what ever happened to earning what you have ? this country has been carrying freeloaders for waaayyyy to long now, watch them scatter like rats when it's time to support themselves. just in case....I'm not talking about disabled people, although there are many who play the system as disabled.
and "earning what you have" only makes sense/is fair if we all started at zero. we don't. inequality starts at conception.
some people work hard enough to leave something for their kid's...is that a problem ?
ugh. obviously not. not even close.
let's say you were born into a family of poverty, STILL A US CITIZEN, and no matter how hard you worked, how hard you sacrificed, how many jobs you had to maintain so your kids could merely eat......you think you deserve LESS healthcare than someone who was born into a middle class family who wants for nothing?
The problem is assigning people things they deserve. Sure, everyone "deserves" healthcare. And the guy with a 500k job probably doesn't deserve that any more than the guy who makes only 50k and in most cases only received those opportunities because he was born into a class that allowed him a good education and better opportunities. The problem with the current system is they are forcing healthy people to pay for more than they need, and forcing wealthier people to pay more than their share. If we level the playing field completely then that destroys the American system. Who's going to start the next billion dollar business by working 80 hours a week that eventually employs thousands, if only to have your success taken and given away? The biggest benefactors of the new healthcare system are the insurance companies themselves. This system is a total scam. Only very few actually benefit from it, and those would be anyone who has month or even year long treatments for serious illnesses. Even small doctors offices have to hire a full time employee just to manage healthcare stuff, and that cost is passed on to me. Except my wife's doctor, who just got tired of dealing with it and send us the bill and make us spend weeks or months fighting with insurance to get anything covered. If you find a doctor who accepts cash payments, its a third of what they bill insurance. Instead of paying insurance $1500/month to cover a family of 4, that money can be put towards a cash visit at just a fraction of the cost. And even a major medical incident would only cost $3-5000 without insurance (that insurance would send a bill for 20k for, making you think you got a great deal) that would be covered in just 2 or 3 months of not paying these ridiculous premiums. So why does AHA get the blame for this? Because the costs have skyrocketed in the last 5 or 6 years since it has become a requirement. 6 years ago I had good health insurance I paid out of pocket myself for less than $150. I had $10 copays to see a doctor, which also covered x-rays if I needed it, lab work, etc. Now my single coworkers pay 3-4 times that. Families pay a combined total (employer contribution + employee cost) of $1500 a month, and if you actually use any of your insurance you get another bill for $200 just to see a doctor that sent in some blood work to get examined. In many cases our pharmacy co-pay is HIGHER than the out-of-pocket cost. My copay may be $60, when the medicine is actually only $40! When I complained to our company about this the only response I got was "It's always a good idea to ask for the out of pocket price." This NEVER happened before Obamacare. Its a total mess and a scam and the insurance is the biggest benefactor of the system.
I wasn't arguing the merits of obamacare. I was arguing the merits of health care for all.
I got a little side-tracked with my frustration. The problem with healthcare for all is many end up over paying, or paying for things they don't need or want. AHA even advertises that they need more healthy people to sign up to cover the cost of the unhealthy. How is it fair to make some healthy kid just out of school and probably will see the doctor once every few years pay the same cost as someone who's 70 and smoked their whole life? But without massive tax increases, that is the only plan so far to make it for all. You wouldn't make good drivers pay more to subsidize the cost of bad drivers, why should healthcare be different?
I agree that it's not perfect. I too have my own issues with your example, but that's the sacrfiice you have to make in order for everyone to be covered. does it suck that some tax the system because of their own personal life choices? but if I am forced to make the choice between having to endure folks who tax the system or someone not being able to access care for a condition they got through no fault of their own, I choose the former, every single time.
I would be much happier with a system that helped people with those conditions you were referring to. A sort of "major health issue" with a sort of "no fault of their own" clause. But that isn't the case. The bottom line is we (or I) are forced to pay significantly more than my share. It also affects our healthcare decisions when the costs is still so high even after paying ridiculous premiums that we have to debate weather to wait to take our sick child to the doctor now or try to wait it out.
It might be misguided to blame the high costs on the consumer. Countries where everyone is insured have lower costs.
Terrible, very simpleton argument made all the time.
Let's go with your single payer model. What's the payment rate? The CMS Medicare fee schedule (or worse, States' Medicaid fee Schedule). Do you know how providers feel about said fee schedule? So, let's go there and see what happens. So, yes, you can get to your lower costs on the back of the providers. Problem is, you still haven't solved the (for example) obesity and diabetes epidemic. And the government (as Bloomberg proved) are helpless when it comes to that. So, let's lower the provider fee schedule again.
You have 2 lever points - cost per service and utilization. Government can do nothing about utilization unless you limit benefits or enforce some sort of management scheme (good luck with the gov't doing that). So, have at the cost per service. I'd love to hear gimmesometruth's thoughts about that.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
have a "cadillac" plan with anthem bc/bs, before ACA $395, now $690 Appreciate it bro.
When did you have the $395 premium? You say "before ACA".....if your premium only went up that much over the last few years that is in line with pre-ACA
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
^^^ I agree with you once again often EdsonNascimento up here we all agree that no matter what if you need healthcare you will receive the best no matter your situation. We are all human.
I'm not sure where up here is, but if it's Canada (maybe you meant heaven?), then you are wrong. Why can people buy supplemental plans that get them better access to care? If everyone got the best, that would be unnecessary. No?
Missed this.
I know what you're saying but as a regular citizen up here and the only thing that I get frustrated with sometimes are the wait times meaning (up to 45mins or so in a walk in clinic!) or a few hours at the ER we're doing pretty good. Aside from that if I get sick or injured I will receive an equal level of care as a billionaire would who chose not to buy a private supplemental plan and that care would be outstanding and free.
But, you qualified that. So, the Billionaire who CHOSE not to didn't get access to better care, but what about the Billionaire who did CHOOSE? (not sure the example needed to be a Billionaire, but since that's where you started) You said - everyone receives the BEST no matter the situation. Well, I think with your qualified statement you just proved your hypothesis 100% wrong.
what supplemental plans are available in Canada? as far as I know, you can't. the same basic services are not allowed to be paid for. however, if you are in the hospital for a stay, then my work insurance plan covers moving me to a private room. I get the same care, just more privacy.
my work plan covers almost, if not, all of my and my family's prescription drugs. the provincial plan covers my daughter's $10,000 ulcerative colitis treatment she gets every 6 weeks.
if I worked in a restaurant, most likely those would be out of pocket. they were, in fact, when I worked in one. But I also didn't need precriptions when I was that age. I don't recall it ever coming up. however, there was also a very short window between me outgrowing my dad's health plan at his work (18) and when I got this job with precription benefits (23).
everyone who lives in the same region gets the same care (I didn't say canada, as the provinces adminster the care, and there are various levels of care depending on province). I'm sure a rich person can hire their own personal doctor. But if they need knee surgery, they don't get to skip a line or anything like that.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
^^^ I agree with you once again often EdsonNascimento up here we all agree that no matter what if you need healthcare you will receive the best no matter your situation. We are all human.
I'm not sure where up here is, but if it's Canada (maybe you meant heaven?), then you are wrong. Why can people buy supplemental plans that get them better access to care? If everyone got the best, that would be unnecessary. No?
Missed this.
I know what you're saying but as a regular citizen up here and the only thing that I get frustrated with sometimes are the wait times meaning (up to 45mins or so in a walk in clinic!) or a few hours at the ER we're doing pretty good. Aside from that if I get sick or injured I will receive an equal level of care as a billionaire would who chose not to buy a private supplemental plan and that care would be outstanding and free.
But, you qualified that. So, the Billionaire who CHOSE not to didn't get access to better care, but what about the Billionaire who did CHOOSE? (not sure the example needed to be a Billionaire, but since that's where you started) You said - everyone receives the BEST no matter the situation. Well, I think with your qualified statement you just proved your hypothesis 100% wrong.
what supplemental plans are available in Canada? as far as I know, you can't. the same basic services are not allowed to be paid for. however, if you are in the hospital for a stay, then my work insurance plan covers moving me to a private room. I get the same care, just more privacy.
my work plan covers almost, if not, all of my and my family's prescription drugs. the provincial plan covers my daughter's $10,000 ulcerative colitis treatment she gets every 6 weeks.
if I worked in a restaurant, most likely those would be out of pocket. they were, in fact, when I worked in one. But I also didn't need precriptions when I was that age. I don't recall it ever coming up. however, there was also a very short window between me outgrowing my dad's health plan at his work (18) and when I got this job with precription benefits (23).
everyone who lives in the same region gets the same care (I didn't say canada, as the provinces adminster the care, and there are various levels of care depending on province). I'm sure a rich person can hire their own personal doctor. But if they need knee surgery, they don't get to skip a line or anything like that.
