REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Did healthcare stocks go up after the HCR bill passed?

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Sunday, April 4, 2010 22:33
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1070
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, March 26, 2010 2:21 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I was really wondering about that... After all, it became a truism that health insurance and pharma stocks ZOOMED up after the bill passed because they smelled huge profits in the future.

Well, I looked up a bunch of stocks on the following website, and it turned out to be NOT TRUE.

http://finance.yahoo.com/charts

Having looked up Wellpoint, Cigna, Aetna, GSK, Baxter, and a number of other health-care related stocks, I found that most of them "blipped" a little bit upward the day of the vote.

BUT.

The operative term is a LITTLE bit. They have not reached, or just barely reached, their 2-year-ago levels, and are still below their 5-year-ago levels.... some of them just half of what they were. So I'm not seeing a killing (so to speak!) on the stock market, nor am I seeing any aniticipation of huge profits in the future.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 6:57 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I was really wondering about that... After all, it became a truism that health insurance and pharma stocks ZOOMED up after the bill passed because they smelled huge profits in the future.

Well, I looked up a bunch of stocks on the following website, and it turned out to be NOT TRUE.

http://finance.yahoo.com/charts

Having looked up Wellpoint, Cigna, Aetna, GSK, Baxter, and a number of other health-care related stocks, I found that most of them "blipped" a little bit upward the day of the vote.

BUT.

The operative term is a LITTLE bit. They have not reached, or just barely reached, their 2-year-ago levels, and are still below their 5-year-ago levels.... some of them just half of what they were. So I'm not seeing a killing (so to speak!) on the stock market, nor am I seeing any aniticipation of huge profits in the future.



Comparing to 2-YEAR-AGO levels??? Wow, not very good with the numbers, are we??
I suspect you did not make a big wad of cash this week like the rest of us who can add. I suppose you might even be one of those liberals who kept their money in the market for all of 2008 and Jan/Feb of 2009, eh?
Geez, when you guys don't have the generous governor of AURaptor to maintain your direction, you really wander off the path. You likely have no clue how much he helps you.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 9:30 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Poor little Jewel--so mired in one mentality it has to come out in every discussion, thereby ignoring anything substantive. It only makes for one more voice adding to the concept that the Conservatives here can't address issues but rather turn to hurling slurs. Too bad.

Thank you, Sig, I had wondered the same thing. Their levels FIVE years ago is valid to a degree; more important to ME is the fact that they blipped up for a short time, then settled down. All kinds of things in society cause stocks to go up and down; a long-term rise or fall might be indicative of something, a few days' worth, nothing.

There's also the possibility that people are making the most of it while profits are high (and will no doubt continue to climb just as they have until the bill is actually implemented, if not after--given bits and pieces of it will be implemented over time). Why shouldn't people want to jump on an upswinging bandwagon while it's safe, before any limitations on profits have been imposed?

At any rate, thanx for posting the information, as I said, I've been wondering too.


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 10:36 AM

FREMDFIRMA



Niki, just to make you aware of this, JSF here is a previously admitted, and already outed, sock puppet of Auraptor - not that it isn't really obvious already, but just makin sure you know that.

Just part of his little game to make him look like less the lone loon by adding a phony echo chamber to back up his own bullshit.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 9:44 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Poor little Jewel--so mired in one mentality it has to come out in every discussion, thereby ignoring anything substantive.

I had wondered the same thing.



For those who are obviously not paying attention but actually want to know the answer, I checked out the quotes for the above mentioned shares.
I will use the quotes from 1 March 2010, which I think was the announcement by Obama that they would resort to the nuclear option (reconcilliation) to force through Obamacare. I waited until 4 Mar to change my funds, but it may have been before 1 March the announcement was made.
It was voted on Sunday 21 March.
GSK: 1 Mar @37.03, 17 Mar @37.80, 18 Mar @39.22, 22 Mar @39.01. From 37.03 to 39.22 is 2.2 gain, or 5.8% over this 3 week period, equating to 101% APR gain, aka profit.
Aetna: 1 Mar @30.32, 22 Mar @34.64, 23 Mar @34.99 for 4.67 gain or 15.4% /3wk, and 267% APR gain.
Cigna: 1 Mar @34.58, 22 Mar @37.28, for 2.7 and 8.1% /3wk, and 139% APR gain.
Wellpoint: 1 Mar @62.06, 19 Mar @65.07, for 3 gain or 4.5% /3wk and 77% APR gain.
Baxter: 1 Mar @57.27, 22Mar @59.67, for 2.4 gain or 4.2% /3wk and 72% APR gain.

