Skip to main content

View Diary: Health insurance stock prices tell the story loud and clear. (68 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well... (0+ / 0-)

    why do you use the 52-week range? Why not two or three years?

    52 weeks back puts us at a point when insurance investors would have already started worrying about health care reform.

    Look two years back, and you've got Aetna, for instance, at a high of close to $60. It's at $32 and change currently. That's hardly gangbusters.

    My sense is that they've come back some from the lows because they were worried about government competition. But they're still far below where they'd be if there was going to be no new government regulation.

    •  Because Obama wasn't president then. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, blueoasis, Lovo

      Why compare the state of play under Bush to now?

      •  Fair enough... (0+ / 0-)

        I read the stock price picture as the stock prices coming back into a "middle ground" between the pre-Obama heady days and the post-Obama uncertainty days. It gets complicated because of the financial crisis at the end of last year, when all stocks were falling in concert, so I don't think we can clearly attribute strength in the insurers now (vs. at that time) to industry/regulatory issues over general market forces.

        •  When you compare BAC, C, JPM (0+ / 0-)

          to the health insurers, you don't see the drop in September or the rise in Nov and Dec.

          I think that's because they are not responding to the HCR debacle (from our point of view) in the same way.  That makes sense.  Their profit in the government screwing us with mandates and no options is not clear.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site