PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Medical bills underlie 60 percent of U.S. bankruptcies


dirk digler
06-04-2009, 07:25 AM
I hate to post and run but I thought this needed to be posted. And for those who say the system doesn't need reform in a big way well maybe you will re-think that position.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5530Y020090604

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Medical bills are involved in more than 60 percent of U.S. personal bankruptcies, an increase of 50 percent in just six years, U.S. researchers reported on Thursday.

More than 75 percent of these bankrupt families had health insurance but still were overwhelmed by their medical debts, the team at Harvard Law School, Harvard Medical School and Ohio University reported in the American Journal of Medicine.

"Using a conservative definition, 62.1 percent of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92 percent of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5,000, or 10 percent of pretax family income," the researchers wrote.
"Most medical debtors were well-educated, owned homes and had middle-class occupations."

The researchers, whose work was paid for by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, said the share of bankruptcies that could be blamed on medical problems rose by 50 percent from 2001 to 2007.

"Unless you're Warren Buffett, your family is just one serious illness away from bankruptcy," Harvard's Dr. David Himmelstein, an advocate for a single-payer health insurance program for the United States, said in a statement.

"For middle-class Americans, health insurance offers little protection," he added.

The United States is embarking on an overhaul of its healthcare system, which is now a patchwork of public programs such as Medicare and employer-sponsored health insurance that leaves 15 percent of the population -- 46 million people -- with no coverage.

About 170 million people get health insurance through an employer but President Barack Obama (http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/barackobama) says soaring healthcare costs are hurting the economy and forcing businesses to drop medical insurance for their workers.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 07:27 AM
The misinformation begins. The selling of the Obama plan is underway.....the fear tactic has worked so well, lets do it again...

Wait till we hear that only with the plan can we prevent flu pandemic that is scheduleds for....oh September yea...

dirk digler
06-04-2009, 07:30 AM
The misinformation begins. The selling of the Obama plan is underway.....the fear tactic has worked so well, lets do it again...

Wait till we hear that only with the plan can we prevent flu pandemic that is scheduleds for....oh September yea...

Why do you think this is mis-information it was an independent study? And to be honest this shouldn't be a surprise as health care costs have skyrocketed in the last 5-10 years and if you get 1 serious illness you are pretty much screwed financially.

BigRedChief
06-04-2009, 07:31 AM
The misinformation begins. The selling of the Obama plan is underway.....the fear tactic has worked so well, lets do it again...

Wait till we hear that only with the plan can we prevent flu pandemic that is scheduleds for....oh September yea...
He has said early and often that if we don't reform health care and bring down costs we have no hope of bringing down the deficits. And I agree.

blaise
06-04-2009, 07:32 AM
I could be wrong but from what I was told when I worked in the credit industry was that medical bills didn't count against your credit rating, so I wonder why it would compel you to file bankruptcy. Maybe it's state by state as far as medical bills and credit. We could see them on the reports but we were told not to consider them.
And this line:
"Using a conservative definition, 62.1 percent of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92 percent of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5,000."
8% declared bankruptcy with medical bills under 5,000? Why are you declaring bankruptcy for under 5,000? And if they had other debt that compelled them to do so then I wouldn't really say it was a medical bankruptcy.

Bwana
06-04-2009, 07:34 AM
The only question I have, is if they come up with some kind of national health program, HOW do they plan to pay for it......serious question.

stevieray
06-04-2009, 07:36 AM
regulators insisting banks loan to those who were high risk is to blame.

Saulbadguy
06-04-2009, 07:37 AM
The only question I have, is if they come up with some kind of national health program, HOW do they plan to pay for it......serious question.

MORE TAXES.

My only hope is that the taxes they impose are less than what i'm already paying for medical insurance. That isn't counting the amount I spend on medical bills.

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 07:41 AM
I freely admit that I have no idea what the "fix" is for health insurance.

But I know what we have now is completely dysfunctional. Linking health insurance to employment is insane. Getting fired is a double whammy -- lose your job AND your health insurance.

And, by the way, corporations somehow have the burden of paying for everyone's health insurance shifted onto them. Except now they're reducing benefits when they struggle too.

Meanwhile, the uninsured go to hospitals and everyone else effectively foots the bill for them too.

I'd like to know what other countries of substantial size do. Our system works very well for a very small percentage of the population, but the rest are hosed. And there are legitimate arguments that preventive treatment (which the uninsured basically can't get) would lower costs on government in the long run. Meanwhile, the government is already carrying a huge burden here (medicare/medicaid) and we still have a completely dysfunctional system.

But this is just one huge problem we have. We need massive systemic change becuase right now our train is nearly off the tracks and a massive derailment is looming. The entire welfare system needs reorganization, and the absurd deficits we are spawning will turn us into a third world country if it keeps up for much longer.

blaise
06-04-2009, 07:41 AM
Now that I look around I see that medical bills do normally count against your credit score. Plus they're probably counting credit card debt people accumulated by paying medical bills with their credit card.
But like Bwana asked, if it's so expensive to pay medical bills who would be paying for national healthcare? I don't anticipate the cost would suddenly go down.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 07:45 AM
He has said early and often that if we don't reform health care and bring down costs we have no hope of bringing down the deficits. And I agree.

Of course you do. And amazingly, while agreeing with his need to bring down the deficit, you agree with his need to create deficit....Sorta like I feel stronly both ways so Ill vote present.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 07:46 AM
I freely admit that I have no idea what the "fix" is for health insurance.

But I know what we have now is completely dysfunctional. Linking health insurance to employment is insane. Getting fired is a double whammy -- lose your job AND your health insurance.

And, by the way, corporations somehow have the burden of paying for everyone's health insurance shifted onto them. Except now they're reducing benefits when they struggle too.

Meanwhile, the uninsured go to hospitals and everyone else effectively foots the bill for them too.

I'd like to know what other countries of substantial size do. Our system works very well for a very small percentage of the population, but the rest are hosed. And there are legitimate arguments that preventive treatment (which the uninsured basically can't get) would lower costs on government in the long run. Meanwhile, the government is already carrying a huge burden here (medicare/medicaid) and we still have a completely dysfunctional system.

But this is just one huge problem we have. We need massive systemic change becuase right now our train is nearly off the tracks and a massive derailment is looming. The entire welfare system needs reorganization, and the absurd deficits we are spawning will turn us into a third world country if it keeps up for much longer.

Actually for the vast majority it is totally functional. We have areas of disfunction. We could deal with the disfunction...and keep the stuff thats working...

stevieray
06-04-2009, 07:47 AM
I

Meanwhile, the uninsured go to hospitals and everyone else effectively foots the bill for them too.

.

really? Ii just hds surgery for skin cancer and I'm not insured...I paid for it out of my pocket.