You are allowed to purchase access to individual doctors and/or clinics. Are you not? Which actually goes to the very crux of getting better access to coverage. Are the lesser doctors somehow participating in these types of plans?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
It's a mess because republicans have sabotaged it. From day one. They even opposed pieces that they previously supported. All to "see this president fail." And they still don't have a solution other than, "let the market decide." Which isn't a solution.
How,did they sabotage it? By not writing a blank check? Good for them.
Republicans in congress, rather than work with Obama, fought it tooth and nail, the idea of universal care. Rather than be part of the process, they screamed death panels and opposed compromise they previously supported. Then republican states barred the expansion of Medicare as an alternative option. And still they have no plan. None.
Prior to Obamacare, my premiums and copays increased by double digit %'s year after year after year. The only times they didn't is when I was a union member and collectively we spoke up and since passage, my premiums increased in single % digits and have stayed flat for the past two years. But then again, I work in a state that embraced romneycare from day one and it's what?, only been a decade? And yes, I get excellent care.
So, what's Trump's solution? Here's a clue, he doesn't have one.
Well, if you look at HealthyIndiana you start to get an idea. Ryan has put forth some ideas too. It's not necessarily trumps job to come up with a solution. Oh for the days when congress was the legislature.
Is your plan on the exchanges?
I've done union employee benefits. You guys were giving up other stuff to maintain those things, it's a choice, which is fine. You made that collectively. Wish we had that for Obamacare.
And not disagreeing with the rhetoric you sited, but it's just that rhetoric. Cut through that. How were the republicans given a chance? Obama and Pelosi rammed a 2,000 page bill through without allowing anyone to read it. Nice revisionist history in your part.
Because during negotiations the repubs failed to offer alternatives, support or anything that would result in a final product or victory for Obama. Even after he agreed to address their concerns. They failed. Because all they were concerned about was seeing him fail.
Why is it that all of our allies have universal health care? Is it really that bad of a concept? It is the 21st century afterall.
bolded part is true.
republicans refused to be a part of the process, so we got what the dems were able to pass.
What negotiation? There was a 2,000+ page bill shoved down our throats without anyone reading it (a fact nobody has disputed). Then they got to choose the color of the curtains. Nice try.
ok, I'll bite
July 2009: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and a group of Democrats from the House of Representatives reveal their plan for overhauling the health-care system. It’s called H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. December 24, 2009: In the Senate, 60 Democrats vote for the Senate’s version of the bill, called America’s Healthy Future Act, whose lead author is senator Max Baucus of California. Thirty-nine Republicans vote against the bill, and one Republican senator, Jim Bunning, does not vote. March 21, 2010: The Senate’s version of the health-care plan is approved by the House in a 219-212 vote. All Republicans and 34 Democrats vote against the plan. March 23, 2010: President Obama signs the Affordable Care Act into law.
It's a mess because republicans have sabotaged it. From day one. They even opposed pieces that they previously supported. All to "see this president fail." And they still don't have a solution other than, "let the market decide." Which isn't a solution.
How,did they sabotage it? By not writing a blank check? Good for them.
Republicans in congress, rather than work with Obama, fought it tooth and nail, the idea of universal care. Rather than be part of the process, they screamed death panels and opposed compromise they previously supported. Then republican states barred the expansion of Medicare as an alternative option. And still they have no plan. None.
Prior to Obamacare, my premiums and copays increased by double digit %'s year after year after year. The only times they didn't is when I was a union member and collectively we spoke up and since passage, my premiums increased in single % digits and have stayed flat for the past two years. But then again, I work in a state that embraced romneycare from day one and it's what?, only been a decade? And yes, I get excellent care.
So, what's Trump's solution? Here's a clue, he doesn't have one.
Well, if you look at HealthyIndiana you start to get an idea. Ryan has put forth some ideas too. It's not necessarily trumps job to come up with a solution. Oh for the days when congress was the legislature.
Is your plan on the exchanges?
I've done union employee benefits. You guys were giving up other stuff to maintain those things, it's a choice, which is fine. You made that collectively. Wish we had that for Obamacare.
And not disagreeing with the rhetoric you sited, but it's just that rhetoric. Cut through that. How were the republicans given a chance? Obama and Pelosi rammed a 2,000 page bill through without allowing anyone to read it. Nice revisionist history in your part.
Because during negotiations the repubs failed to offer alternatives, support or anything that would result in a final product or victory for Obama. Even after he agreed to address their concerns. They failed. Because all they were concerned about was seeing him fail.
Why is it that all of our allies have universal health care? Is it really that bad of a concept? It is the 21st century afterall.
bolded part is true.
republicans refused to be a part of the process, so we got what the dems were able to pass.
What negotiation? There was a 2,000+ page bill shoved down our throats without anyone reading it (a fact nobody has disputed). Then they got to choose the color of the curtains. Nice try.
ok, I'll bite
July 2009: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and a group of Democrats from the House of Representatives reveal their plan for overhauling the health-care system. It’s called H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. December 24, 2009: In the Senate, 60 Democrats vote for the Senate’s version of the bill, called America’s Healthy Future Act, whose lead author is senator Max Baucus of California. Thirty-nine Republicans vote against the bill, and one Republican senator, Jim Bunning, does not vote. March 21, 2010: The Senate’s version of the health-care plan is approved by the House in a 219-212 vote. All Republicans and 34 Democrats vote against the plan. March 23, 2010: President Obama signs the Affordable Care Act into law.
All that happened, and no one managed to read it?
You can try, but the 2,000+ page bill did not actual exist in July 2009, so you can wipe that whole timeline out. Interesting that 34 Democrats broke rank when they had a couple months to read 2,000+ pages which had none of the necessary guidance on how key provisions would be shaped or implemented. 4 more, and what would have happened?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
what ever happened to earning what you have ? this country has been carrying freeloaders for waaayyyy to long now, watch them scatter like rats when it's time to support themselves. just in case....I'm not talking about disabled people, although there are many who play the system as disabled.
and "earning what you have" only makes sense/is fair if we all started at zero. we don't. inequality starts at conception.
some people work hard enough to leave something for their kid's...is that a problem ?
ugh. obviously not. not even close.
let's say you were born into a family of poverty, STILL A US CITIZEN, and no matter how hard you worked, how hard you sacrificed, how many jobs you had to maintain so your kids could merely eat......you think you deserve LESS healthcare than someone who was born into a middle class family who wants for nothing?
The problem is assigning people things they deserve. Sure, everyone "deserves" healthcare. And the guy with a 500k job probably doesn't deserve that any more than the guy who makes only 50k and in most cases only received those opportunities because he was born into a class that allowed him a good education and better opportunities. The problem with the current system is they are forcing healthy people to pay for more than they need, and forcing wealthier people to pay more than their share. If we level the playing field completely then that destroys the American system. Who's going to start the next billion dollar business by working 80 hours a week that eventually employs thousands, if only to have your success taken and given away? The biggest benefactors of the new healthcare system are the insurance companies themselves. This system is a total scam. Only very few actually benefit from it, and those would be anyone who has month or even year long treatments for serious illnesses. Even small doctors offices have to hire a full time employee just to manage healthcare stuff, and that cost is passed on to me. Except my wife's doctor, who just got tired of dealing with it and send us the bill and make us spend weeks or months fighting with insurance to get anything covered. If you find a doctor who accepts cash payments, its a third of what they bill insurance. Instead of paying insurance $1500/month to cover a family of 4, that money can be put towards a cash visit at just a fraction of the cost. And even a major medical incident would only cost $3-5000 without insurance (that insurance would send a bill for 20k for, making you think you got a great deal) that would be covered in just 2 or 3 months of not paying these ridiculous premiums. So why does AHA get the blame for this? Because the costs have skyrocketed in the last 5 or 6 years since it has become a requirement. 6 years ago I had good health insurance I paid out of pocket myself for less than $150. I had $10 copays to see a doctor, which also covered x-rays if I needed it, lab work, etc. Now my single coworkers pay 3-4 times that. Families pay a combined total (employer contribution + employee cost) of $1500 a month, and if you actually use any of your insurance you get another bill for $200 just to see a doctor that sent in some blood work to get examined. In many cases our pharmacy co-pay is HIGHER than the out-of-pocket cost. My copay may be $60, when the medicine is actually only $40! When I complained to our company about this the only response I got was "It's always a good idea to ask for the out of pocket price." This NEVER happened before Obamacare. Its a total mess and a scam and the insurance is the biggest benefactor of the system.
