1. Welcome to the new Styleforum!

    We hope you’re as excited as we are to hang out in the new place. There are more new features that we’ll announce in the near future, but for now we hope you’ll enjoy the new site.

    We are currently fine-tuning the forum for your browsing pleasure, so bear with any lingering dust as we work to make Styleforum even more awesome than it was.

    Oh, and don’t forget to head over to the Styleforum Journal, because we’re giving away two pairs of Carmina shoes to celebrate our move!

    Please address any questions about using the new forum to support@styleforum.net

    Cheers,

    The Styleforum Team

    Dismiss Notice

Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general

Discussion in 'Business, Careers & Education' started by mikeman, Feb 2, 2011.

  1. jbarwick

    jbarwick Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,970
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Corona prices could go up. Need a ticker with price action to Russian vodka. Which also brings a good question, will the Russians buy into the US housing market like they did into the London housing market if Putin and Trump ease things?
     
  2. idfnl

    idfnl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,339
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    VA
    

    54ish is a good price, it has been in the low 60s for the better part of the year. I think my basis is around 43, but even at 54, the yield is 4.5%.
     
  3. otc

    otc Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,202
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    

    That's moving the goalposts a bit.

    Having to meet state reporting requirements isn't the same as not being allowed to operate there. Insurance companies already operate in multiple states and can deal with this...and often this stuff is handled by outside vendors anyways. You buy some software, it takes care of it, not your problem.

    Whether or not you have to meet those requirements...you still have the problem of simultaneously building up a provider network and a customer base.
    Insurance may be a bit of a "virtual" product in that an insurance agent sitting in Delaware can sell to a customer in Nevada without any issue...but when people want to actually use that coverage, they need local presence. It's not like some other type of insurance where they just cut you a check because you actually need doctors and hospitals nearby that are covered.

    That's a much bigger undertaking than getting permission to operate and figuring out how to meet regulatory requirements. If you eliminated the state rules (or allowed a seperate "national regulator" like we do for banks) and allowed insurance companies to sell services anywhere...its not like Kaiser would start recruiting customers in Alabama tomorrow.

    Also, a lot of the mid-sized insurers out there that operate in multiple states are things such as BCBS licensees who don't really have the option to expand to other states...so opening up those borders wouldn't do much for any of the firms that are already national or blue licensees.
     
  4. MSchapiro

    MSchapiro Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,097
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    It does create the potential for national insurance companies and remove barriers.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see a few upstarts target younger consumers with lower healthcare needs and a higher bar of service.

    How will they overcome these problems? I'm not sure, but that will be their competitive advantage. Maybe target urbanites and contract with one brand of urgent care centers and one hospital network.
     
    1 person likes this.
  5. idfnl

    idfnl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,339
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    VA
    

    Point agreed, but what I think you're missing is my point about cost, that software costs a hell of a lot more because of this dynamic.



    Help me understand, don't these insurance companies already operate in this "virtual presence" model? I see cards and they say BCBS Anthem CA, and another says BCBS Care First GA, they are basically the same shit, but with a different name?


    Don't these entities have their own departments within them? IT, HR, accounting, et al. Wouldn't that provide a significant cost savings if aggregated? While you may have licensees, wouldn't it be like banks where they just buy each other up?

    Fundamentally, being allowed to operate across states means cost savings for insurers. I'm not sure I see any argument that dispels this assertion.
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2016
  6. idfnl

    idfnl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,339
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    VA
    

    Unfortunately you expose the need for regulation (ugh). There will be an insurance company that will eventually pop up based on a genetic profile. Dangerous fucking territory.
     
  7. UnFacconable

    UnFacconable Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,172
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    States rights can certainly be blamed for a number of inefficiencies including certainly the delivery of healthcare in this country. People like to say Obamacare is failing and point to the high premiums and the losses sustained by insurers, but what that really means is that without this insurance, individuals would be left holding the bag which I don't think most people would consider a superior outcome.

    There is a lot of complaining about onerous regulations imposed by the federal government, but as a business lawyer I would point the finger squarely at state's rights. In the modern era where technology makes it relatively easy to operate across state lines, complying with the various regulatory regimes of the 50 states is actually far more problematic for many businesses than dealing with (more or less) one set of federal regs.

    I would love to see an expansion of the commerce clause or even a constitutional amendment since most likely our conservative supreme court would not be in favor of such an expansion. This system may have made sense when all business was local in the 1700's but it's anachronistic now.
     
    1 person likes this.
  8. Piobaire

    Piobaire Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    50,191
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Location:
    In My Douchemobile
    I actually think the Constitution and States' Rights gets in the way of many things that should be public goods in the US. Primary and secondary education is another thing off the top of my head that gets hurt. Also, Medicaid (state ran programs for medically indigent) is such a duplication of services. Imagine how many pencil pushers are doing the same damn thing in every state.

    OTOH Canada's healthcare is per province so I guess it can get done that way but Canada has far fewer subdivisions. Also, the feds tell the provinces the minimums that a plan has to provide.
     
    1 person likes this.
  9. idfnl

    idfnl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,339
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    VA
    

    State's rights were always a social construct. As an economic construct it was a failure the instant the word was coined. Beyond all the "You Es Ay" rah rah bullshit, countries are formed for economic cooperation between peoples. The first time state's rights were expressed as economic regulation is the moment it started to benefit lawyers and not the greater good of the nation.

    A constitutional amendment? LOL. This country needs to split to make that possible again. In my view, it's the best way to progress the experiment. What I thought was 2 territories 10 years ago is 3 today... west coast, middle and eastern. It's clear there is too much social divergence to progress. If this was a corporation, it would spinoff. Same shit.
     