BucEyedPea
06-04-2009, 07:49 AM
Ayup! Marxists are full of dreams and fluff and look at what it's wrought—bankruptcy. Just as it always does. Not to mention it's totalitarianism and lack of privacy by having the govt assign us all numbers for medical purposes. Talk about unreasonable search and seizure or security in one's papers. Oh btw, wasn't Roe v Wade decided on the basis of privacy? Yup!

Folks, what you're seeing here is a patchwork socialist healthcare system to date. Think this is bad? Just wait 'til the govt takes over more of it.
First there will be rationing as demand soars. Then in order to control greater skyrocketing costs there will be price controls....until the govt has to take it all over
by subsidizing the education of doctors like they do in France where they make only $60k per year. Not to mention the right to live or die being put in the hands of the new state doctors on who they can pull the plug on to save money....like they do in Holland and where people are afraid to be admitted into a hospital. This is how the greed of the left will play it's way out.

We shall all be Winston Smith.

BigRedChief
06-04-2009, 07:51 AM
The only question I have, is if they come up with some kind of national health program, HOW do they plan to pay for it......serious question.
As I've said in the past I'm against a "socialized" approach to health care ala Canada and England.

I worked in health care for 9 years and it was obvious to me that if everyone had health care coverage it would be cheaper to deliver health care for everyone. We are paying for most of this already.

The increased costs for premiums would be offset by decreased costs in providing coverage for everyone. Those ER visits by the uninsured are expensive and who do you think is paying for those now? If they could go see a Dr. about an issue before it evolves into a huge costly cancer treatment etc that would lower costs.

You could get pharmacy companies to give "qualified" American citizens(the poor etc.) the drugs for the same price that they charge Africans. Lots of ways the helath care industry could kick in on the increased cost of coverage to lower the overall cost for us all.

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 07:53 AM
Now that I look around I see that medical bills do normally count against your credit score. Plus they're probably counting credit card debt people accumulated by paying medical bills with their credit card.
But like Bwana asked, if it's so expensive to pay medical bills who would be paying for national healthcare? I don't anticipate the cost would suddenly go down.

Someone needs to take a look at how to manage the cost side of things. And capitalism needs to be made a factor -- somehow there needs to be rewards for keeping costs DOWN, not awards for ordering more tests. NPR is covering an interesting study on someplace in Texas which has the alrgest per capita health care costs in the country. The doctors got tutored by some businessmen and they all figured out how to get rich off Medicare by ordering more tests. And yet the actual RESULTS -- the actual health of their patients -- is WORSE -- since any contact with health care procedures carries at least some risk.

But, of course, spreading the costs across more individuals or entities will lower per person costs. Currently, 100% of health care costs is carried by some combination of corporations (not smaller ones), individuals (co-pays and premium payments), insurance and the government in a very complex mix.

petegz28
06-04-2009, 07:54 AM
I freely admit that I have no idea what the "fix" is for health insurance.

But I know what we have now is completely dysfunctional. Linking health insurance to employment is insane. Getting fired is a double whammy -- lose your job AND your health insurance.

And, by the way, corporations somehow have the burden of paying for everyone's health insurance shifted onto them. Except now they're reducing benefits when they struggle too.

Meanwhile, the uninsured go to hospitals and everyone else effectively foots the bill for them too.

I'd like to know what other countries of substantial size do. Our system works very well for a very small percentage of the population, but the rest are hosed. And there are legitimate arguments that preventive treatment (which the uninsured basically can't get) would lower costs on government in the long run. Meanwhile, the government is already carrying a huge burden here (medicare/medicaid) and we still have a completely dysfunctional system.

But this is just one huge problem we have. We need massive systemic change becuase right now our train is nearly off the tracks and a massive derailment is looming. The entire welfare system needs reorganization, and the absurd deficits we are spawning will turn us into a third world country if it keeps up for much longer.


A good start to fixing our healthcare system is people eating better and exercising more as opposed to shoving McDonald's down their throat 5 times a week and sitting in front of the TV or XBOX. Will if it fix the problem? No. Will it reduce the impact of the problem? Tremendously.
But asking people to take some self-responsibility it beyond thought of a politician.

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 07:55 AM
really? Ii just hds surgery for skin cancer and I'm not insured...I paid for it out of my pocket.

Most uninsured are uninsured because they are unable to pay for it.

You, it appears, are uninsured because you are unwilling ot pay for it. You are in effect self-insured, having weighed your risks and chosen to gamble that you will spend less on health care costs than on insurance, since you appear to have the economic means to afford insurance, but choose not to.

I'd say that an EXTREMELY small percentage of the uninsured are in your category.

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 07:56 AM
A good start to fixing our healthcare system is people eating better and exercising more as opposed to shoving McDonald's down their throat 5 times a week and sitting in front of the TV or XBOX. Will if it fix the problem? No. Will it reduce the impact of the problem? Tremendously.
But asking people to take some self-responsibility it beyond thought of a politician.

What laws would you implement in furtherance of your goal?

Seriously -- people acting healthier is a great idea, but how in hell do you plan to make laws enforcing that? You gonna ban all fast food chains?

Cannibal
06-04-2009, 08:00 AM
I would like to know the Republican answer to the Health Care crisis.

Cannibal
06-04-2009, 08:00 AM
Denying there is a problem is not the answer either. Healthcare is crushing our economy.

stevieray
06-04-2009, 08:02 AM
Denying there is a problem is not the answer either. Healthcare is crushing our economy.
Living out of our means has nothing to do with it.

stevieray
06-04-2009, 08:02 AM
Most uninsured are uninsured because they are unable to pay for it.

You, it appears, are uninsured because you are unwilling ot pay for it. You are in effect self-insured, having weighed your risks and chosen to gamble that you will spend less on health care costs than on insurance, since you appear to have the economic means to afford insurance, but choose not to.

I'd say that an EXTREMELY small percentage of the uninsured are in your category.

I call it being responsible for myself.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 08:06 AM
299,106,000 People
253,499,000 Have Health Care Coverage

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/historic/hihistt2.xls
So, its a crisis, we must desroy what we have and replace it with Post Office and Licence bureau government controlled and run care.

***SPRAYER
06-04-2009, 08:11 AM
Hopey Change™ will fix everything!

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 08:15 AM
Most uninsured are uninsured because they are unable to pay for it.

You, it appears, are uninsured because you are unwilling ot pay for it. You are in effect self-insured, having weighed your risks and chosen to gamble that you will spend less on health care costs than on insurance, since you appear to have the economic means to afford insurance, but choose not to.

I'd say that an EXTREMELY small percentage of the uninsured are in your category.

