Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16% and UnitedHealth denies double that at 32%, so that means the vast majority of claims are approved even for the worst examples.
68% in particular is stretching the term “vast majority” especially when that 32% is people who pay for insurance every fucking month for the explicit purpose of being covered.
They aren’t asking for a handout. They are entitled to this coverage. They paid for it already!
Right right right, but that’s more than zero. That’s tens of millions more cases than zero. We need to understand every action, or inaction, will have consequences to make the best possible decisions. Some users are advocating armed violence against the offices that would be allocating funding for healthcare, not even the CEOs but the actual workers at the company, it is each of our responsibilities to weigh the pros and cons and examine all of our options to solve these problems.
Theres no easy way. It’s not as simple as pushing a button or pulling a trigger.
And we only have those two choices because of capitalist gaslighting. Given those two options, I would advocate deposing a few more insurance executives to improve the situation.
This is a post about making threats of death and violence to people who work in an office building handling insurance claims, getting it to shut down for the day.
Excellent, I’d not heard of the coconut island parable before! That’s very apt.
I was thinking of the False Dilemma fallacy. The notion that the only two options are a school bus service with 32% casualty/loss rate, or no bus and a 100% casualty/loss rate, is capitalist gaslighting when we can plainly see the government bus company in other countries getting all the kids to school. For less cost, at that.
You kind of defeated yourself by admitting the 32% is the lesser evil that you still wouldnt choose because you associate it with a different political tribe.
You’re literally advocating we harm ourselves as an alternative to “caPiTAlisM”.
Ideally it should be 0% (this is too optomistic, but I am not one make that figure) people pay into an insurance system to distribute risk. If a company cant resolve the inflow/outflow problem (not even going to get into profits, for-profit insurance is unethical) then it needs to be managed by an organization that can. ~30 governments (USA not amongst them) that have solved this problem for their citizens and anyone requiring medical assistance within their borders.
Especially when you consider that these claims are not being made by random people but by trained board certified physicians whose entire livelihood depends on them providing prompt and appropriate care for their patients.
Well, the claims are reviewed by physicians but they’re often not in the specialization of the care provided so they can make mistaken judgements and a great way to appeal it is to ask the insurance company for proof that the physician who denied the claim does specialize in the type of care being reviewed.
Unfortunately most people don’t know that, less than 1% of denied claims are appealed.
What is this comment supposed to bring to the discussion?
Edit: bro is like im going to win this debate by having a very narrow defensible argument that 1 is smaller than 3
If you presume the other health funds are acting rationally, accepting legitimate claims, rejecting those that are not covered by the policy of the person claiming them, then for every illegitimate claim denied by the average fund United deny one illegitimate and one valid claim.
I’m not sure who you’re arguing against but it isn’t me.
I’m not defending anything. I’m just pointing out an obvious lie.
Why do you think none of the claims being accepted is not terrible but 84% being accepted is terrible? Are you pro-debt and unnecessary death and sickness?
I never suggested all should be accepted. I made an assumption for my argument that the average health funds are acting fairly. I don’t believe that, incidentally, since many are far below the average and I don’t believe they are approving invalid claims
Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16% and UnitedHealth denies double that at 32%, so that means the vast majority of claims are approved even for the worst examples.
Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16%
Right, this entire thread I made, which you were replying to, as well as the post above it, was about the entire industry and every single person who works in it.
Well my darling deario no claims are being approved, they’re being rejected though.
Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16% and UnitedHealth denies double that at 32%, so that means the vast majority of claims are approved even for the worst examples.
68% in particular is stretching the term “vast majority” especially when that 32% is people who pay for insurance every fucking month for the explicit purpose of being covered.
They aren’t asking for a handout. They are entitled to this coverage. They paid for it already!
Right right right, but that’s more than zero. That’s tens of millions more cases than zero. We need to understand every action, or inaction, will have consequences to make the best possible decisions. Some users are advocating armed violence against the offices that would be allocating funding for healthcare, not even the CEOs but the actual workers at the company, it is each of our responsibilities to weigh the pros and cons and examine all of our options to solve these problems.