Nope, 101%, 267%, 139%, 77%, 72% gains, no profiteering going on here, move along now, never mind that man behind the curtain, no profitmaking here, that's just normal, happens all the time.....insignificant even!!! Nothing to see here....
Right.
Of course, spelling it all out for those not paying attention takes time, which will of course be wasted because you will ignore the facts in favor of your preconcieved conclusions which have no bearing in reality.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 5:34 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Nope, 101%, 267%, 139%, 77%, 72% gains, no profiteering going on here, move along now, never mind that man behind the curtain, no profitmaking here, that's just normal, happens all the time.....insignificant even!!! Nothing to see here....


I don't think you know what profiteering is. Raising prices to exploit a tempory condition (such as $10/gallon gas right after a hurricane or padding the bill for delivering needed ammunition during a war), that is profiteering. But if a company, because of changing conditions, finds its services in greater demand and the value of the corporation goes up as a result of that demand, that is not profiteering.

The Health Care Law caused some related stocks to rise and more will rise as the details of the law become apparent. Stock price is not a measure of profit, but rather a measure of the value of the company. Because they will see more business, their value is greater, thus the stock price will rise.

Likewise many companies are going to see their values fall. As the cost of Health Care is evaluated companies are forced to restate their projected earnings, some to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Their stock will suffer for it...unless they can offset the costs either through higher prices to consumers or my cutting costs (aka layoffs, factory closing, outsourcing). Neither prospect is good for the American people (but at least their anti-depressants will be covered...)

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 6:27 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


JSF: The profiteering is done by stock traders like you. That is different from the profits taken by the pharmas.

I know you (ie Rappy) make your living out of a dollar rise or fall in stocks here or there... and if you buy and sell on margin you can make HUGE amounts of money. (Which BTW is IMHO the most destructive way to ... ahem!... "earn" a living, and should be banned. AFA I'm concerned, stock traders, speculators, and bankers destroy an economy's health.) I was simply pointing out there was no historic rise or fall in stocks to go along with the historic bill.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 7:27 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

JSF here is a previously admitted, and already outed, sock puppet of Auraptor
Ahhh, thank you Frem. That sock puppet thing, as I've said before, totally confuses me, and it's good to know who I'm "talking" to. I had noticed the similarities, but as you said, it worked in making me think he wasn't the only loon around.

Sign,
Quote:

Which BTW is IMHO the most destructive way to ... ahem!... "earn" a living
Right on; I agree with every word.


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 7:52 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Poor little Jewel--so mired in one mentality it has to come out in every discussion, thereby ignoring anything substantive.

I had wondered the same thing.



For those who are obviously not paying attention but actually want to know the answer, I checked out the quotes for the above mentioned shares.
I will use the quotes from 1 March 2010, which I think was the announcement by Obama that they would resort to the nuclear option (reconcilliation) to force through Obamacare.



And for those who are REALLY obviously not paying attention (except to FauxNews), "reconciliation" is NOT "the nuclear option". I'd honestly expect the Republicans to know better than this, and not to be so stupid and/or easily misled that they would fall into this idiocy. The "nuclear option" that they speak of - THEY coined the phrase, by the way - was the idea of doing away with the filibuster altogether. It was something they were threatening to do when they had control of Congress. And, just like reconciliation, they of course were FOR it before they were AGAINST it.