No data would back that garbage up. SomePeople choose where to put their money. Some choose to have a 200 phone, a new ipod, a big screen TV and a car on 0% interest for 7 years and have no insurance becuase they choose not to. They are unwilling to pay for it, not unable to pay for it.

blaise
06-04-2009, 08:16 AM
The article seems to be worded kind of strange. For instance:
"Medical bills are involved in more than 60 percent of U.S. personal bankruptcies, an increase of 50 percent in just six years, U.S. researchers reported on Thursday."
That doesn't say medical bills were the reason for the bankruptcy. I don't know if it;s fair to say medical bills underlie the bankruptcy. If you have enough debt to declare bankruptcy it stands to reason you could have medical bills. It doesn't mention whether these people were driving vehicles they couldn't afford, taking vacations they shouldn't have, bought too expensive a house, etc.
And here:
"Using a conservative definition, 62.1 percent of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical."
That seems to be an incomplete thought to me. How are they defining it as medical? Is there a certain percent of outstanding debt that's medical as opposed to non-medical? The article seems to be trying to paint the picture that medical bills alone are causing 60% of bankruptcies, but just because those people had medical debt it doesn't mean it's a medical bankruptcy.

Chief Henry
06-04-2009, 08:22 AM
I'm not denying a problem in the health care field. The screaming %%%% highlighted in the story says 75% of the people goin bankrupt say they have health insurance.

Ok...then how are they spending the money they have ?
How many cell phones do they have ?
How many flat screen TV's do they have?
How many video games do they have?
How much of a home do they have compared to they're income?
How many times do they stop at Starbucks for a $4.50 cup of flaovered coffee

If 75% had health insurance...then i"m guessing many were not running a tight enough ship with they're finances.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 08:26 AM
That African Pharma plan is doing well. If we force the Pharmas to price at that level we will see new development about as good as the one we see come from African based Pharma companies. And imagine the breakthrough stuff we will have.

petegz28
06-04-2009, 08:28 AM
What laws would you implement in furtherance of your goal?

Seriously -- people acting healthier is a great idea, but how in hell do you plan to make laws enforcing that? You gonna ban all fast food chains?

Well I am not so sure if you can employ laws as opposed to insurance companies imposing policies. Such as discounts on your insurance if you fall in your ideal weight range, non-smoker, gym membership, etc, etc.

Also things like increased co-pays for visits that are deemed "trivial", e.g. "I have a cold and I want some anti-biotics". Knock the co-pay on that visit from $15 to $50. IMO, we have become a society that those with insurance have a tendancy to abuse it by running to the doctor for every little thing because it is only a $15 co-pay.

Mr. Flopnuts
06-04-2009, 08:29 AM
The misinformation begins. The selling of the Obama plan is underway.....the fear tactic has worked so well, lets do it again...

Wait till we hear that only with the plan can we prevent flu pandemic that is scheduleds for....oh September yea...

The republicans have a patent on fear tactics. You guys should sue.

petegz28
06-04-2009, 08:30 AM
No data would back that garbage up. SomePeople choose where to put their money. Some choose to have a 200 phone, a new ipod, a big screen TV and a car on 0% interest for 7 years and have no insurance becuase they choose not to. They are unwilling to pay for it, not unable to pay for it.

ACtually I would argue that there are people who are unable to afford their insurance. Particular if you work for a small business.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 08:35 AM
ACtually I would argue that there are people who are unable to afford their insurance. Particular if you work for a small business.

Im sure some are.
Im sure some are not.

Those who choose to not buy it are not the issue. Thats choice. If they choose not to and tank, its not my problem. If I choose to waste my money and ignore my health coverage its not your problem either.

If you work for a small business and the government requires your bosses business to pay for health coverage you may be titsup anyway since many businesses would be in a position to let some people go to pay the cost.

Velvet_Jones
06-04-2009, 08:36 AM
I would buy that 75 percent of bankruptcies are due to health reasons - not the lack of insurance. So if the bread winner of the house gets sick to the point they can't work, government ran healthcare is going to fix that and replace the bread winner's income? This is a stupid argument dirk.

Chief Henry
06-04-2009, 08:40 AM
I would buy that 75 percent of bankruptcies are due to health reasons - not the lack of insurance. So if the bread winner of the house gets sick to the point they can't work, government ran healthcare is going to fix that and replace the bread winner's income? This is a stupid argument dirk.


Thats where disabitly income insurance comes into play. Arguabley its one of the most important insurances to have for the reason you stated.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 08:41 AM
Thats where disabitly income insurance comes into play. Arguabley its one of the most important insurances to have for the reason you stated.


Yea but damn, have you seen the new 60 inch plasmas...dude, whats more important.

Velvet_Jones
06-04-2009, 08:47 AM
Thats where disabitly income insurance comes into play. Arguabley its one of the most important insurances to have for the reason you stated.

That is my point. Health insurance has nothing to do with it. We already have Medicare disability. It is a stupid argument to say we need government run healthcare because of the lack of disability insurance which we already have. Agree?

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 08:47 AM
Is the cell phone/plasma tv/vacation thing a new talking point or something?

Even if you toss this bankruptcy argument the system is still flawed. Today's argument seems like a waste of time.

I'm young, I own my own business, I haven't seen a doctor in 3.5 years (except for one physical) and I have a high deductible HSA plan. I'm paying $150/month and each of the previous 3 years I have been given a maximum rate increase.

Broken!

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 08:49 AM
150/month. Crushing costs like that cripple you I know.

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 08:56 AM
150/month. Crushing costs like that cripple you I know.Maybe I'm crazy but it seems high.

If I have to use the plan I pay for pretty much everything until I hit the $5k mark.

Chief Henry
06-04-2009, 09:03 AM
That is my point. Health insurance has nothing to do with it. We already have Medicare disability. It is a stupid argument to say we need government run healthcare because of the lack of disability insurance which we already have. Agree?

People choose not to buy disability insurance because they put a higher value on toys and entertainment.

BucEyedPea
06-04-2009, 09:04 AM
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
Most uninsured are uninsured because they are unable to pay for it.


I was uninsured for a while because as soon as I went to a newer less expensive insurance the premiums would begin to rise immediately because the govt was mandated certain things or people be covered. That pushed many people off insurance. These are the unintended consequencs of govt intervention for socialist ends. Insurance used to be affordable at one time. And it's none of the govt's business who can or cannot afford it.

Chief Henry
06-04-2009, 09:12 AM
Is the cell phone/plasma tv/vacation thing a new talking point or something?

Even if you toss this bankruptcy argument the system is still flawed. Today's argument seems like a waste of time.

I'm young, I own my own business, I haven't seen a doctor in 3.5 years (except for one physical) and I have a high deductible HSA plan. I'm paying $150/month and each of the previous 3 years I have been given a maximum rate increase.

Broken!

ITs not a new talking point...its common sense thinking after observing our spending habits. I watch daily how people spend they're money foolishly. I've got friends that pay for they're Country Club dues with :cuss: plastic because they dont' have the money in savings or checking acocunt. How do I know this, because they tell me. They all have health insurance and good jobs - but yet they're always straped for funds. But yet they think nothing of dropping a couple of hundred bucks a weekend for fun and entertainment.

petegz28
06-04-2009, 09:20 AM
150/month. Crushing costs like that cripple you I know.