I wasn't arguing the merits of obamacare. I was arguing the merits of health care for all.
I got a little side-tracked with my frustration. The problem with healthcare for all is many end up over paying, or paying for things they don't need or want. AHA even advertises that they need more healthy people to sign up to cover the cost of the unhealthy. How is it fair to make some healthy kid just out of school and probably will see the doctor once every few years pay the same cost as someone who's 70 and smoked their whole life? But without massive tax increases, that is the only plan so far to make it for all. You wouldn't make good drivers pay more to subsidize the cost of bad drivers, why should healthcare be different?
I agree that it's not perfect. I too have my own issues with your example, but that's the sacrfiice you have to make in order for everyone to be covered. does it suck that some tax the system because of their own personal life choices? but if I am forced to make the choice between having to endure folks who tax the system or someone not being able to access care for a condition they got through no fault of their own, I choose the former, every single time.
I would be much happier with a system that helped people with those conditions you were referring to. A sort of "major health issue" with a sort of "no fault of their own" clause. But that isn't the case. The bottom line is we (or I) are forced to pay significantly more than my share. It also affects our healthcare decisions when the costs is still so high even after paying ridiculous premiums that we have to debate weather to wait to take our sick child to the doctor now or try to wait it out.
It might be misguided to blame the high costs on the consumer. Countries where everyone is insured have lower costs.
Terrible, very simpleton argument made all the time.
Let's go with your single payer model. What's the payment rate? The CMS Medicare fee schedule (or worse, States' Medicaid fee Schedule). Do you know how providers feel about said fee schedule? So, let's go there and see what happens. So, yes, you can get to your lower costs on the back of the providers. Problem is, you still haven't solved the (for example) obesity and diabetes epidemic. And the government (as Bloomberg proved) are helpless when it comes to that. So, let's lower the provider fee schedule again.
You have 2 lever points - cost per service and utilization. Government can do nothing about utilization unless you limit benefits or enforce some sort of management scheme (good luck with the gov't doing that). So, have at the cost per service. I'd love to hear gimmesometruth's thoughts about that.
That same week, Luis Manuel Encarnación, then the director at Fundación Mídete, a foundation in Mexico City that battles obesity, also started receiving strange messages with links. When he clicked, Mr. Encarnación was ominously redirected to Gayosso, Mexico’s largest funeral service.
The messages Mr. Encarnación received were identical to a series of texts sent to Alejandro Calvillo, a mild-mannered activist and founder of El Poder del Consumidor, yet another Mexico City organization that has been at the forefront of battling childhood obesity in the country.
What the men had in common was this: All were vocal proponents of Mexico’s 2014 soda tax, the first national soda tax of its kind. It is aimed at reducing consumption of sugary drinks in Mexico, where weight-related diseases kill more people every year than violent crime.
The links sent to the men were laced with an invasive form of spyware developed by NSO Group, an Israeli cyberarms dealer that sells its digital spy tools exclusively to governments and that has contracts with multiple agencies inside Mexico, according to company emails leaked to The New York Times last year.
^^^ I agree with you once again often EdsonNascimento up here we all agree that no matter what if you need healthcare you will receive the best no matter your situation. We are all human.
I'm not sure where up here is, but if it's Canada (maybe you meant heaven?), then you are wrong. Why can people buy supplemental plans that get them better access to care? If everyone got the best, that would be unnecessary. No?
Missed this.
I know what you're saying but as a regular citizen up here and the only thing that I get frustrated with sometimes are the wait times meaning (up to 45mins or so in a walk in clinic!) or a few hours at the ER we're doing pretty good. Aside from that if I get sick or injured I will receive an equal level of care as a billionaire would who chose not to buy a private supplemental plan and that care would be outstanding and free.
But, you qualified that. So, the Billionaire who CHOSE not to didn't get access to better care, but what about the Billionaire who did CHOOSE? (not sure the example needed to be a Billionaire, but since that's where you started) You said - everyone receives the BEST no matter the situation. Well, I think with your qualified statement you just proved your hypothesis 100% wrong.
what supplemental plans are available in Canada? as far as I know, you can't. the same basic services are not allowed to be paid for. however, if you are in the hospital for a stay, then my work insurance plan covers moving me to a private room. I get the same care, just more privacy.
my work plan covers almost, if not, all of my and my family's prescription drugs. the provincial plan covers my daughter's $10,000 ulcerative colitis treatment she gets every 6 weeks.
if I worked in a restaurant, most likely those would be out of pocket. they were, in fact, when I worked in one. But I also didn't need precriptions when I was that age. I don't recall it ever coming up. however, there was also a very short window between me outgrowing my dad's health plan at his work (18) and when I got this job with precription benefits (23).
everyone who lives in the same region gets the same care (I didn't say canada, as the provinces adminster the care, and there are various levels of care depending on province). I'm sure a rich person can hire their own personal doctor. But if they need knee surgery, they don't get to skip a line or anything like that.
You are allowed to purchase access to individual doctors and/or clinics. Are you not? Which actually goes to the very crux of getting better access to coverage. Are the lesser doctors somehow participating in these types of plans?
No, not really. It's contrary to our laws around access to medical care to pay directly to get better access to physician/medical services. There are some clinics that charge a fee because they bundle non-insured other services in. You can pay a flat rate and get access to para-health professionals that aren't covered under the provincial plans, or for which there is only partial coverage (physiotherapy, for example). But you would pay a fee to get these services wherever you got them, unless you got them as an inpatient in hospital, in which case there is no fee to the patient.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
It's a mess because republicans have sabotaged it. From day one. They even opposed pieces that they previously supported. All to "see this president fail." And they still don't have a solution other than, "let the market decide." Which isn't a solution.
How,did they sabotage it? By not writing a blank check? Good for them.
Republicans in congress, rather than work with Obama, fought it tooth and nail, the idea of universal care. Rather than be part of the process, they screamed death panels and opposed compromise they previously supported. Then republican states barred the expansion of Medicare as an alternative option. And still they have no plan. None.
Prior to Obamacare, my premiums and copays increased by double digit %'s year after year after year. The only times they didn't is when I was a union member and collectively we spoke up and since passage, my premiums increased in single % digits and have stayed flat for the past two years. But then again, I work in a state that embraced romneycare from day one and it's what?, only been a decade? And yes, I get excellent care.
So, what's Trump's solution? Here's a clue, he doesn't have one.
Well, if you look at HealthyIndiana you start to get an idea. Ryan has put forth some ideas too. It's not necessarily trumps job to come up with a solution. Oh for the days when congress was the legislature.
Is your plan on the exchanges?
I've done union employee benefits. You guys were giving up other stuff to maintain those things, it's a choice, which is fine. You made that collectively. Wish we had that for Obamacare.
And not disagreeing with the rhetoric you sited, but it's just that rhetoric. Cut through that. How were the republicans given a chance? Obama and Pelosi rammed a 2,000 page bill through without allowing anyone to read it. Nice revisionist history in your part.
Because during negotiations the repubs failed to offer alternatives, support or anything that would result in a final product or victory for Obama. Even after he agreed to address their concerns. They failed. Because all they were concerned about was seeing him fail.
Why is it that all of our allies have universal health care? Is it really that bad of a concept? It is the 21st century afterall.
bolded part is true.
republicans refused to be a part of the process, so we got what the dems were able to pass.
What negotiation? There was a 2,000+ page bill shoved down our throats without anyone reading it (a fact nobody has disputed). Then they got to choose the color of the curtains. Nice try.
ok, I'll bite
July 2009: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and a group of Democrats from the House of Representatives reveal their plan for overhauling the health-care system. It’s called H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. December 24, 2009: In the Senate, 60 Democrats vote for the Senate’s version of the bill, called America’s Healthy Future Act, whose lead author is senator Max Baucus of California. Thirty-nine Republicans vote against the bill, and one Republican senator, Jim Bunning, does not vote. March 21, 2010: The Senate’s version of the health-care plan is approved by the House in a 219-212 vote. All Republicans and 34 Democrats vote against the plan. March 23, 2010: President Obama signs the Affordable Care Act into law.
All that happened, and no one managed to read it?
