation patterns.
 
2012-07-03 01:28:52 AM  

FabulousFreep: Should come as a surprise to no one that the ins companies don't like Obamacare.


The less those vultures like it, the more I like Obamacare.
 
2012-07-03 02:03:58 AM  

Ambivalence: FlashHarry: isn't obamacare a giveaway to the health insurance industry? i mean 30,000,000 new mandated customers? who wouldn't want that?

It's probably all the other stuff like regulating how much profit they can take. It'll be good for them overall, but not as good as they want so....

Better spend that money now while they have it.


There is no profit cap in PPACA. There is a whole company cap, essentially.

A simple way to look at it is that for every $1 in premiums, between $0.80 and $0.85 needs to get passed on to the docs and hospitals, while the remaining $0.15 to $0.20 can go to the insurance company for everything else.

They can spend that any way they like, leaving no profit at all, or they could take ALL of it as profit and just lump it into a big pile of money. Actually, they are required by law to have a big pile of money, so definitely some goes to that.
 
2012-07-03 02:12:28 AM  

pdieten: jedihirsch: It still doesn't change the fact the the only people who benefit from Obamacare are Health Insurance companies

There are a lot of people who think PPACA is going to screw the insurance industry sideways, because the penalties for not buying insurance are too small and easy to avoid; and people won't sign up until they find out they need expensive care.


The cost of any regulation that affects all insurers equally just gets passed on to employer groups, and from there to consumers (us).

So no, insurers will be fine. If their risk goes up, they will raise rates accordingly. It's just a matter of pricing it.
 
2012-07-03 03:44:25 AM  
So Aetna gave 7 million because they believe they will lose money. Let me count the ways-some of which are why OTHER companies give money to democrats.

1. they believe that the increased competition will force them to lower prices
2. they believe other companies will be better at competing against them.

Some of the positioning in all of this is fascinating, watch who buys what. some insurance companies are buying up various health care companies in the idea that they will better be able to either maintain higher prices, or compete more effectively by owning parts of the infrastructure at a state level. really kinda fascinating.
 
2012-07-03 07:07:00 AM  

Ambivalence: FlashHarry: isn't obamacare a giveaway to the health insurance industry? i mean 30,000,000 new mandated customers? who wouldn't want that?

It's probably all the other stuff like regulating how much profit they can take. It'll be good for them overall, but not as good as they want so....

Better spend that money now while they have it.


It does not regulate how much profit they can take. It regulates a percentage.

There is a difference. All you have to do is not care if a hospital charges you 3 times what something cost before the change, pass that on to a group of people who now HAVE to buy your product or run afoul of the law, and POOF! Increased revenue.

/ this is the flaw. No one is talking about it, but it will kill the law. 10 years from now your co pay will be more than the current cost without insurance. PLUS you will have to pay for insurance.
// are they REALLY going to just not grow revenues? do you really believe that? Is the hospital going to complain about getting paid 3X what they do now? Who is going to stop this?
 
Displayed 50 of 55 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report