For the business my Uncle's run, health insurance for a single persin was between $250-$300 a month. If you had a spouse or kids it was well over $400 a month.

I am not sure where you get your numbers from but $150 is the rate you pat at a large corporation for just 1 person.

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 09:21 AM
For the business my Uncle's run, health insurance for a single persin was between $250-$300 a month. If you had a spouse or kids it was well over $400 a month.

I am not sure where you get your numbers from but $150 is the rate you pat at a large corporation for just 1 person.I guess that I'm doing alright then.

New plasma for me and toss in a couple of cell phones. o:-)

petegz28
06-04-2009, 09:24 AM
Is the cell phone/plasma tv/vacation thing a new talking point or something?

Even if you toss this bankruptcy argument the system is still flawed. Today's argument seems like a waste of time.

I'm young, I own my own business, I haven't seen a doctor in 3.5 years (except for one physical) and I have a high deductible HSA plan. I'm paying $150/month and each of the previous 3 years I have been given a maximum rate increase.

Broken!

Not sure what type of coverage you have...but at Sprint, which has excellent benefits, I am paying about $170 a month for all my insurance and that covers my wife.

There is no way in hell a small business is going to provide good coverage at that price. If you are are only paying $150 a month and you are a small business I would be leary of the insurance. Maybe it is good....but something doesn't seem to be stirring the kool-aid.

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 09:28 AM
It's one of the BCBS super high deducible plans.

The HSA card is nice because I can use it to buy over the counter drugs pretax along with some other things.

petegz28
06-04-2009, 09:30 AM
It's one of the BCBS super high deducible plans.

The HSA card is nice because I can use it to buy over the counter drugs pretax along with some other things.

Ah, ok, key phrase there "super-high deductible". When you have kids, which I do not have meself, I think that will have to change. Judged by how much I see my friends whisking their kids off to their weekly doctor appointments.

Chief Henry
06-04-2009, 09:32 AM
It's one of the BCBS super high deducible plans.

The HSA card is nice because I can use it to buy over the counter drugs pretax along with some other things.

Kudo's to you for going the HSA plan...they make alot of sense. :thumb:

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 09:33 AM
Ah, ok, key phrase there "super-high deductible". When you have kids, which I do not have meself, I think that will have to change. Judged by how much I see my friends whisking their kids off to their weekly doctor appointments.For sure.

Adding my wife to the plan would be ridiculous as well. She's been quoted at $400/month because she was in a car accident and had to have shoulder surgery a couple of years ago.

Her current employer is getting killed on premiums. It's only 11 people and one of them has been fighting cancer for close to 5 years now. They've had to come up with some pretty creative plans just to keep everyone insured.

SBK
06-04-2009, 09:36 AM
Doctors have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in malpractice insurance, health insurance is super expensive because people DON'T pay for it now, so they don't care about what each visit costs.

Make it law that if you sue and lose you cover all the legal bills, if you sue and win the loser pays all legal costs. This would lower the amount of junk lawsuits considerably, will lower the cost of malpractice insurance, and thus will lower costs of day to day care.

But being able to sue anyone for any reason you can dream up allows the non-achiever to steal from the achiever, so I doubt we'll see any changes to that under an administration/Congress that wants to do the same thing.

Chief Henry
06-04-2009, 09:41 AM
Doctors have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in malpractice insurance, health insurance is super expensive because people DON'T pay for it now, so they don't care about what each visit costs.

Make it law that if you sue and lose you cover all the legal bills, if you sue and win the loser pays all legal costs. This would lower the amount of junk lawsuits considerably, will lower the cost of malpractice insurance, and thus will lower costs of day to day care.

But being able to sue anyone for any reason you can dream up allows the non-achiever to steal from the achiever, so I doubt we'll see any changes to that under an administration/Congress that wants to do the same thing.

This would help...but it has no chance of ever seeing the night of day.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 10:40 AM
Doctors have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in malpractice insurance, health insurance is super expensive because people DON'T pay for it now, so they don't care about what each visit costs.

Make it law that if you sue and lose you cover all the legal bills, if you sue and win the loser pays all legal costs. This would lower the amount of junk lawsuits considerably, will lower the cost of malpractice insurance, and thus will lower costs of day to day care.

But being able to sue anyone for any reason you can dream up allows the non-achiever to steal from the achiever, so I doubt we'll see any changes to that under an administration/Congress that wants to do the same thing.

Lawyers write the laws so lawyers have laws so lawyers have jobs. Then they say it aint so.
One lawyer in a small town is broke. Two lawyers both live super fine.

shitgoose
06-04-2009, 10:55 AM
Let the govt take over and soon enough we'll have the Kevorkian health care plan were if you get cancer or something they just put a bullet in your head and it only cost $.42 to remedy the problem. Oh, but then where will we come up with the money for the funeral? Better get the govt to help with that too 'cause Billy Ray needs a $6k casket and a tombstone with a platinum grill.

SBK
06-04-2009, 11:07 AM
I really think a big part of the problem is a lack of a free market in the health care world.

If we had to pay for day to day care, not hospital stays and cancer type things, but for sore throats and things nobody would pay doctors crazy rates, and those costs would come down so fast your head would spin.
Some doctor did something like a 70 bucks a month come as much as you want, we'd see more stuff like that--similar to gym memberships or something.
Posted via Mobile Device

wild1
06-04-2009, 01:16 PM
There are a boatload of people out there for whom it's a hobby to pick fruit from the medical system. If something is free, people will work all day long to see how much they can squeeze out of it. They are the ones taking their kids to the ED when they're just normal, kid-sick, or demanding to see specialists for aches and pains. A lot of these people are in some kind of office every week for marginal issues, and will not even pay a $10 copay.

I would say that the typical subject may rarely maintain steady employment. They're generally overweight, and thus have minor illnesses all the time (which they seek medical attention for every time). These types of people are always having "accidents". It's extremely curious to me. You never see a lawyer come into the ED having cut his hand on a broken dish, or having fallen down the stairs, or having gotten in a fight at a bar needing stitching, or having hit himself in the head with a car door. You don't see people dressed nicely in the ED very often. What you do see are overweight, shabbily dressed people, often under the influence. People in life who are successful take at least marginal care of themselves, also seem in my anecdotal experience to be pretty unlikely to do something stupid and hurt themselves. The guy in the chair in waiting is never a guy wearing suits or an entrepreneur or someone with a PhD. In my opinion a lot of the same people you could see angrily waiting on line down at your acronym government benefit office are the ones who mysteriously seem to need to come to the hospital all the time and create a lot of the volume issues in the system.