Ever see what the budget is for congressional staffers? Do they not know how to read? Or share the work burden? Incompetency at its finest. And all because their number one priority was to "see this president fail." Republicans own that.
what ever happened to earning what you have ? this country has been carrying freeloaders for waaayyyy to long now, watch them scatter like rats when it's time to support themselves. just in case....I'm not talking about disabled people, although there are many who play the system as disabled.
and "earning what you have" only makes sense/is fair if we all started at zero. we don't. inequality starts at conception.
some people work hard enough to leave something for their kid's...is that a problem ?
ugh. obviously not. not even close.
let's say you were born into a family of poverty, STILL A US CITIZEN, and no matter how hard you worked, how hard you sacrificed, how many jobs you had to maintain so your kids could merely eat......you think you deserve LESS healthcare than someone who was born into a middle class family who wants for nothing?
The problem is assigning people things they deserve. Sure, everyone "deserves" healthcare. And the guy with a 500k job probably doesn't deserve that any more than the guy who makes only 50k and in most cases only received those opportunities because he was born into a class that allowed him a good education and better opportunities. The problem with the current system is they are forcing healthy people to pay for more than they need, and forcing wealthier people to pay more than their share. If we level the playing field completely then that destroys the American system. Who's going to start the next billion dollar business by working 80 hours a week that eventually employs thousands, if only to have your success taken and given away? The biggest benefactors of the new healthcare system are the insurance companies themselves. This system is a total scam. Only very few actually benefit from it, and those would be anyone who has month or even year long treatments for serious illnesses. Even small doctors offices have to hire a full time employee just to manage healthcare stuff, and that cost is passed on to me. Except my wife's doctor, who just got tired of dealing with it and send us the bill and make us spend weeks or months fighting with insurance to get anything covered. If you find a doctor who accepts cash payments, its a third of what they bill insurance. Instead of paying insurance $1500/month to cover a family of 4, that money can be put towards a cash visit at just a fraction of the cost. And even a major medical incident would only cost $3-5000 without insurance (that insurance would send a bill for 20k for, making you think you got a great deal) that would be covered in just 2 or 3 months of not paying these ridiculous premiums. So why does AHA get the blame for this? Because the costs have skyrocketed in the last 5 or 6 years since it has become a requirement. 6 years ago I had good health insurance I paid out of pocket myself for less than $150. I had $10 copays to see a doctor, which also covered x-rays if I needed it, lab work, etc. Now my single coworkers pay 3-4 times that. Families pay a combined total (employer contribution + employee cost) of $1500 a month, and if you actually use any of your insurance you get another bill for $200 just to see a doctor that sent in some blood work to get examined. In many cases our pharmacy co-pay is HIGHER than the out-of-pocket cost. My copay may be $60, when the medicine is actually only $40! When I complained to our company about this the only response I got was "It's always a good idea to ask for the out of pocket price." This NEVER happened before Obamacare. Its a total mess and a scam and the insurance is the biggest benefactor of the system.
I wasn't arguing the merits of obamacare. I was arguing the merits of health care for all.
I got a little side-tracked with my frustration. The problem with healthcare for all is many end up over paying, or paying for things they don't need or want. AHA even advertises that they need more healthy people to sign up to cover the cost of the unhealthy. How is it fair to make some healthy kid just out of school and probably will see the doctor once every few years pay the same cost as someone who's 70 and smoked their whole life? But without massive tax increases, that is the only plan so far to make it for all. You wouldn't make good drivers pay more to subsidize the cost of bad drivers, why should healthcare be different?
I agree that it's not perfect. I too have my own issues with your example, but that's the sacrfiice you have to make in order for everyone to be covered. does it suck that some tax the system because of their own personal life choices? but if I am forced to make the choice between having to endure folks who tax the system or someone not being able to access care for a condition they got through no fault of their own, I choose the former, every single time.
I would be much happier with a system that helped people with those conditions you were referring to. A sort of "major health issue" with a sort of "no fault of their own" clause. But that isn't the case. The bottom line is we (or I) are forced to pay significantly more than my share. It also affects our healthcare decisions when the costs is still so high even after paying ridiculous premiums that we have to debate weather to wait to take our sick child to the doctor now or try to wait it out.
It might be misguided to blame the high costs on the consumer. Countries where everyone is insured have lower costs.
Terrible, very simpleton argument made all the time.
Let's go with your single payer model. What's the payment rate? The CMS Medicare fee schedule (or worse, States' Medicaid fee Schedule). Do you know how providers feel about said fee schedule? So, let's go there and see what happens. So, yes, you can get to your lower costs on the back of the providers. Problem is, you still haven't solved the (for example) obesity and diabetes epidemic. And the government (as Bloomberg proved) are helpless when it comes to that. So, let's lower the provider fee schedule again.
You have 2 lever points - cost per service and utilization. Government can do nothing about utilization unless you limit benefits or enforce some sort of management scheme (good luck with the gov't doing that). So, have at the cost per service. I'd love to hear gimmesometruth's thoughts about that.
Wait, providers are going to resist being kicked off the gravy train?! I'm shocked.
what ever happened to earning what you have ? this country has been carrying freeloaders for waaayyyy to long now, watch them scatter like rats when it's time to support themselves. just in case....I'm not talking about disabled people, although there are many who play the system as disabled.
and "earning what you have" only makes sense/is fair if we all started at zero. we don't. inequality starts at conception.
some people work hard enough to leave something for their kid's...is that a problem ?
ugh. obviously not. not even close.
let's say you were born into a family of poverty, STILL A US CITIZEN, and no matter how hard you worked, how hard you sacrificed, how many jobs you had to maintain so your kids could merely eat......you think you deserve LESS healthcare than someone who was born into a middle class family who wants for nothing?
The problem is assigning people things they deserve. Sure, everyone "deserves" healthcare. And the guy with a 500k job probably doesn't deserve that any more than the guy who makes only 50k and in most cases only received those opportunities because he was born into a class that allowed him a good education and better opportunities. The problem with the current system is they are forcing healthy people to pay for more than they need, and forcing wealthier people to pay more than their share. If we level the playing field completely then that destroys the American system. Who's going to start the next billion dollar business by working 80 hours a week that eventually employs thousands, if only to have your success taken and given away? The biggest benefactors of the new healthcare system are the insurance companies themselves. This system is a total scam. Only very few actually benefit from it, and those would be anyone who has month or even year long treatments for serious illnesses. Even small doctors offices have to hire a full time employee just to manage healthcare stuff, and that cost is passed on to me. Except my wife's doctor, who just got tired of dealing with it and send us the bill and make us spend weeks or months fighting with insurance to get anything covered. If you find a doctor who accepts cash payments, its a third of what they bill insurance. Instead of paying insurance $1500/month to cover a family of 4, that money can be put towards a cash visit at just a fraction of the cost. And even a major medical incident would only cost $3-5000 without insurance (that insurance would send a bill for 20k for, making you think you got a great deal) that would be covered in just 2 or 3 months of not paying these ridiculous premiums. So why does AHA get the blame for this? Because the costs have skyrocketed in the last 5 or 6 years since it has become a requirement. 6 years ago I had good health insurance I paid out of pocket myself for less than $150. I had $10 copays to see a doctor, which also covered x-rays if I needed it, lab work, etc. Now my single coworkers pay 3-4 times that. Families pay a combined total (employer contribution + employee cost) of $1500 a month, and if you actually use any of your insurance you get another bill for $200 just to see a doctor that sent in some blood work to get examined. In many cases our pharmacy co-pay is HIGHER than the out-of-pocket cost. My copay may be $60, when the medicine is actually only $40! When I complained to our company about this the only response I got was "It's always a good idea to ask for the out of pocket price." This NEVER happened before Obamacare. Its a total mess and a scam and the insurance is the biggest benefactor of the system.
I wasn't arguing the merits of obamacare. I was arguing the merits of health care for all.
I got a little side-tracked with my frustration. The problem with healthcare for all is many end up over paying, or paying for things they don't need or want. AHA even advertises that they need more healthy people to sign up to cover the cost of the unhealthy. How is it fair to make some healthy kid just out of school and probably will see the doctor once every few years pay the same cost as someone who's 70 and smoked their whole life? But without massive tax increases, that is the only plan so far to make it for all. You wouldn't make good drivers pay more to subsidize the cost of bad drivers, why should healthcare be different?
I agree that it's not perfect. I too have my own issues with your example, but that's the sacrfiice you have to make in order for everyone to be covered. does it suck that some tax the system because of their own personal life choices? but if I am forced to make the choice between having to endure folks who tax the system or someone not being able to access care for a condition they got through no fault of their own, I choose the former, every single time.
I would be much happier with a system that helped people with those conditions you were referring to. A sort of "major health issue" with a sort of "no fault of their own" clause. But that isn't the case. The bottom line is we (or I) are forced to pay significantly more than my share. It also affects our healthcare decisions when the costs is still so high even after paying ridiculous premiums that we have to debate weather to wait to take our sick child to the doctor now or try to wait it out.
