12/21/2024    Joseph Borreggine, DPM

Assassination of UHC CEO ( Paul Kesselman, DPM)

The assassin who needlessly shot the UHC CEO did
so for what reason I do not personally know since
I have not read his manifesto, but I can only
surmise that it was based on corporate greed and
corruption. I have not delved deeply into this
that much, but from what the media has reported he
committed this heinous crime because he opined
that a family member did not receive the care that
they needed due to the denial of services by UHC.
I believe that was the primary concern and the
rooted disgruntlement of the previously mentioned
corporate greed and corruption.

This individual made a judgment to make an example
of the CEO so that others in the same line of
business would be on notice that things need to
change. I am sure they do, but this was not the
way to do it. I understand that many applaud what
he did and are supporting him with defense fund
support along with touting their opinions on
social media. They are sorely mistaken as far as I
am concerned. I also disagree with certain DC
politicians who say that murdering someone in cold
blood is wrong, but then go on to say that this
situation was coming one way or another. This
rhetoric is also uncalled for since it does
nothing, but fuel the fire of discontent.

But if we dig deeper into how the wick was lit
that started this fire, then we have to go back to
the passing of "Obamacare" back in 2008. There is
verbiage in that law that states "Community
Rating" and " Guaranteed issue". These policies
look good on paper, but in reality were the
impetus to corporate greed and corruption. Yes,
these policies eliminated the unfair and biased
issue of "pre-existing condition" riders that were
baked into insurance policies that did not allow a
beneficiary to receive benefits for these ongoing
health conditions which led to increased morbidity
and mortality. There was also the removal of the
lifetime benefit caps which certainly reduced the
tremendous financial liability on beneficiaries
that occurred with traumatic and terminal illness.
This was all good until it was not.

These policies unfortunately created tremendous
profits for insurance companies that had never
seen before. Think about it, "Community Rating"
leveled the insurance premium that everyone paid
regardless of age. That is the 20-year-old healthy
individual who rarely sees a doctor is paying the
same premium as a much older individual with
multiple medical issues. Again, sounds good on
paper, but in reality, it was a financial ticking
time bomb. The ability to collect these same
premiums regardless of age or health status
increased the coffers of the insurance companies
to secure tremendous profits which quelled the
losses created by eliminating pre-existing
condition riders and restrictions on lifetime
benefits.

The "Guaranteed Issue" policy states "Guaranteed
issue is provided to applicants regardless of
health, race, age, or income status". This was a
troublesome issue for most trying to obtain health
insurance, but once it was truly enforced
insurance companies could no longer limit who
could have health insurance. Again, this is good
on paper, but this gave insurance companies the
ability to overcompensate for this requirement by
precipitously increasing their premiums. Insurance
premiums are much higher than over 20 years ago
and will not drop anytime soon.

So, those who supported a type of government-run
healthcare and are now mad at what the result is
need to think again about allowing the federal
government to be allowed in anything because the
result is always the same. Look at Medicare and
Social Security and the trillions in the deficit
they are both in currently. The insolvency of
these programs was predicted to occur in 2026, but
now it looks like with the planned printing of
money from the U.S. Treasury this will not occur
until 2039.

Joseph S. Borreggine, DPM, Fort Myers, FL

There are no more messages in this thread.