Of course many people do have legitimate accidents, and that's why the place exists. But when accidents are so frequent you have to thing that maybe 'accident' isn't exactly the right term

It's something that should be studied, that could be modeled. The talking point is "the poor can't afford health care" but the reality is that the poor get the lion's share of care dispensed in this country, especially the urgent care, and there is a definite relationship between a general lack of common sense and their consumption of medical care, in my opinion.

jjjayb
06-04-2009, 01:22 PM
Why do you think this is mis-information it was an independent study? And to be honest this shouldn't be a surprise as health care costs have skyrocketed in the last 5-10 years and if you get 1 serious illness you are pretty much screwed financially.

And how much of the bankruptcy has to do with missed work as opposed to the whopping $5k in expenses?

Hydrae
06-04-2009, 01:32 PM
I have not read the replies to this thread yet.

The problem as I see it (and I believe the OP shows this to be true) is not whether people have insurance. The problem is in the expense of medical care in this country. The OP states that 75% of these bankruptcies are from people who HAD insurance. How is providing insurance to more people going to answer that issue?

jjjayb
06-04-2009, 01:37 PM
I have not read the replies to this thread yet.

The problem as I see it (and I believe the OP shows this to be true) is not whether people have insurance. The problem is in the expense of medical care in this country. The OP states that 75% of these bankruptcies are from people who HAD insurance. How is providing insurance to more people going to answer that issue?

No no no. You're not supposed to notice that. Look over here at the shiny object instead. Don't you know that gubment insurance will save the economy, cure cancer and put us back on the moon?

dirk digler
06-04-2009, 02:00 PM
No data would back that garbage up. SomePeople choose where to put their money. Some choose to have a 200 phone, a new ipod, a big screen TV and a car on 0% interest for 7 years and have no insurance becuase they choose not to. They are unwilling to pay for it, not unable to pay for it.

Do you any idea what you are talking about? Seriously you must live in alternate universe out in the sticks.

I will use the company that I work for as an example.

I work for a non-profit company that employs roughly 1000 employees. I know for a fact the company pays around $4 million a year for health insurance with Blue Cross and Blue Shield.

For single premuims it is not too bad, $120\month for a $2000 deductible and $160\month for a $1000 deductible all with no co-pay.

For families it is back breaking. It is $500 a month for a $3000 deductible. Simple math will tell you it is $6000 a year out of your paycheck and 98% of our employees are paid under $30,000 gross a year. Add on that for all our plans the insurance doesn't pay a dime until you meet your deductible so for a family that totals $9000 a year before the insurance company pays a dime.

Now if you think $9000 dollars upfront is affordable or somehow a good deal then you are stupider than I thought.

It is no wonder alot of people forgo insurance because in the last 6-8 years wages have been stagnant while health insurance costs have skyrocketed to the point people can no longer afford it anymore.

The more I read about this issue the more progressive I have become where I am to the point I am starting to believe that a single payer system is the only way to go. Politically it will never happen but it should have done in the first place because as it is right now we are already paying everyone's health care costs one way or another.

Hydrae
06-04-2009, 02:09 PM
No no no. You're not supposed to notice that. Look over here at the shiny object instead. Don't you know that gubment insurance will save the economy, cure cancer and put us back on the moon?

Sorry, I try to deal in realities when possible. I will go back to my hole now. :sulk:

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 02:10 PM
Do you any idea what you are talking about? Seriously you must live in alternate universe out in the sticks.

I will use the company that I work for as an example.

I work for a non-profit company that employs roughly 1000 employees. I know for a fact the company pays around $4 million a year for health insurance with Blue Cross and Blue Shield.

For single premuims it is not too bad, $120\month for a $2000 deductible and $160\month for a $1000 deductible all with no co-pay.

For families it is back breaking. It is $500 a month for a $3000 deductible. Simple math will tell you it is $6000 a year out of your paycheck and 98% of our employees are paid under $30,000 gross a year. Add on that for all our plans the insurance doesn't pay a dime until you meet your deductible for a family that totals $9000 a year before the insurance company pays a dime.

Now if you think $9000 dollars upfront is affordable or somehow a good deal then you are stupider than I thought.

It is no wonder alot of people forgo insurance because in the last 6-8 years wages have been stagnant while health insurance costs have skyrocketed to the point people can no longer afford it anymore.

The more I read about this issue the more progressive I have become where I am to the point I am starting to believe that a single payer system is the only way to go. Politically it will never happen but it should have done in the first place because as it is right now we are already paying everyone's health care costs one way or another.

I dont disagree that healt insurance is high. Health Care costs are high thus so is the insurance.

I too benefit from Insurance provided by employer and my costs are similar to yours. I also pay for disability insurance and extended benefits.

Facts are just simple facts. Thats what it costs. So some people choose to not have the insurance because they choose to spend that 5000 on something else. I dont care how they spend their money I just do not think I have a responsibility to pay for their healt insurance if they refuse to.

We hear all abpout the 9000 deductible and what a load that is. Its as iff every one of those families have 9000 in med expences every year...they dont. And as someone stated earlier people dont look for a best price for HC they run to the emergency room instead of a doctor...and they do it for nicks, scratches, colds and a sniffle. Its nuts. People should be told to go home and go see a doctor or just go home you will be fine. Or Charge 50 bucks to see a doc before you see one...if it costs em they will quit going for every little thing.

People will go without health care but never go a weekend without some booze,a couple nights out, and a house full of gagets and a car with every option. Will you rank health insurance over AC in your car? most wont..its a choice. You choose but its your responsibility.

dirk digler
06-04-2009, 02:21 PM
I dont disagree that healt insurance is high. Health Care costs are high thus so is the insurance.

I too benefit from Insurance provided by employer and my costs are similar to yours. I also pay for disability insurance and extended benefits.

Facts are just simple facts. Thats what it costs. So some people choose to not have the insurance because they choose to spend that 5000 on something else. I dont care how they spend their money I just do not think I have a responsibility to pay for their healt insurance if they refuse to.

We hear all abpout the 9000 deductible and what a load that is. Its as iff every one of those families have 9000 in med expences every year...they dont. And as someone stated earlier people dont look for a best price for HC they run to the emergency room instead of a doctor...and they do it for nicks, scratches, colds and a sniffle. Its nuts. People should be told to go home and go see a doctor or just go home you will be fine. Or Charge 50 bucks to see a doc before you see one...if it costs em they will quit going for every little thing.

People will go without health care but never go a weekend without some booze,a couple nights out, and a house full of gagets and a car with every option. Will you rank health insurance over AC in your car? most wont..its a choice. You choose but its your responsibility.

Fair enough HCF and I really have no problem with what you posted.

But for alot of people $6000 is alot of money out of your paycheck when you only gross $20,000. If that was my salary there was no way I can afford that and still pay rent, utilites, and food.