It might be misguided to blame the high costs on the consumer. Countries where everyone is insured have lower costs.
Terrible, very simpleton argument made all the time.
Let's go with your single payer model. What's the payment rate? The CMS Medicare fee schedule (or worse, States' Medicaid fee Schedule). Do you know how providers feel about said fee schedule? So, let's go there and see what happens. So, yes, you can get to your lower costs on the back of the providers. Problem is, you still haven't solved the (for example) obesity and diabetes epidemic. And the government (as Bloomberg proved) are helpless when it comes to that. So, let's lower the provider fee schedule again.
You have 2 lever points - cost per service and utilization. Government can do nothing about utilization unless you limit benefits or enforce some sort of management scheme (good luck with the gov't doing that). So, have at the cost per service. I'd love to hear gimmesometruth's thoughts about that.
The problem is the health insurers. They are making a fortune off this. I tried to search for average healthcare costs the first 2 sources gave me an average of $16,000 per family and the second was $22,000. Seems accurate because my cost is exactly in the middle at $19,000. Not to mention co-pays and deductibles families end up paying even more, with that price everything should be free. What family comes even close to spending that in actual medical expenses? Very few. Get ride of insurance and the hospitals/doctors will actually only charge you a 1/3 of what they bill insurance. If you're worried about a major medical expense of $100,000 due to some accident, well just a few years of not paying this ridiculous rate will have that covered. I don't understand arguments of how the skyrocketing increases and just on track with normal inflation? They've doubled or tripled in 6 or 7 years, and the coverage has gone down. That is not normal cost increase. Obamacare forces us to buy into this scam at ridiculous rates and allows the health insurers to continue to hike price beyond what is affordable. 99% of families don't need this. 99% of families will have medical expenses 1/10 of what they are paying in premiums alone. For now I'd prefer to opt out of insurance, get my extra 19k a year that's going to premiums, and pay a reasonable cash price for doctor visits that is way less that what insurance will bill for. And with an extra 19k a year I could actually afford to take my kid to the doctor.
It's absolutely the insurers that are the problem. It makes no sense to have that layer of administrative costs between patient and doctor.
We need to follow the lead of every other industrialized nation in the world and drop this bullshit. We already have a single payer system in place for everyone over 65....just start dropping the required age to participate annually and get it over with.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
The "waiting" narrative is just bullshit. My sister in law was diagnosed with skin cancer a few years ago. The doctor that she was referred to couldn't see her for six months (near Columbus, OH) so she came to Indianapolis to see a doctor and only waited a few weeks.
Point being....we already "wait" here.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
The problem is the health insurers. They are making a fortune off this. I tried to search for average healthcare costs the first 2 sources gave me an average of $16,000 per family and the second was $22,000. Seems accurate because my cost is exactly in the middle at $19,000. Not to mention co-pays and deductibles families end up paying even more, with that price everything should be free. What family comes even close to spending that in actual medical expenses? Very few. Get ride of insurance and the hospitals/doctors will actually only charge you a 1/3 of what they bill insurance. If you're worried about a major medical expense of $100,000 due to some accident, well just a few years of not paying this ridiculous rate will have that covered. I don't understand arguments of how the skyrocketing increases and just on track with normal inflation? They've doubled or tripled in 6 or 7 years, and the coverage has gone down. That is not normal cost increase. Obamacare forces us to buy into this scam at ridiculous rates and allows the health insurers to continue to hike price beyond what is affordable. 99% of families don't need this. 99% of families will have medical expenses 1/10 of what they are paying in premiums alone. For now I'd prefer to opt out of insurance, get my extra 19k a year that's going to premiums, and pay a reasonable cash price for doctor visits that is way less that what insurance will bill for. And with an extra 19k a year I could actually afford to take my kid to the doctor.
Another poorly informed consumer.
NY State has made Managed Care mandatory for their Medicaid participants. Do you know who pushed and got that law?
As to the avg family paying that much - agree. That's insurance. You are paying for the unfortunate person that spends $500,000. How many people paying $20k need to use 0 services to pay for that? And who's using 0?
Not saying insurance companies are innocent. But, if you think that's the problem you are woefully under informed. And you comment on who spends $20K shows that.
As for billings - you know why hospital bills are so high right? Has nothing to do with actual charges. They are so when commercial payers have to pay % of charges, or for liability cases (i.e. car accidents), or someone without insurance. It has nothing to do with charging you a third.
Do you believe the sticker price of a car is its actual price?
Post edited by EdsonNascimento on
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
It's absolutely the insurers that are the problem. It makes no sense to have that layer of administrative costs between patient and doctor.
We need to follow the lead of every other industrialized nation in the world and drop this bullshit. We already have a single payer system in place for everyone over 65....just start dropping the required age to participate annually and get it over with.
So, you think if the Gov't ran it there'd be no administrative costs?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
It's absolutely the insurers that are the problem. It makes no sense to have that layer of administrative costs between patient and doctor.
We need to follow the lead of every other industrialized nation in the world and drop this bullshit. We already have a single payer system in place for everyone over 65....just start dropping the required age to participate annually and get it over with.
So, you think if the Gov't ran it there'd be no administrative costs?
It's absolutely the insurers that are the problem. It makes no sense to have that layer of administrative costs between patient and doctor.
We need to follow the lead of every other industrialized nation in the world and drop this bullshit. We already have a single payer system in place for everyone over 65....just start dropping the required age to participate annually and get it over with.
So, you think if the Gov't ran it there'd be no administrative costs?
We already have an agency that handles it. WOuld more people be required? Yes....would they be paid millions of dollars in CEO bonuses each year? No.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I think some people are worried about the level of abuse. I partially am too. it is already pretty bad here in low economic areas. Unfortunately when people don't have to pay for it directly it gets abused, that's true for anything. Showing up in the ER for a cold or a headache, because they are on a subsidized plan and don't have to pay anything, or know they have to be seen by law and never pay the bill. I currently know some people who work in the ER at various levels and, in poor areas of the cities, they see a lot of this. Some hospitals where I lived 15 years ago actually closed down due to unpaid bills. That's why instead of paying some insurance company 20k a year, then my doctor bill them $500 for a simple visit, or just show up knowing I'll never see the bill anyway. I'd prefer to just pay the reasonable fee of $100 to begin with and skip the middleman. And without the premiums or ridiculous taxes to cover the cost, I would be able to afford that. In the end I'd have more money in my pocket and better coverage. Only ones upset are the insurance reps out of a job.
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I'm also curious if you have any idea of the level of fraud or abuse from doctors? Fraud might be too strong. But take an auto shop for example. You get into a small fender bender, the first thing they ask when you take your car in is "are you paying out of pocket or through insurance?" They ask because if you say "out of pocket" they will at least give you some choices and a reasonable price, with a cheap option of popping out the dent and straightening the fender and doing some touch-up paint. But if you say "Going through insurance" then all of the sudden half your car needs to be replaced and painted because they just send the bill to insurance. Is there an increase in more expensive medial procedures if they just send the bill off to a third party (government) to pay the bill instead of billing you instead?
It's absolutely the insurers that are the problem. It makes no sense to have that layer of administrative costs between patient and doctor.
We need to follow the lead of every other industrialized nation in the world and drop this bullshit. We already have a single payer system in place for everyone over 65....just start dropping the required age to participate annually and get it over with.
So, you think if the Gov't ran it there'd be no administrative costs?
We already have an agency that handles it. WOuld more people be required? Yes....would they be paid millions of dollars in CEO bonuses each year? No.
Who's paying the claims? (BTW, who pays the claims today?)
Who's putting in programs to "bend the cost curve?"
If all you want to do is cut provider fees, then your solution is a great one. I'm not for that, but you seem to be. You should let your doctor and anesthesiologist know that view next time you need a procedure.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I'm also curious if you have any idea of the level of fraud or abuse from doctors? Fraud might be too strong. But take an auto shop for example. You get into a small fender bender, the first thing they ask when you take your car in is "are you paying out of pocket or through insurance?" They ask because if you say "out of pocket" they will at least give you some choices and a reasonable price, with a cheap option of popping out the dent and straightening the fender and doing some touch-up paint. But if you say "Going through insurance" then all of the sudden half your car needs to be replaced and painted because they just send the bill to insurance. Is there an increase in more expensive medial procedures if they just send the bill off to a third party (government) to pay the bill instead of billing you instead?
Doctors overbill and do unnecessary procedures all the time.