Quote:

I waited until 4 Mar to change my funds, but it may have been before 1 March the announcement was made.
It was voted on Sunday 21 March.
GSK: 1 Mar @37.03, 17 Mar @37.80, 18 Mar @39.22, 22 Mar @39.01. From 37.03 to 39.22 is 2.2 gain, or 5.8% over this 3 week period, equating to 101% APR gain, aka profit.
Aetna: 1 Mar @30.32, 22 Mar @34.64, 23 Mar @34.99 for 4.67 gain or 15.4% /3wk, and 267% APR gain.
Cigna: 1 Mar @34.58, 22 Mar @37.28, for 2.7 and 8.1% /3wk, and 139% APR gain.
Wellpoint: 1 Mar @62.06, 19 Mar @65.07, for 3 gain or 4.5% /3wk and 77% APR gain.
Baxter: 1 Mar @57.27, 22Mar @59.67, for 2.4 gain or 4.2% /3wk and 72% APR gain.

Nope, 101%, 267%, 139%, 77%, 72% gains, no profiteering going on here, move along now, never mind that man behind the curtain, no profitmaking here, that's just normal, happens all the time.....insignificant even!!! Nothing to see here....
Right.
Of course, spelling it all out for those not paying attention takes time, which will of course be wasted because you will ignore the facts in favor of your preconcieved conclusions which have no bearing in reality.



Maybe you SHOULD "spell it all out", then, because I'm confused. On the one hand, we have a conservative here admitting that he made tidy profits when healthcare stocks rose. On the flip-side, we have his alter-ego (Rappy) arguing that because the healthcare reform bill passed, there will BE no private corporations in just a few short years. Seems odd their stocks would go up on the news of their death sentence being announced, doesn't it?

So what am I missing here?




"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 8:56 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Sigh...they still do it, tho', don't they? And their "base" buys it whole cloth, "I know it's true, 'cuz I saw it on TV".

Silly Mike, how can you expect their base to "not be so stupid and/or easily misled"? The majority of them don't think seriously about politics, they just mimic what they hear, Wind is a prime example.

Where do you think all those horrendous numbers about what Republicans believe came from? One source=believing that source implicitly.


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 1:02 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Sigh...they still do it, tho', don't they? And their "base" buys it whole cloth, "I know it's true, 'cuz I saw it on TV".

Silly Mike, how can you expect their base to "not be so stupid and/or easily misled"? The majority of them don't think seriously about politics, they just mimic what they hear, Wind is a prime example.

Where do you think all those horrendous numbers about what Republicans believe came from? One source=believing that source implicitly.




Well, I'd still like it spelled out. If healthcare stocks rose, it would seem that investors see healthcare reform as a solid investment, and the industry as a good bet. Yet if we're to believe the hyperbolic, hyperventilating rhetoric espoused by some, they'd have us believe that those very companies have been made illegal or illegitimate with the stroke of a pen. So its confusing to me - did Obama outlaw insurance companies, or did he hand the American people to them on a platter? 'Cause I'm not real sure how it can be BOTH...




"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, April 4, 2010 12:56 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

Nope, 101%, 267%, 139%, 77%, 72% gains, no profiteering going on here, move along now, never mind that man behind the curtain, no profitmaking here, that's just normal, happens all the time.....insignificant even!!! Nothing to see here....


I don't think you know what profiteering is.


From Webster's 3rd New International, 1976:
Profiteer: 1. One who makes what is considered an unreasonable profit.
Although this conforms to my meaning, you may substitute profitmaking instead. I am aware of your meaning, and that was not the one I intended to be inferred.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, April 4, 2010 7:24 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Mike, look at it this way: The fiscal impact on health insurance companies will take a long time to show their effect; in the meantime, they'll do their best to increase their profits by whatever means to offset the coming reduction. They've already been doing it before the bill was even passed; raising premiums, kicking out the unprofitable, etc.

So short-term investors (you know those I mean!) are probably jumping in while the profits go up for shareholders, and will bail when the effects start to be felt and profits go down. Jump in now, stocks go up, make a killing and get out before they go down. Should make sense to any investor, shouldn't it?

Not that your fears might well prove to be real, as they're already hunting for loopholes and the bill isn't a good way to keep them in check.


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, April 4, 2010 8:28 AM

ANTIMASON


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I was really wondering about that... After all, it became a truism that health insurance and pharma stocks ZOOMED up after the bill passed because they smelled huge profits in the future.