For me since I have no co-pay every time I go to the doctor it cost me around $100. That is the main reason why I don't go to the doctor unless I absolutely have to.

Anyway, good post HCF.

VAChief
06-04-2009, 02:24 PM
Living out of our means has nothing to do with it.

Greed certainly is big factor, however it doesn't fully explain why costs continue to rise at a rate far beyond inflation and has for quite some time now. That is why I see it as something that has to change from the present, it is unstainable.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 02:26 PM
Greed certainly is big factor, however it doesn't fully explain why costs continue to rise at a rate far beyond inflation and has for quite some time now. That is what I see it as something that has to change from the present, it is unstainable.

Well inflation will soon pick up, maybe that will help.

wild1
06-04-2009, 02:39 PM
i think that living outside our means does have something to do with it. The vast majority of people are practically broke. They have little in the way of savings, they have debt accumulation many times their annual income. They have maxed credit cards, they lease cars they can't afford, they're living in double the house they can really afford.

Then they have a major expense like a $5,000 medical incident - which is a lot of money of course, but not a lot over the space of a year or a couple of years - and they end up losing their house.

People in America live their financial lives right on the edge of the envelope. They might go bankrupt due to a medical expense, but that's not really the cause. The root cause is lack of coherent financial planning for a contingency such as this.

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 02:39 PM
Do you any idea what you are talking about? Seriously you must live in alternate universe out in the sticks.

I will use the company that I work for as an example.

I work for a non-profit company that employs roughly 1000 employees. I know for a fact the company pays around $4 million a year for health insurance with Blue Cross and Blue Shield.

For single premuims it is not too bad, $120\month for a $2000 deductible and $160\month for a $1000 deductible all with no co-pay.

For families it is back breaking. It is $500 a month for a $3000 deductible. Simple math will tell you it is $6000 a year out of your paycheck and 98% of our employees are paid under $30,000 gross a year. Add on that for all our plans the insurance doesn't pay a dime until you meet your deductible so for a family that totals $9000 a year before the insurance company pays a dime.

Now if you think $9000 dollars upfront is affordable or somehow a good deal then you are stupider than I thought.

It is no wonder alot of people forgo insurance because in the last 6-8 years wages have been stagnant while health insurance costs have skyrocketed to the point people can no longer afford it anymore.

The more I read about this issue the more progressive I have become where I am to the point I am starting to believe that a single payer system is the only way to go. Politically it will never happen but it should have done in the first place because as it is right now we are already paying everyone's health care costs one way or another.

You don't understand. Not at all.

The only people who don't have health insurance are either too busy spending it on ganja or people who are too busy living off welfare to care because they're planning an entire life around not working or spending any of thier own money on anything.

Or, of course, people who are too stupid and lazy to make any decent money.

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 02:43 PM
Im sure some are.
Im sure some are not.

Those who choose to not buy it are not the issue. Thats choice. If they choose not to and tank, its not my problem. If I choose to waste my money and ignore my health coverage its not your problem either.

If you work for a small business and the government requires your bosses business to pay for health coverage you may be titsup anyway since many businesses would be in a position to let some people go to pay the cost.

Question -- what SHOULD happen (in your mind) when an uninsured person who is genuinely sick goes to the hospital for his/her issue(s)?

jjjayb
06-04-2009, 02:51 PM
Question -- what SHOULD happen (in your mind) when an uninsured person who is genuinely sick goes to the hospital for his/her issue(s)?

What happens when a poor hungry person goes to a fancy restaurant? Should we feed them for free while everyone else pays? Maybe, just maybe they might decide to go ahead and put money towards health insurance instead of eating out, buying playstations etc. etc. if they know they will be turned away.

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 02:54 PM
What happens when a poor hungry person goes to a fancy restaurant? Should we feed them for free while everyone else pays? Maybe, just maybe they might decide to go ahead and put money towards health insurance instead of eating out, buying playstations etc. etc. if they know they will be turned away.

Ok. So turn them away.

What happens if it's a prolonged issue, like cancer, that takes tens of thousands to treat, and they are uninsured but pay for the first, say, $12,000 and then run out of money.

When they start to get behind on bills stop treatment?

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 02:55 PM
I have a very good friend who is 30. She has two small kids, married to a loser from the get go and she has breast cancer. Not one dime of insurance. Its horrible. What she has been through you would wish on no one.

Her care has benn excellent. Her cost has been virtually nill except for the suffering she has been through.

The system is in place with a safety net. I see it weekly with this person.

The genuine need is taken care of.

The freeloaders who scam the system are a very real source of cost and a Hospital ER cannot go out and say you will be well, go home, take two asprin and drink water. Why? Stupid damn rules and regs fostered by and written because of bad lawyers and bad lawsuits and the legal system lives of this crap.

The docs pay incredible malpractice fees...why...Stupid lawsuits with insane settlements and legal costs, thats why.

The cost of health care under real scrutiny will show the real cost to provide care is far far far less than the total costs driven by non care costs and bullshit.

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 02:56 PM
i think that living outside our means does have something to do with it. The vast majority of people are practically broke. They have little in the way of savings, they have debt accumulation many times their annual income. They have maxed credit cards, they lease cars they can't afford, they're living in double the house they can really afford.

Then they have a major expense like a $5,000 medical incident - which is a lot of money of course, but not a lot over the space of a year or a couple of years - and they end up losing their house.

People in America live their financial lives right on the edge of the envelope. They might go bankrupt due to a medical expense, but that's not really the cause. The root cause is lack of coherent financial planning for a contingency such as this.

Can you take a guess at what the median US income is without looking it up?

I bet you'd be surprised....

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 02:58 PM
I have a very good friend who is 30. She has two small kids, married to a loser from the get go and she has breast cancer. Not one dime of insurance. Its horrible. What she has been through you would wish on no one.

Her care has benn excellent. Her cost has been virtually nill except for the suffering she has been through.

The system is in place with a safety net. I see it weekly with this person.

The genuine need is taken care of.

The freeloaders who scam the system are a very real source of cost and a Hospital ER cannot go out and say you will be well, go home, take two asprin and drink water. Why? Stupid damn rules and regs fostered by and written because of bad lawyers and bad lawsuits and the legal system lives of this crap.

The docs pay incredible malpractice fees...why...Stupid lawsuits with insane settlements and legal costs, thats why.

The cost of health care under real scrutiny will show the real cost to provide care is far far far less than the total costs driven by non care costs and bullshit.

First, while MedMal is a real cost, especially in some specialties, it's just a covnenient excuse to blame high health care costs on "evil ambulance chasers".

Second, what would you recommend if, say, someone operated on the wrong leg? That people can't sue? Do you honestly think that people sue and get paid millions because of minor misdiagnosis? They don't, believe me.

Finally, how much "freeloading" do you think goes on, and of what type? I'm sure there is some, no doubt. But is it so mucht hat it seriously affects something as massive as the entire US health care system?

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 03:02 PM
treated you moron just as we have today. We pay the fee. Its all ready in place

Im sure we have millions of legs taken off that are wrong. So you may be right. And these minor mis diagnoses ....everyday and no doubt a plauge on us all.

And Im sure that I have a bias against lawyers, its the evil docs who really are the issue.

wild1
06-04-2009, 03:04 PM
Can you take a guess at what the median US income is without looking it up?

I bet you'd be surprised....

I'd say probably $40-50k

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 03:12 PM
treated you moron just as we have today. We pay the fee. Its all ready in place

Im sure we have millions of legs taken off that are wrong. So you may be right. And these minor mis diagnoses ....everyday and no doubt a plauge on us all.

And Im sure that I have a bias against lawyers, its the evil docs who really are the issue.

Very few doctors are evil. Very few lawyers are evil.

And yet, when doctors make serious mistakes, they can and should be held accountable, and have to compensate victims.

I'm not saying tort reform can't be part of the equation, but it's absurd to lay it all at the feet of suit-happy lawyers. It just isn't true except, MAYBE, for extremely high risk practices (Ob/Gyn comes ot mind).

Amnorix
06-04-2009, 03:13 PM
I'd say probably $40-50k

Not bad. Households are at about 50,000, which means, of course, that half of all households in American are tryign to live on $50,000 in pre-tax income.

dirk digler
06-04-2009, 03:23 PM
You don't understand. Not at all.

The only people who don't have health insurance are either too busy spending it on ganja or people who are too busy living off welfare to care because they're planning an entire life around not working or spending any of thier own money on anything.

Or, of course, people who are too stupid and lazy to make any decent money.

I look at my situation which is probably not different than most people.

I am a single parent who has to provide insurance for my daughter, pay child support, pay mortgage, car payment, utilities etc... If something really major happened I would be pretty closed to screwed even though I have saved a little.

Now if I had multiple children with multiple child support payments I would be fucked.

Velvet_Jones
06-04-2009, 03:38 PM
I look at my situation which is probably not different than most people.

I am a single parent who has to provide insurance for my daughter, pay child support, pay mortgage, car payment, utilities etc... If something really major happened I would be pretty closed to screwed even though I have saved a little.

Now if I had multiple children with multiple child support payments I would be ****ed.

Dude - Why do you keep talking about disability/life insurance instead of healthcare. Health insurance whether private or provided by the government isn't going to help you if something catastrophic happens and you are unable to earn a living. Health insurance isn't going to pay your normal - non health related bills.

JohnnyV13
06-04-2009, 04:22 PM
Part of the solution is data management.

I know it sounds crazy, but in most medical practices, the physicians has no idea what the patient can pay when he prescribes treatment.

In the normal course of things, physicians decided the best course of treatment without knowing whether the patient's insurance will cover said proceedure. Sounds nuts, but the reality is that private and government insurers change their payment profile on an almost constant basis, making it impossible for a physician to keep track.

Consequently, patient treatment is determined on an almost pure medical basis without any reference to financial wherewithal.

After treatment is prescribed, the physician's administrative staff submits insurance claims. A certain portion becomes patient responsibility if insurance fails to cover costs.

Often, the physician's office does not recieve payment until month's after service. At times, with multiple submission due to claiming different diagnosis codes which could possibly cover a patients medical situation, it can be many months (6 to 12) before insurance coverage is determined. That's why patients will often recieve bills long after treatment (and hit the roof).

My company's (Rezeta, Inc.) medical practice software, however, puts financial information in the doctor's hands right when he prescrbes treatment. Physicians with our system have an insurance claims rate over 90%. They have a good idea immediately what will and will not be covered at the initial consultation with the patient.

NOt only can the physician immediately toy with possible diagnosis codes to maximize coverage, he can work with the patient to devise the best possible treatment given the funds (insurance and patient's ability to pay) available.

Any good integrated EHR/medical practice management software should do this, and basically allow the patients ability to pay to become part of the treatment plan right from the outset.

HonestChieffan
06-04-2009, 04:27 PM
cut the paperwork required and then you save more

mlyonsd
06-04-2009, 04:29 PM
I don't know what the answer is but someone that doesn't work shouldn't expect the same coverage as someone taking in a pay check paying taxes that is offered a better plan from their employer.

JohnnyV13
06-04-2009, 04:35 PM
cut the paperwork required and then you save more

Certainly, this is true. But, its much easier said than done. If you you're going to have private insurance, each one of them will have a different coverage profile.

Also, coverage profiles aren't static, because medical therapy constantly changes. Yesterday's "experimental" proceedure becomes favored practice. Yesterday's best approach, is suddenly proven not effective.

These two factors make data management the issue with respect to including payment ability in a treatment plan. Obviously, tailoring a treatment plan to funds available will help prevent medically driven bankrupcies.

mikey23545
06-04-2009, 04:35 PM
Now if I had multiple children with multiple child support payments I would be ****ed.

If you can't afford to have kids, THEN DON'T FUCKING HAVE THEM.

Don't have them and expect me to pay for the little fuckers.

jAZ
06-04-2009, 05:11 PM
I call it being responsible for myself.

You'll call it bankruptcy when you wake up in the hospital after a heart attack, car wreck, or are have to go on dialysis for kidney disease or some other catastrophic condition occurs that you are betting against.

Chiefspants
06-04-2009, 05:18 PM
It's all liberal propaganda. :(

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 05:58 PM
I don't know what the answer is but someone that doesn't work shouldn't expect the same coverage as someone taking in a pay check paying taxes that is offered a better plan from their employer.What should someone that's out of work expect in your world?

RedNeckRaider
06-04-2009, 06:08 PM
What should someone that's out of work expect in your world?

I guess that they need to get a job. Not a shot at you, but I feel we should pay our own way. We already have welfare for those who can not, and sadly many who could. I really feel like moving towards a goverment should take care of us type country is not a good thing.

SBK
06-04-2009, 06:13 PM
I am 100% against gov't care. However, here's something I would support, and would not have a problem with the state gov't paying for, and the taxes that would go with it.

Instead of health care for all, create a hospital in cities that are designed for the uninsured. Nobody is refused, nobody is billed, and care can be administered by the doctors in this town. If you don't want to use this hospital, you go elsewhere and pay for it, if you want gov't care, you go to this hospital.

If you go to another hospital for urgent care, ie you've been shot, you are stablized and the gov't hospital is billed when you've been transferred. If you have a sneeze you are sent to the gov't hospital.

Very similar to Broadlawns in Des Moines. You wait in line there, but you get the same docs as the other hospitals in town, as they rotate in for a day or 2 a week.

This way nobody is denied care, and nobody is forced to have gov't insurance.

Taking all the people milking the system out of the private hospitals would lower costs for all who are there considerably as well.

It's a compromise, and it's a win/win deal as both sides are given the care and freedom they desire.
Posted via Mobile Device

JohnnyV13
06-04-2009, 06:25 PM
SBK, how is your solution any different than minimum government insurance? In essense, a "floor" level of care for everyone?

SBK
06-04-2009, 06:32 PM
SBK, how is your solution any different than minimum government insurance? In essense, a "floor" level of care for everyone?

You can opt-in or opt out. It leaves the choice to the people, not the gov't.

Also, it's run from the state level, not federal.
Posted via Mobile Device

JohnnyV13
06-04-2009, 07:03 PM
One plan that's gaining traction is a government sponsored insurance plan. I guess the idea is sort of like the core theory of fascism, government participation in a market sector to prevent oligopolistic price gouging and force competition.

People will not be forced to buy into the govt plan, but the intent is to emphasize "affordability". Which, of course, will mean a rather basic level of care. I think this is a better "minimum" option than local municipalities compelling one day of free care a week from practicing doctors.

As much as I hate to say it, but a compelled workforce is one that is going to perform poorly.

And, SBK's solution will still require government tax funding. Medical doctors are only a small part of delivering medical care. What about machines? Will you expect manufacturers to donate medical equipment? What about the building, plus maintenance costs? Will construction firms and local utilities be compelled to provide power, water, and building repair for free? Are pharmacuedical companies going to provide drugs for free to your state run hospital?

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 07:14 PM
I guess that they need to get a job. Not a shot at you, but I feel we should pay our own way. We already have welfare for those who can not, and sadly many who could. I really feel like moving towards a goverment should take care of us type country is not a good thing.I'm not taking it as a stab. I'm working and I'm covered.

I think that people expect a certain level of care regardless of their situation. Sort of what SBK is alluding to. Nothing fancy but something.

mlyonsd
06-04-2009, 07:16 PM
What should someone that's out of work expect in your world?

For starters, nothing for illegals if they're over 18.

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 07:24 PM
For starters, nothing for illegals if they're over 18.Deal!

It's a hard sell for the doctors though. They are going to have a hard time watching someone die.

mlyonsd
06-04-2009, 07:31 PM
Deal!

It's a hard sell for the doctors though. They are going to have a hard time watching someone die.

I know. If they want to offer their clinic services including all costs for free its up to them.

Second, I have no problem with Universal Health Care for minors.

jiveturkey
06-04-2009, 07:41 PM
And I'll agree to put some kind of cap on malpractice lawsuits.

I think that we're getting somewhere. :)

SBK
06-04-2009, 10:33 PM
For starters, nothing for illegals if they're over 18.

Even though I'm an evil conservative, there is no reason that anyone in this country should be without the option of care. There needs to be something in place, I just happen to disagree with our Dear Leader about what that something should be.

googlegoogle
06-05-2009, 02:17 AM
Doctors and hospitals are gouging.

Idea = Open up the system by forcing prices to be displayed.

Let free markets work. Republicans take money from the doctors unions so. :shakeshead.

BucEyedPea
06-05-2009, 06:11 AM
One plan that's gaining traction is a government sponsored insurance plan.
Planning? Govt planning in an area for economic reasons falls under big govt, fascism, and socialism.

We all know how this type of planning winds up.


I guess the idea is sort of like the core theory of fascism, government participation in a market sector to prevent oligopolistic price gouging and force competition.
You can't have this planning you want without reducing competition.
These so called "oligopolistic" prices people are complaining about came about due to govt trying to make sure more people were covered. It gaurantees a market for the suppliers because it makes demand soar higher without enough suppliers. It DOES NOT WORK.

All you can do is go to price controls which will create shortages and lines. There is no artificial fix.

As much as I hate to say it, but a compelled workforce is one that is going to perform poorly.
So does gauranteed access to care no matter what.This is what we have right now from earlier interventions in healthcare markets beginning with the HMO act of the 70's. Now we have doctors and patients unhappy with corporations happy.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Are pharmacuedical companies going to provide drugs for free to your state run hospital?
Tiime to break up the monopolistic hold of the Big Pharma-Medical Complex.

You know other forms of competition is alternative medicine which is cheaper. It's already growing despite the poo-ing of some here and the attempts by Big Pharma to put it out of business by trying to regulate vitamins out of existence by classifying them as drugs. You want to bring in competition to help pricing....free up the healthcare markets. Break up their near monopolistic hold and protection by govt for it.

dirk digler
06-05-2009, 06:15 AM
Dude - Why do you keep talking about disability/life insurance instead of healthcare. Health insurance whether private or provided by the government isn't going to help you if something catastrophic happens and you are unable to earn a living. Health insurance isn't going to pay your normal - non health related bills.

Velvet I am not talking about something catastrophic. Alot of people have cancer or heart bypass surgeries and continue working. But what happens is the medical bills are too much and they go bankrupt.

If you can't afford to have kids, THEN DON'T FUCKING HAVE THEM.

Don't have them and expect me to pay for the little fuckers.

:spock:

Ever heard of divorce dumbass? Maybe you could afford them while married then you divorced and the father gets stuck paying child support + provide health insurance. It is a common thing.

mlyonsd
06-05-2009, 06:38 AM
Even though I'm an evil conservative, there is no reason that anyone in this country should be without the option of care. There needs to be something in place, I just happen to disagree with our Dear Leader about what that something should be.

I don't if they're here illegaly and undocumented.

Messier
06-05-2009, 07:29 AM
I call it being responsible for myself.

Really? My wife is going through breast cancer treatment. As of now the total cost of the surgeries and the treatment is over $500,000. Would you be able to afford that cost without insurance? Is it irresponsible to not be be able to afford medical bills that high without assistance?

BucEyedPea
06-05-2009, 07:33 AM
Really? My wife is going through breast cancer treatment. As of now the total cost of the surgeries and the treatment is over $500,000. Would you be able to afford that cost without insurance? Is it irresponsible to not be be able to afford medical bills that high without assistance?

Let's say millions have those bills, where does all this money come from? It adds up and astronomically.
If it bankrupts an individual, what would it do to the country, particularly if everyone is covered?

Sorry to hear about your wife.

Messier
06-05-2009, 07:44 AM
Let's say millions have those bills, where does all this money come from? It adds up and astronomically.
If it bankrupts an individual, what would it do to the country, particularly if everyone is covered?

Sorry to hear about your wife.

Thank You.

dirk digler
06-05-2009, 07:44 AM
Really? My wife is going through breast cancer treatment. As of now the total cost of the surgeries and the treatment is over $500,000. Would you be able to afford that cost without insurance? Is it irresponsible to not be be able to afford medical bills that high without assistance?

Holy shit. I had no idea it cost that much. I hope your wife is getting better.

And people wonder why health care costs bankrupt people.