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I challenge your hypothesis of broken limb, etc. I experienced it in Italy with one of our youth soccer players. We ended up deciding to wait until we flew home then next day to NY to have it taken care of after waiting 5 hours and seeing sick babies, mothers, bleeding people and all sorts of coughing, hacking that were going to make him sicker that had been sitting around for 18+hours.
Not sure why you care so much about our healthcare system. You like Canada's and that's where you live. The Republicans have taken over everything in response to Obamacare. Since Obama's first election, the Dems have lost on all levels slowly but surely until this ultimate loss and it's mostly directly related to that. House, Senate, Governors, and finally President. It's loud and clear. Now the only people crying are those that are getting a free ride b/c of it.
Post edited by EdsonNascimento on
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I'm also curious if you have any idea of the level of fraud or abuse from doctors? Fraud might be too strong. But take an auto shop for example. You get into a small fender bender, the first thing they ask when you take your car in is "are you paying out of pocket or through insurance?" They ask because if you say "out of pocket" they will at least give you some choices and a reasonable price, with a cheap option of popping out the dent and straightening the fender and doing some touch-up paint. But if you say "Going through insurance" then all of the sudden half your car needs to be replaced and painted because they just send the bill to insurance. Is there an increase in more expensive medial procedures if they just send the bill off to a third party (government) to pay the bill instead of billing you instead?
it's not like that, because a doctor doesn't ask if you're privately insured. he has no reason to, as there is no private insurance for procedures, only precriptions and other services that are not considered primary care (like physiotherapy, some mental health services, massages, etc), but those aren't administered by a doctor anyway. he can't "upsell" anything, like giving a better quality tensor bandage or anything like that depending on your coverage. we all have the same. and the pharmacists are the same. there are some differences when it comes to generic brands of drugs or a name brand, but that's up to you if you want to contribute to driving up the costs of your private insurance and have to pay for it on the back end later on down the line.
there is no out of pocket expenses for the patient for primary care. I go to the ER, they see my medical card, and there is no exchange of money or insurance forms or anything. All they care to know is if you are a permanent resident of that province. if you aren't. you may have to pay up front and then get reimbursed by your provincial government. or they may direct bill, I don't know that part.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I'm also curious if you have any idea of the level of fraud or abuse from doctors? Fraud might be too strong. But take an auto shop for example. You get into a small fender bender, the first thing they ask when you take your car in is "are you paying out of pocket or through insurance?" They ask because if you say "out of pocket" they will at least give you some choices and a reasonable price, with a cheap option of popping out the dent and straightening the fender and doing some touch-up paint. But if you say "Going through insurance" then all of the sudden half your car needs to be replaced and painted because they just send the bill to insurance. Is there an increase in more expensive medial procedures if they just send the bill off to a third party (government) to pay the bill instead of billing you instead?
Doctors overbill and do unnecessary procedures all the time.
Who monitors that?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
The problem is assigning people things they deserve. Sure, everyone "deserves" healthcare. And the guy with a 500k job probably doesn't deserve that any more than the guy who makes only 50k and in most cases only received those opportunities because he was born into a class that allowed him a good education and better opportunities. The problem with the current system is they are forcing healthy people to pay for more than they need, and forcing wealthier people to pay more than their share. If we level the playing field completely then that destroys the American system. Who's going to start the next billion dollar business by working 80 hours a week that eventually employs thousands, if only to have your success taken and given away? The biggest benefactors of the new healthcare system are the insurance companies themselves. This system is a total scam. Only very few actually benefit from it, and those would be anyone who has month or even year long treatments for serious illnesses. Even small doctors offices have to hire a full time employee just to manage healthcare stuff, and that cost is passed on to me. Except my wife's doctor, who just got tired of dealing with it and send us the bill and make us spend weeks or months fighting with insurance to get anything covered. If you find a doctor who accepts cash payments, its a third of what they bill insurance. Instead of paying insurance $1500/month to cover a family of 4, that money can be put towards a cash visit at just a fraction of the cost. And even a major medical incident would only cost $3-5000 without insurance (that insurance would send a bill for 20k for, making you think you got a great deal) that would be covered in just 2 or 3 months of not paying these ridiculous premiums. So why does AHA get the blame for this? Because the costs have skyrocketed in the last 5 or 6 years since it has become a requirement. 6 years ago I had good health insurance I paid out of pocket myself for less than $150. I had $10 copays to see a doctor, which also covered x-rays if I needed it, lab work, etc. Now my single coworkers pay 3-4 times that. Families pay a combined total (employer contribution + employee cost) of $1500 a month, and if you actually use any of your insurance you get another bill for $200 just to see a doctor that sent in some blood work to get examined. In many cases our pharmacy co-pay is HIGHER than the out-of-pocket cost. My copay may be $60, when the medicine is actually only $40! When I complained to our company about this the only response I got was "It's always a good idea to ask for the out of pocket price." This NEVER happened before Obamacare. Its a total mess and a scam and the insurance is the biggest benefactor of the system.
I wasn't arguing the merits of obamacare. I was arguing the merits of health care for all.
I got a little side-tracked with my frustration. The problem with healthcare for all is many end up over paying, or paying for things they don't need or want. AHA even advertises that they need more healthy people to sign up to cover the cost of the unhealthy. How is it fair to make some healthy kid just out of school and probably will see the doctor once every few years pay the same cost as someone who's 70 and smoked their whole life? But without massive tax increases, that is the only plan so far to make it for all. You wouldn't make good drivers pay more to subsidize the cost of bad drivers, why should healthcare be different?
I agree that it's not perfect. I too have my own issues with your example, but that's the sacrfiice you have to make in order for everyone to be covered. does it suck that some tax the system because of their own personal life choices? but if I am forced to make the choice between having to endure folks who tax the system or someone not being able to access care for a condition they got through no fault of their own, I choose the former, every single time.
I would be much happier with a system that helped people with those conditions you were referring to. A sort of "major health issue" with a sort of "no fault of their own" clause. But that isn't the case. The bottom line is we (or I) are forced to pay significantly more than my share. It also affects our healthcare decisions when the costs is still so high even after paying ridiculous premiums that we have to debate weather to wait to take our sick child to the doctor now or try to wait it out.
It might be misguided to blame the high costs on the consumer. Countries where everyone is insured have lower costs.
Terrible, very simpleton argument made all the time.
Let's go with your single payer model. What's the payment rate? The CMS Medicare fee schedule (or worse, States' Medicaid fee Schedule). Do you know how providers feel about said fee schedule? So, let's go there and see what happens. So, yes, you can get to your lower costs on the back of the providers. Problem is, you still haven't solved the (for example) obesity and diabetes epidemic. And the government (as Bloomberg proved) are helpless when it comes to that. So, let's lower the provider fee schedule again.
You have 2 lever points - cost per service and utilization. Government can do nothing about utilization unless you limit benefits or enforce some sort of management scheme (good luck with the gov't doing that). So, have at the cost per service. I'd love to hear gimmesometruth's thoughts about that.
The problem is the health insurers. They are making a fortune off this. I tried to search for average healthcare costs the first 2 sources gave me an average of $16,000 per family and the second was $22,000. Seems accurate because my cost is exactly in the middle at $19,000. Not to mention co-pays and deductibles families end up paying even more, with that price everything should be free. What family comes even close to spending that in actual medical expenses? Very few. Get ride of insurance and the hospitals/doctors will actually only charge you a 1/3 of what they bill insurance. If you're worried about a major medical expense of $100,000 due to some accident, well just a few years of not paying this ridiculous rate will have that covered. I don't understand arguments of how the skyrocketing increases and just on track with normal inflation? They've doubled or tripled in 6 or 7 years, and the coverage has gone down. That is not normal cost increase. Obamacare forces us to buy into this scam at ridiculous rates and allows the health insurers to continue to hike price beyond what is affordable. 99% of families don't need this. 99% of families will have medical expenses 1/10 of what they are paying in premiums alone. For now I'd prefer to opt out of insurance, get my extra 19k a year that's going to premiums, and pay a reasonable cash price for doctor visits that is way less that what insurance will bill for. And with an extra 19k a year I could actually afford to take my kid to the doctor.
You're claiming only 1% of the US population is unhealthy or uses more than $16,000 to $22,000 of health care costs. Cancer patients, diabetes, accident/shooting victims? Seriously? Where do you get the 99% have medical expenses of 1/10 of premium costs? Do you have a link to that stat? My health insurer sends me itemized listing of the costs and there is no way I would take the chance of being financially ruined because of unforeseen medical expenses. Its like life insurance, you hope you don't need it but better to pay in and have peace of mind.