Well, I looked up a bunch of stocks on the following website, and it turned out to be NOT TRUE.

http://finance.yahoo.com/charts

Having looked up Wellpoint, Cigna, Aetna, GSK, Baxter, and a number of other health-care related stocks, I found that most of them "blipped" a little bit upward the day of the vote.

BUT.

The operative term is a LITTLE bit. They have not reached, or just barely reached, their 2-year-ago levels, and are still below their 5-year-ago levels.... some of them just half of what they were. So I'm not seeing a killing (so to speak!) on the stock market, nor am I seeing any aniticipation of huge profits in the future.




that's interesting, i wasnt aware of that. since the bill's past, i haven't been following it all that closely lately(to be perfectly honest). but my thought would be that there's got to be some short term gain to be made, just through the mandates. but eventually the money to cover pre-existing care will have to be passed down as a consequence right? i cant imagine this lowering peoples premiums. most importantly though, the bill didnt deal with the root of the 'crisis', which was cost and affordability, by addressing the horrible inflation in the market. and it will just get worse with the expansion of public subsidies. i mean price controls have never been efficient or productive. we all know that being covered, and actually seeing a phsyician and getting the help you need, are not neccessariy synonomous.

i think the system is going to become unmanageble. the effects of this bill are not going to be pretty.. at some point people in government will point to this looming mess, declare it a failure of the private sector, and then try to assume control and nationalize the market. in that case, as time goes the stocks will respond to the inevitability of government takeover and begin to tank. just my opinion though- im certainly no expert

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, April 4, 2010 10:33 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by antimason:
Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I was really wondering about that... After all, it became a truism that health insurance and pharma stocks ZOOMED up after the bill passed because they smelled huge profits in the future.

Well, I looked up a bunch of stocks on the following website, and it turned out to be NOT TRUE.

http://finance.yahoo.com/charts

Having looked up Wellpoint, Cigna, Aetna, GSK, Baxter, and a number of other health-care related stocks, I found that most of them "blipped" a little bit upward the day of the vote.

BUT.

The operative term is a LITTLE bit. They have not reached, or just barely reached, their 2-year-ago levels, and are still below their 5-year-ago levels.... some of them just half of what they were. So I'm not seeing a killing (so to speak!) on the stock market, nor am I seeing any aniticipation of huge profits in the future.




that's interesting, i wasnt aware of that.


I didn't really think it would be a news flash for you, but I'll spell it out for you: 2-year-ago levels are practically the all-time high levels for almost the entire market. It would be a very uncommon stock to currently exceed it's all-time high valuation, since the market is still around 70% of it's all time high, and it has about 40% of growth to return to those levels.
Making any comparisons based upon this measure lacks any validity.
For 5-year-ago levels, attempts at comparison are laughable. It was an entirely different cycle, the entire market has gone up 50%, then dropped 60%, then gained 100%. The market has a completely different composition, and any comparison to stock performance from one of these cycles to another lacks validity as well.

To make an equally invalid comparison, try comparing it to one year ago levels, or 8 year ago levels, or even 9 year ago levels.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Trump, convicted of 34 felonies
Thu, November 28, 2024 03:56 - 44 posts
Thread of Trump Appointments / Other Changes of Scenery...
Thu, November 28, 2024 03:51 - 48 posts
Where Will The American Exodus Go?
Thu, November 28, 2024 03:25 - 1 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Wed, November 27, 2024 23:34 - 4775 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:47 - 7510 posts
What's wrong with conspiracy theories
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:06 - 21 posts
Ellen Page is a Dude Now
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:05 - 238 posts
Bald F*ck MAGICALLY "Fixes" Del Rio Migrant Invasion... By Releasing All Of Them Into The U.S.
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:03 - 41 posts
Why does THUGR shit up the board by bumping his pointless threads?
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:43 - 32 posts
Joe Rogan: Bro, do I have to sue CNN?
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:41 - 7 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, November 27, 2024 16:36 - 4845 posts
Biden will be replaced
Wed, November 27, 2024 15:06 - 13 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL