Hell hath no fury like a former liberal woman.
If at all. I’m a firm believer in compensation that based on market rate, industry, job position, work experience, and finally both time and performance on the job. I don’t believe in cherry picking one industry you designate as “too rich” or “evil and greedy” as a means to then use the tax code for market engineering by the government.
For instance, you’ll hear a lot from liberals about how the executives at health insurance companies are overpaid and shouldn’t be making that much while people suffer. Of course, they ignore the facts of profit margins and actual compensation package details when making these claims. But they are liberals so for them using facts is me having too high of an expectation. As Trying To Grok has noted in a couple posts, you’ll never hear anything from liberals for the government to tax, regulate or engineer the market-dictated salaries or profits of Democrat-aligned companies such as Google. Hmmm, funny how that goes.
But let’s take a look at who’s making what in these industries. For the purpose of this example I’ll use Cigna since they are a major company in the health insurance market that’s come under fire during the topic of healthcare reform.
First, what were the salaries of the CEOs of Cigna vs. Google.
- Edward Hanway, CEO Cigna - 2008 Total Compensation: $12,236,740 (including a base salary of $1,142,885)
- Eric Schmidt, CEO Google – 2008 Total Compensation: A base salary of $1; and other compensation of $508,763; Oh, and let’s not forget his stock options in Google which have allowed him to amass $5.5 BILLION in his past compensation package of 12.5 million shares. Schmidt currently no longer accepts stock options in Google, but he’s set as one of the world’s richest men.
It’s not that Hanway hasn’t amassed some degree of wealth over the years as Cigna’s CEO. The last few years his compensations have been $22 million in 2007 and $15.2 million in 2006.
But the issue is IF you’re going to start taxing executive pay, which executives do you tax? What industries do you tax – the ones that accrue the most wealth from the economy? Who gets to make those taxation classification decisions? Why do they get to make those decisions? And since those decisions will be subjective in manner anyways, isn’t that a reason for them not to be made at all (and thus salaries shouldn’t be engineered by the government)?
I mean if we just look at the years between 2006 – 2008, CEO Schmidt of Google has a wealth that far surpasses even the majority of companies in this world. He certainly seems like he can afford to be taxed more on his wealth more so than Hanway.
But a liberal may say Cigna profits too much from their own industry. Well, what about market share – shouldn’t that show how much Cigna is really the one taking America to the cleaners. Ummm, not so much.
- Google has a near majority in some of the services it provides. In the industry of Search Engine Marketing, Google owns around 70% of the SEM market share. SEM is roughly around a $20 billion industry in terms of revenue, set to move upwards of $26 – $30 billion by 2013.
- Cigna on the other hand covers around 11.7 million people with its health insurance plans. If you figure 165 million people are currently under a form of private insurance, 11.7 million of those people equate to around 7% of the industry market share.
And to those liberals who say that healthcare is a right. Well, Cigna doesn’t offer healthcare. It offers a risk policy aka insurance. And a service of providing an insurance policy should not be held to a higher moral ground in service retention than a search engine’s services. Sorry, I have a heart – I just don’t let it bleed for unnecessary, illogical sentiments.
Also, let’s look at net profit margins to see how much of America’s hard-earned dollars is being hoarded between Cigna vs. Google:
- For 2008, Cigna’s net profit margin was 1.51% (profiting only $292 million out of $19.1 billion in revenue)
- And guess what Google’s was – 19.39% (profiting more than $4.3 BILLION out of $21.8 BILLION in revenue)
Gee, it sure seems like Google is a dominant monopoly with more greed to be taxed. 70% vs. 7% market share? 1.51% vs. 19.35% profit margins? Makes someone wonder why liberals are fussing so much over companies like Cigna when they could get more $$ for their tax out of companies like Google.
The ranting and raving of a woman formally brainwashed under the liberal agenda. Through investigation, commentary and sarcasm about government, this woman is breaking free of the hypocritical liberal party that tries to manipulate women into believing only they can represent women’s rights. Get informed, get free, get Un-Liberaled! This blog does not endorse any particular candidate or party - although if I did, I most likely wouldn’t endorse a liberal candidate. For instance, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) or as I like to call her Smancy Pelotox would not get my vote. Comprende? Good. Hope you enjoy the rants! :)
Sarah
December 8th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Well done.
czander
December 9th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Several organizations demonstrated outside the annual shareholders meeting of United Health Group the largest HMO in the U.S. to “decry the gap between need and greed.” United Health Group CEO William McGuire, and his replacement Stephen Helmsley, as well as other Minnesota HMO executives, took billions in stock options. McGuire was the highest-paid CEO in Minnesota history, with stock options totaling $2 billion. Helmsley, who replaced McGuire, has stock options in excess of $750 million. In 2009 Helmsley’s compensation came to $57,000 an hour. McGuire and other executives who were ousted in October, 2006, are under criminal investigation due to stock option backdating fraud. According to Herbert Sacks past President of the American Psychiatric Association, when asked where does this money come from, he replied “from the denial and interruption of…patient care.”
Not only are CEO salaries excessive but so are their Senior VPs’, VPs’, and board members. For example, in 2007, the top 6 health plan boards paid themselves a whopping $277,998,793 .
Estimates of the compensation cost for health care CEO’s and their executives total about $7 to 10 billion a year. If their pay was reduced by 80 percent it would cover health insurance for 500,000 families enrolled in a government insurance program at $10,000 per year per family. Also, if health care was nationalized the administrative savings alone would be enough to provide health care coverage for the one million uninsured in America. One third of every dollar spent on health care goes to administrative overhead and half of that goes to executives. According to the Security and Exchange Commission between 2000 and 2007 the 10 largest publicly traded health insurance corporations increased their profits 428 percent from $2.8 billion to $12.9 billion, as premiums increased 87 percent.
Health care institutions have lost the confidence of a public that once valued their altruistic mission and many maintain that executive pay is a significant part of the health care problem in America. For example, Patrick Soon-Shiong the CEO of APP Pharmaceuticals stepped down as CEO in the spring of 2008, but the former surgeon still held 83 percent of the company’s shares. In July, he agreed to sell APP to a German firm. The sale finalized two months later for an initial $3.7 billion cash payment, as a result Soon-Shiong’s personal fortune gain $3 billion in 2008.
unliberaledwoman
December 16th, 2009 at 11:14 am
I’d like to see some sources on these materials, czander. Can any of this information be cited to Google Finance or actual annual reporting? Also, I have no problem with health insurance companies making profits. Again, don’t be a typical liberal and solely look at profits. Healthcare services and their demand has increased dramatically over the last decade, so it’s no surprise then that companies offering health insurance would also see increase in profits. You wouldn’t need to be Milton Friedman to guess that doctors, medical institutions like hospitals, pharmaceuticals and medical device industries have also seen profit increases. But healthcare insurance companies also employee millions of people – not just in the US but abroad. Those massive profits you site “the 428% increase” go to paying for employee salaries, like the near 40,000 that work for Cigna alone. Also, I believe your information on healthcare spending is way off and highly inaccurate. Perhaps you need to read this informative report http://onlyaliberal.com/blog/2009/10/opposing-transactions-or-profits/. Actually for every dollar spent on health insurance, the insurance companies keep THREE CENTS.
jerome
December 16th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
So, according to czander’s figure of $10,000 per year per family, for every $10,000 our government wastes by shifting tax dollars into special interest and pork projects, one person in America is denied health care. I’d like to know what the liberals have to say about this little fact…….
cabinetmeeting.net » Blog Archive » Awesome article
December 16th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
[...] Google vs. Cigna – What Executives Should We Really Be Taxing? [...]
Alin_S
February 5th, 2010 at 11:27 am
I have United Healthcare insurance, and I love it. They paid for my surgery when I broke my ankle and for the surgery I had to have to repair a faulty upper GI/stomach valve. I had ankle surgery a couple of days after breaking it. I had the upper GI surgery a few weeks after meeting with the doctor, because it was at UCLA and as you can expect they are pretty busy. Looks like the system works, and this “evil” insurance company took care of the payments just as contracted. Because after all, that’s all insurance is – a contract for mitigating risk of personal financial loss. Here is a question: how much can we expect to pay for an MRI? Those machines are expensive to buy and operate, and nobody would buy and operate them if not for a profit. Since we pay for coverage for these types of procedures which are expensive, it is only expected that insurance premiums would go up. But the people want the latest technologies and procedures and at the same time expect costs to stay low. It’s either a lack of education, ignorance, or inability to understand how the real world works.
Alin_S
February 5th, 2010 at 11:35 am
One more thing: Stop with the hate and envy on executive pay.
If the company can afford to pay it, then who are you to tell them what they should do with it? We don’t need to nationalize anything, we should provide funds that people can use to purchase insurance. This is what we do with food stamps; I don’t see anyone clamoring to take over food production so that everyone can have free food.
donzi12234567
May 26th, 2010 at 1:27 pm
You’ve got to be kidding me. The grand larceny, greed and sheer lack of moral code inherit in the US medical insurance industry is literally heart stopping. Thank you all readers for providing the real facts. I am a middle aged woman, in good health, healthy family history, no pre-existing conditions. CIGNA just yanked my one year contract up $150 a month to help out their starving CEO. I’m at $650 a month with a $2,500 deductible. In shopping around to all the weasels alone and w/an agent, the best alternative $550. I have worked 20 years in the nonprofit sector helping people and want to know when I die that I brought some good into this world that was not self serving. I don’t care how many guilt donations these guys make, it doesn’t offset the tragedies and deaths they are directly responsible for.
Anarchist Perspective
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:47 am
“For instance, you’ll hear a lot from liberals about how the executives at health insurance companies are overpaid and shouldn’t be making that much while people suffer. Of course, they ignore the facts of profit margins and actual compensation package details when making these claims”
um…profit margins are LOWERED because of employee compensation include executive pay….it executives take less than corporate profits are more…overall the effect is not large but this is pretty basic accounting….
“But a liberal may say Cigna profits too much from their own industry. ”
who? you are arguing with fictitious people.
“Makes someone wonder why liberals are fussing so much over companies like Cigna when they could get more $$ for their tax out of companies like Google.”
again, I have no idea who these “liberals” are because you just refer to some undefined group…
M Rizzo
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:06 am
Wow. Are you for real or what? First – there is a difference between majority and monopoly. Is it googles fault that people like them better than bing, yahoo etc. Does apple have a monopoly because it enjoys nearly an 80% market share in digital music. Same thing goesfor Microsoft in the 80′s. So why pick on health care. No competition. When 1 of every 7 dollars spent in healthcare goesto one man, we have a real problem. BTW thank a liberal for fightig and in some cases dying so you have the right to vote.
M Rizzo
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:11 am
One final thought – cigna and all the rest have right to make A’s much money a they can. Should their profit come at the cost of their customers lives. To deny a claim for, in some cases life saving, better profit margins is despicable.
kegel exercises
May 31st, 2013 at 11:31 pm
I create a leave a response each time I appreciate a article on a website or if I have something to valuable to contribute to the conversation.
It is a result of the sincerness communicated in the article I looked at.
And on this article Google vs. Cigna – What Executives Should We Really Be Taxing?
I do have some questions for
And, if you are posting on additional places, I’d like to keep up with you. Would you list every one of your community pages like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?
| Un-Liberaled Woman. I was actually moved enough to post a thought
you if you do not mind. Could it be only me or do some
of the responses appear like they are left by brain dead individuals?