In the above bolded example you provided, it would take 6.25 years to pay that off, without interest and late fees, which you know corporate healthcare is turning you over to collection agencies. They don't do finance.
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I challenge your hypothesis of broken limb, etc. I experienced it in Italy with one of our youth soccer players. We ended up deciding to wait until we flew home then next day to NY to have it taken care of after waiting 5 hours and seeing sick babies, mothers, bleeding people and all sorts of coughing, hacking that were going to make him sicker that had been sitting around for 18+hours.
Not sure why you care so much about our healthcare system. You like Canada's and that's where you live. The Republicans have taken over everything in response to Obamacare. Since Obama's first election, the Dems have lost on all levels slowly but surely until this ultimate loss and it's mostly directly related to that. House, Senate, Governors, and finally President. It's loud and clear. Now the only people crying are those that are getting a free ride b/c of it.
I hear people crying that are worried about losing their insurance. The majority of the country wants a single payer system.
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I'm also curious if you have any idea of the level of fraud or abuse from doctors? Fraud might be too strong. But take an auto shop for example. You get into a small fender bender, the first thing they ask when you take your car in is "are you paying out of pocket or through insurance?" They ask because if you say "out of pocket" they will at least give you some choices and a reasonable price, with a cheap option of popping out the dent and straightening the fender and doing some touch-up paint. But if you say "Going through insurance" then all of the sudden half your car needs to be replaced and painted because they just send the bill to insurance. Is there an increase in more expensive medial procedures if they just send the bill off to a third party (government) to pay the bill instead of billing you instead?
Doctors overbill and do unnecessary procedures all the time.
In Canada a doctor's patterns of practice, as reflected by billing patterns, are monitored. If they appear unusual they are flagged for review. Each physician gets a print out of their billing patterns yearly with items flagged, if there are any. If you can explain it - for instance, you have a particular subspecialty practice - then fine. If not, you're going to be audited.
And pretty much any doctor I know is so busy that there's no need for fraudulent billing. They have all the work they can possibly do, and more.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
canadian doctors bill the govenment directly. it's pretty fucking simple. no insurance companies to deal with. if I want reimbursement on something I'm privately insured for, I have to do the adminstrative work.
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
I challenge your hypothesis of broken limb, etc. I experienced it in Italy with one of our youth soccer players. We ended up deciding to wait until we flew home then next day to NY to have it taken care of after waiting 5 hours and seeing sick babies, mothers, bleeding people and all sorts of coughing, hacking that were going to make him sicker that had been sitting around for 18+hours.
Not sure why you care so much about our healthcare system. You like Canada's and that's where you live. The Republicans have taken over everything in response to Obamacare. Since Obama's first election, the Dems have lost on all levels slowly but surely until this ultimate loss and it's mostly directly related to that. House, Senate, Governors, and finally President. It's loud and clear. Now the only people crying are those that are getting a free ride b/c of it.
the discussion is about socialized healthcare, which is what I have where I live. and even if I didn't have it, what is it with americans that, as soon as they are pressed with real facts that go against their narrative, the fall back is always "you are in (not america)! what do you care! it's not your business!". it's so predictable.
is it perfect? of course not. A friend of mine had a heart issue, and while he got seen right away, he spent a night in a fucking hallway instead of in a room before his operation.
challenge my hypothesis all you want. I have lived it, I know hudreds of people who have had broken limbs and haven't had to wait to get treated.
"sick babies, bleeding people....sitting around for 18+ hours". that is LAUGHABLE. how more dramatic are you going to get to prove your point? the problem is, yes, there can be sick people that go to the ER when they shouldn't, and they end up waiting. Why? because there are people with life-threatening issues that need help first. that's called a system that works.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
Comments
Let's go with your single payer model. What's the payment rate? The CMS Medicare fee schedule (or worse, States' Medicaid fee Schedule). Do you know how providers feel about said fee schedule? So, let's go there and see what happens. So, yes, you can get to your lower costs on the back of the providers. Problem is, you still haven't solved the (for example) obesity and diabetes epidemic. And the government (as Bloomberg proved) are helpless when it comes to that. So, let's lower the provider fee schedule again.
You have 2 lever points - cost per service and utilization. Government can do nothing about utilization unless you limit benefits or enforce some sort of management scheme (good luck with the gov't doing that). So, have at the cost per service. I'd love to hear gimmesometruth's thoughts about that.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
my work plan covers almost, if not, all of my and my family's prescription drugs. the provincial plan covers my daughter's $10,000 ulcerative colitis treatment she gets every 6 weeks.
if I worked in a restaurant, most likely those would be out of pocket. they were, in fact, when I worked in one. But I also didn't need precriptions when I was that age. I don't recall it ever coming up. however, there was also a very short window between me outgrowing my dad's health plan at his work (18) and when I got this job with precription benefits (23).
everyone who lives in the same region gets the same care (I didn't say canada, as the provinces adminster the care, and there are various levels of care depending on province). I'm sure a rich person can hire their own personal doctor. But if they need knee surgery, they don't get to skip a line or anything like that.
-EV 8/14/93
July 2009: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and a group of Democrats from the House of Representatives reveal their plan for overhauling the health-care system. It’s called H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act.
December 24, 2009: In the Senate, 60 Democrats vote for the Senate’s version of the bill, called America’s Healthy Future Act, whose lead author is senator Max Baucus of California. Thirty-nine Republicans vote against the bill, and one Republican senator, Jim Bunning, does not vote.
March 21, 2010: The Senate’s version of the health-care plan is approved by the House in a 219-212 vote. All Republicans and 34 Democrats vote against the plan.
March 23, 2010: President Obama signs the Affordable Care Act into law.
All that happened, and no one managed to read it?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/11/technology/hack-mexico-soda-tax-advocates.html?_r=0
That same week, Luis Manuel Encarnación, then the director at Fundación Mídete, a foundation in Mexico City that battles obesity, also started receiving strange messages with links. When he clicked, Mr. Encarnación was ominously redirected to Gayosso, Mexico’s largest funeral service.
The messages Mr. Encarnación received were identical to a series of texts sent to Alejandro Calvillo, a mild-mannered activist and founder of El Poder del Consumidor, yet another Mexico City organization that has been at the forefront of battling childhood obesity in the country.
What the men had in common was this: All were vocal proponents of Mexico’s 2014 soda tax, the first national soda tax of its kind. It is aimed at reducing consumption of sugary drinks in Mexico, where weight-related diseases kill more people every year than violent crime.
The links sent to the men were laced with an invasive form of spyware developed by NSO Group, an Israeli cyberarms dealer that sells its digital spy tools exclusively to governments and that has contracts with multiple agencies inside Mexico, according to company emails leaked to The New York Times last year.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
What family comes even close to spending that in actual medical expenses? Very few. Get ride of insurance and the hospitals/doctors will actually only charge you a 1/3 of what they bill insurance. If you're worried about a major medical expense of $100,000 due to some accident, well just a few years of not paying this ridiculous rate will have that covered.
I don't understand arguments of how the skyrocketing increases and just on track with normal inflation? They've doubled or tripled in 6 or 7 years, and the coverage has gone down. That is not normal cost increase.
Obamacare forces us to buy into this scam at ridiculous rates and allows the health insurers to continue to hike price beyond what is affordable. 99% of families don't need this. 99% of families will have medical expenses 1/10 of what they are paying in premiums alone.
For now I'd prefer to opt out of insurance, get my extra 19k a year that's going to premiums, and pay a reasonable cash price for doctor visits that is way less that what insurance will bill for. And with an extra 19k a year I could actually afford to take my kid to the doctor.
We need to follow the lead of every other industrialized nation in the world and drop this bullshit. We already have a single payer system in place for everyone over 65....just start dropping the required age to participate annually and get it over with.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
I really don't get what's so fucking scary and difficult about it.
wait times can suck, but americans seem to think they will die waiting, or they won't get immediate treatment for a broken leg. which is patently false. everything is done in priority, so yes, if you go to emergency with a finger nail falling off, you're going to have to wait. HOURS. But if you have chest pain or a broken limb, you get access IMMEDIATELY.
the single solitary reason american politicians won't get this done is because they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies. that's it. that's all.
-EV 8/14/93
Point being....we already "wait" here.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
NY State has made Managed Care mandatory for their Medicaid participants. Do you know who pushed and got that law?
As to the avg family paying that much - agree. That's insurance. You are paying for the unfortunate person that spends $500,000. How many people paying $20k need to use 0 services to pay for that? And who's using 0?
Not saying insurance companies are innocent. But, if you think that's the problem you are woefully under informed. And you comment on who spends $20K shows that.