Theres no easy way. It’s not as simple as pushing a button or pulling a trigger.
Oh come the fuck on you can’t seriously be going “I’m just saying it’s not zero!“ and acting like this is the discussion at hand.
I’m sure we’d be pretty sanguine about a school bus driver who gets 68% of the kids to school safely, too.
If the options were a bus with 32% fatality and no bus with 100% fatality, would you advocate we tear down the bus?
And we only have those two choices because of capitalist gaslighting. Given those two options, I would advocate deposing a few more insurance executives to improve the situation.
Alright, clearly you’re lost.
This is a post about making threats of death and violence to people who work in an office building handling insurance claims, getting it to shut down for the day.
I don’t think swingingthelamp is lost.
I think they just hit you with the polite version of the “coconut island” cohesive nature of capital.
I think capitalist realism is what makes many of us choose the lesser evil of 68% mortality.
Excellent, I’d not heard of the coconut island parable before! That’s very apt.
I was thinking of the False Dilemma fallacy. The notion that the only two options are a school bus service with 32% casualty/loss rate, or no bus and a 100% casualty/loss rate, is capitalist gaslighting when we can plainly see the government bus company in other countries getting all the kids to school. For less cost, at that.
You kind of defeated yourself by admitting the 32% is the lesser evil that you still wouldnt choose because you associate it with a different political tribe.
You’re literally advocating we harm ourselves as an alternative to “caPiTAlisM”.
I’m not sure you understand that I don’t subscribe to the same binary choices you do.
It’s not an ideological tribe that dictates my decision. I understand that better options exist and I choose those.
Ideally it should be 0% (this is too optomistic, but I am not one make that figure) people pay into an insurance system to distribute risk. If a company cant resolve the inflow/outflow problem (not even going to get into profits, for-profit insurance is unethical) then it needs to be managed by an organization that can. ~30 governments (USA not amongst them) that have solved this problem for their citizens and anyone requiring medical assistance within their borders.
Right right right all cool, but I was conversing with that other user who claimed nothing was getting approved.
Bro 1 in 3 claims being denied is fuckin insane are you drunk on boot
Love that
Especially when you consider that these claims are not being made by random people but by trained board certified physicians whose entire livelihood depends on them providing prompt and appropriate care for their patients.
I feel like even 16% being rejected is very high
Well, the claims are reviewed by physicians but they’re often not in the specialization of the care provided so they can make mistaken judgements and a great way to appeal it is to ask the insurance company for proof that the physician who denied the claim does specialize in the type of care being reviewed.
Unfortunately most people don’t know that, less than 1% of denied claims are appealed.
1 in 3 is bad
3 in 3 is worse
What is this comment supposed to bring to the discussion? Edit: bro is like im going to win this debate by having a very narrow defensible argument that 1 is smaller than 3
I am the voice of “Don’t threaten to shoot up your local office building or post office.”
Yeah you’re right, we shouldn’t have a system that requires people to go to extreme measures in order to get meaningful reforms.
This is an incredibly stupid hill to die on
If you think lying to promote terrorism is a better hill, idgaf what you think.
If you presume the other health funds are acting rationally, accepting legitimate claims, rejecting those that are not covered by the policy of the person claiming them, then for every illegitimate claim denied by the average fund United deny one illegitimate and one valid claim.
In what way is that not terrible?
I’m not sure who you’re arguing against but it isn’t me.
I’m not defending anything. I’m just pointing out an obvious lie.
Why do you think none of the claims being accepted is not terrible but 84% being accepted is terrible? Are you pro-debt and unnecessary death and sickness?
100 minus 36 is 64, not 84.
I never suggested all should be accepted. I made an assumption for my argument that the average health funds are acting fairly. I don’t believe that, incidentally, since many are far below the average and I don’t believe they are approving invalid claims
Right. My comment, which you were replying to was about the worst company.
Right, this entire thread I made, which you were replying to, as well as the post above it, was about the entire industry and every single person who works in it.