United Health stock continues slow decline

[Are_grits_groceries]

From Daily Kos:
cls180's diary ::

An interesting thing happened on the way to the bank, however. Since Dec. 22, United Health, Aetna and all the big HMO players have been on a steady decline. Since I trade stocks for income, I keep up on this stuff. When the healthcare stocks hit their 52-week highs, I didn't think it was because the health care legislation was such a great deal for insurance stock. They were rising because the uncertainty was gone. The stock market hates uncertainty above all else.

However, since before the vote, health care stocks have been marching downhill. I doubt it is because of end of year profit taking, their isn't that much profit to take since these stocks are so beaten down from their all time highs. Traders are not stupid and I think they likely came to the same conclusion as Kevin Drum over at Mother Jones:

==========================================================================================================================
"Community rating" is wonkspeak for a requirement that health insurers cover everyone at the same price, regardless of preexisting conditions or health status. James Surowiecki says it makes private health insurance unnecessary:

'Congress’s support for community rating and universal access doesn’t fit well with its insistence that health-care reform must rely on private insurance companies. After all, measuring risk, and setting prices accordingly, is the raison d’être of a health-insurance company....Congress is effectively making private insurers unnecessary, yet continuing to insist that we can’t do without them.

The truth is that we could do just fine without them: an insurance system with community rating and universal access has no need of private insurers.'

I agree, and it's one of the reasons that, warts and all, I support the current healthcare reform legislation so strongly. My take is that community rating at the national level can eventually lead to only two outcomes: (a) the end of private health insurance completely or (b) the transformation of private insurers into regulated public utilities. Roughly speaking, Option A is what you see in Canada or Sweden, Option B is what you see in Germany and the Netherlands. I'd prefer the former, but the regulated utility model works OK too, and it's hard to see how you avoid one or the other in the long run.
=========================================================================================================================
So if you're not a believer that this health reform bill is going to make a difference, think again. The market is telling us otherwise.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/31/113834/86

No wonder they want to kill it completely. I wonder if this trend will hold overall. The stocks will probably still gyrate as the bill moves forward, but I wonder about the long-term activity.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Insurers Making Less Profit Does Not Mean Lower Costs For Consumers

There's nothing in the bill to drive down costs - we already pay 50% more, per person, for health care vs. any other country, and the rate of increase continues to be staggering with no end in sight. It's good that the insurers will profit less off of the misfortune of others, but health care will continue to be unaffordable for many, and a huge burden on US business being competitive in the world economy.

[notesdev]

2. Their stocks rose on the deal

they have been retreating on the news that as a whole, the people of this country HATE the bill and don't want it to pass into law.

[Sukie]

3. Baloney. n/t