As for billings - you know why hospital bills are so high right? Has nothing to do with actual charges. They are so when commercial payers have to pay % of charges, or for liability cases (i.e. car accidents), or someone without insurance. It has nothing to do with charging you a third.
Do you believe the sticker price of a car is its actual price?
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
That's why instead of paying some insurance company 20k a year, then my doctor bill them $500 for a simple visit, or just show up knowing I'll never see the bill anyway. I'd prefer to just pay the reasonable fee of $100 to begin with and skip the middleman. And without the premiums or ridiculous taxes to cover the cost, I would be able to afford that. In the end I'd have more money in my pocket and better coverage. Only ones upset are the insurance reps out of a job.
They ask because if you say "out of pocket" they will at least give you some choices and a reasonable price, with a cheap option of popping out the dent and straightening the fender and doing some touch-up paint. But if you say "Going through insurance" then all of the sudden half your car needs to be replaced and painted because they just send the bill to insurance.
Is there an increase in more expensive medial procedures if they just send the bill off to a third party (government) to pay the bill instead of billing you instead?
Who's putting in programs to "bend the cost curve?"
If all you want to do is cut provider fees, then your solution is a great one. I'm not for that, but you seem to be. You should let your doctor and anesthesiologist know that view next time you need a procedure.
Not sure why you care so much about our healthcare system. You like Canada's and that's where you live. The Republicans have taken over everything in response to Obamacare. Since Obama's first election, the Dems have lost on all levels slowly but surely until this ultimate loss and it's mostly directly related to that. House, Senate, Governors, and finally President. It's loud and clear. Now the only people crying are those that are getting a free ride b/c of it.
there is no out of pocket expenses for the patient for primary care. I go to the ER, they see my medical card, and there is no exchange of money or insurance forms or anything. All they care to know is if you are a permanent resident of that province. if you aren't. you may have to pay up front and then get reimbursed by your provincial government. or they may direct bill, I don't know that part.
-EV 8/14/93
The problem is assigning people things they deserve. Sure, everyone "deserves" healthcare. And the guy with a 500k job probably doesn't deserve that any more than the guy who makes only 50k and in most cases only received those opportunities because he was born into a class that allowed him a good education and better opportunities.
The problem with the current system is they are forcing healthy people to pay for more than they need, and forcing wealthier people to pay more than their share. If we level the playing field completely then that destroys the American system. Who's going to start the next billion dollar business by working 80 hours a week that eventually employs thousands, if only to have your success taken and given away?
The biggest benefactors of the new healthcare system are the insurance companies themselves. This system is a total scam. Only very few actually benefit from it, and those would be anyone who has month or even year long treatments for serious illnesses. Even small doctors offices have to hire a full time employee just to manage healthcare stuff, and that cost is passed on to me. Except my wife's doctor, who just got tired of dealing with it and send us the bill and make us spend weeks or months fighting with insurance to get anything covered.
If you find a doctor who accepts cash payments, its a third of what they bill insurance. Instead of paying insurance $1500/month to cover a family of 4, that money can be put towards a cash visit at just a fraction of the cost. And even a major medical incident would only cost $3-5000 without insurance (that insurance would send a bill for 20k for, making you think you got a great deal) that would be covered in just 2 or 3 months of not paying these ridiculous premiums.
So why does AHA get the blame for this? Because the costs have skyrocketed in the last 5 or 6 years since it has become a requirement. 6 years ago I had good health insurance I paid out of pocket myself for less than $150. I had $10 copays to see a doctor, which also covered x-rays if I needed it, lab work, etc. Now my single coworkers pay 3-4 times that. Families pay a combined total (employer contribution + employee cost) of $1500 a month, and if you actually use any of your insurance you get another bill for $200 just to see a doctor that sent in some blood work to get examined. In many cases our pharmacy co-pay is HIGHER than the out-of-pocket cost. My copay may be $60, when the medicine is actually only $40! When I complained to our company about this the only response I got was "It's always a good idea to ask for the out of pocket price."
This NEVER happened before Obamacare.
Its a total mess and a scam and the insurance is the biggest benefactor of the system.
I wasn't arguing the merits of obamacare. I was arguing the merits of health care for all.
I got a little side-tracked with my frustration.
The problem with healthcare for all is many end up over paying, or paying for things they don't need or want. AHA even advertises that they need more healthy people to sign up to cover the cost of the unhealthy.
How is it fair to make some healthy kid just out of school and probably will see the doctor once every few years pay the same cost as someone who's 70 and smoked their whole life? But without massive tax increases, that is the only plan so far to make it for all.
You wouldn't make good drivers pay more to subsidize the cost of bad drivers, why should healthcare be different?
I agree that it's not perfect. I too have my own issues with your example, but that's the sacrfiice you have to make in order for everyone to be covered. does it suck that some tax the system because of their own personal life choices? but if I am forced to make the choice between having to endure folks who tax the system or someone not being able to access care for a condition they got through no fault of their own, I choose the former, every single time.
I would be much happier with a system that helped people with those conditions you were referring to. A sort of "major health issue" with a sort of "no fault of their own" clause.
But that isn't the case. The bottom line is we (or I) are forced to pay significantly more than my share. It also affects our healthcare decisions when the costs is still so high even after paying ridiculous premiums that we have to debate weather to wait to take our sick child to the doctor now or try to wait it out.
It might be misguided to blame the high costs on the consumer. Countries where everyone is insured have lower costs.
Terrible, very simpleton argument made all the time.
Let's go with your single payer model. What's the payment rate? The CMS Medicare fee schedule (or worse, States' Medicaid fee Schedule). Do you know how providers feel about said fee schedule? So, let's go there and see what happens. So, yes, you can get to your lower costs on the back of the providers. Problem is, you still haven't solved the (for example) obesity and diabetes epidemic. And the government (as Bloomberg proved) are helpless when it comes to that. So, let's lower the provider fee schedule again.
You have 2 lever points - cost per service and utilization. Government can do nothing about utilization unless you limit benefits or enforce some sort of management scheme (good luck with the gov't doing that). So, have at the cost per service. I'd love to hear gimmesometruth's thoughts about that.
The problem is the health insurers. They are making a fortune off this. I tried to search for average healthcare costs the first 2 sources gave me an average of $16,000 per family and the second was $22,000. Seems accurate because my cost is exactly in the middle at $19,000. Not to mention co-pays and deductibles families end up paying even more, with that price everything should be free.
What family comes even close to spending that in actual medical expenses? Very few. Get ride of insurance and the hospitals/doctors will actually only charge you a 1/3 of what they bill insurance. If you're worried about a major medical expense of $100,000 due to some accident, well just a few years of not paying this ridiculous rate will have that covered.
I don't understand arguments of how the skyrocketing increases and just on track with normal inflation? They've doubled or tripled in 6 or 7 years, and the coverage has gone down. That is not normal cost increase.
Obamacare forces us to buy into this scam at ridiculous rates and allows the health insurers to continue to hike price beyond what is affordable. 99% of families don't need this. 99% of families will have medical expenses 1/10 of what they are paying in premiums alone.
For now I'd prefer to opt out of insurance, get my extra 19k a year that's going to premiums, and pay a reasonable cash price for doctor visits that is way less that what insurance will bill for. And with an extra 19k a year I could actually afford to take my kid to the doctor.
You're claiming only 1% of the US population is unhealthy or uses more than $16,000 to $22,000 of health care costs. Cancer patients, diabetes, accident/shooting victims? Seriously? Where do you get the 99% have medical expenses of 1/10 of premium costs? Do you have a link to that stat? My health insurer sends me itemized listing of the costs and there is no way I would take the chance of being financially ruined because of unforeseen medical expenses. Its like life insurance, you hope you don't need it but better to pay in and have peace of mind.
In the above bolded example you provided, it would take 6.25 years to pay that off, without interest and late fees, which you know corporate healthcare is turning you over to collection agencies. They don't do finance.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
And pretty much any doctor I know is so busy that there's no need for fraudulent billing. They have all the work they can possibly do, and more.
is it perfect? of course not. A friend of mine had a heart issue, and while he got seen right away, he spent a night in a fucking hallway instead of in a room before his operation.
challenge my hypothesis all you want. I have lived it, I know hudreds of people who have had broken limbs and haven't had to wait to get treated.
"sick babies, bleeding people....sitting around for 18+ hours". that is LAUGHABLE. how more dramatic are you going to get to prove your point? the problem is, yes, there can be sick people that go to the ER when they shouldn't, and they end up waiting. Why? because there are people with life-threatening issues that need help first. that's called a system that works.
-EV 8/14/93