  10. brokencycle

    brokencycle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,574
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Location:
    The Old North State
    
    Couldn't states rights also be credited with benefits that may not have come about otherwise? As a admittedly weak example, think about incorporation - many companies incorporate in Delaware. They do that in large part because of the courts there, and as a result the judges are widely considered experts in the field.
     
    2 people like this.
  11. Master-Classter

    Master-Classter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,463
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I can't believe how much SWHC has dropped. It was around 29 and I started picking it up around 24 and have been buying down to 22, sort of assumed it was going to go down but wow, it's like -30% or more and doesn't seem to be slowing down. I was assuming this was an overreaction and some sort of terrorist attack, or legislature, or anything really and this'll bounce right back etc. I haven't been following the platforms but is Trump very anti-gun? Was Hillary anti gun so this was people buying in anticipation, or was she pro gun so this was seen as a positive potential?
     
  12. brokencycle

    brokencycle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,574
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Location:
    The Old North State
    

    It appears to be because people assumed there would be a huge rush of gun buys when Hillary was elected. Now that won't happen as people aren't worried about it. Though trump isn't exactly a strong gun rights guy.
     
  13. MSchapiro

    MSchapiro Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,097
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    I believe that's already illegal. I think the movie GATTACA had something to do with it.


    Also states rights have their advantages. I don't want everywhere run like NJ.

     
  14. Piobaire

    Piobaire Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    50,191
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Location:
    In My Douchemobile
    

    There's good and bad in most things. I do think in terms of nationwide public good type issues it's often been a barrier.
     
  15. otc

    otc Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,202
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    

    The blues are their own special breed. They all have their territory but they share their service network. So if a company goes to care first ga but has an office in Indiana, the Indiana employees will essentially be using anthem's services (and some of that revenue will then change hands from care first to anthem). But the blues are a special case... They can't really expand to compete with each other directly (and on national accounts, whoever covers the headquarters gets to bid, unless the local blue cedes it to a larger blue), and a new entrant couldn't just join them. If someone like Kaiser or Harvard pilgrim wants to enter new markets, they have to actually get a network because the blues won't just let them in.

    As far as efficiencies go... That is unrelated and really, it applies everywhere that regional firms exist. Law firms, banks, and grocery chains all have HR people and yet stay independent of each other. And of course, some do (there are plenty of big healthcare mergers).
     
    2 people like this.
  16. jbarwick

    jbarwick Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,970
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    The insurance companies have a network of physicians that agree to a specific discount on their services for accepting patients with that coverage. I think BCBS tends to have a narrower network due to the discounts they ask physicians to take. I feel the trend in the marketplace will be for hospital systems within specific markets to offer insurance products with a super narrow network, i.e. only use their services for everything. In return the purchaser of these products are managed to keep costs down and the product is offered at a price that the larger companies cannot compete with. This is the ultimate narrow network. Current narrow networks are too broad to drive down costs in any meaningful way. Somehow you have to align physicians with the cost savings of these networks but physicians don't care unless somehow they get a large return from this. For instance, would a physician care if they got an extra $2,500 for sharing in the savings? Probably not which is an issue with these products.

    I will be honest, I do not know what opening up state borders will do to offer competitive coverage. I see too many other issues that you have to fix first. The whole industry is archaic.
     
    2 people like this.
  17. idfnl

    idfnl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,339
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    VA
    

    Yea, I kinda like pumping my own gas but thanks.
     
  18. idfnl

    idfnl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,339
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    VA
    

    Isn't fixing this shit system sort of the point of the exercise? We can't just keep this up, my healthcare goes up almost every year and the benefits of it keep getting shittier. Eventually you gotta strip it down and start again.

    Case in point, my company changed insurers a year ago and I went to the doctor exactly 1 time all year, here comes a bill for $90 (my portion). The year before it was $35 a visit. Price stayed the same. I pay all that money all year for insurance, use the fucker once, and still get ganked for 90 bucks?

    The surreal thing about this healthcare monster is that nobody knows what anything costs. Who designed this aimless consumption of a service having no clue what the price is? I can only assume it's doctors, who I've come to understand are pretty damn greedy and so much more focused on income than I had previously understood.

    That doctor visit was because I hosed up my shoulder on a ladder and it was MRI this and MRI that, I called to find out what it cost and they wanted $700 out of pocket. I said fuck that, and in a few weeks my shoulder was fine.
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2016
  19. GreenFrog

    GreenFrog Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,235
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Lock the corrupt doctors up!!!

    :censored:
     
  20. idfnl

    idfnl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,339
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    VA
    It was asked a couple of days ago why tech was down, its pretty straightforward:

    http://www.zdnet.com/article/trumps-ascendancy-to-the-white-house-could-severely-maul-indian-it/

    Silicon Valley has been lobbying and winning increasing the numbers of H1B visas for about 2 decades now. Its supplanting qualified full time workers with these cheap replacements, boosting profits.

    Being in IT for 20 years, this H1B program has had a significant effect. It's driven down wages, and introduced this huge workforce of coders which are less and less skilled every year. Now most of them have fake college degrees, paid people to pass exams for them, and have cheated their way into US companies for guys like me to weed out.

    20 years ago we saw some serious talent, they were really impressive programmers, but over time the talent pool went to 0, and we're getting the 5th and 6th string. I've fired 50 or 60 off projects over the last several years alone and their skills keep getting worse and worse. There are definitely some talented programmers in the bunch that I hold on to, but there are way too many unskilled guys sneaking into this program.

    Also, a long time ago there was a shortage of talent, but that was resolved quickly as talented kids saw $ in computer science degrees and went in full force. There hasn't been a shortage in a long time, and this program is unnecessary in its current form. Today, its just a way to replace more expensive full time workers with this army of temps.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by