Thread: Health Care in the USA

Exactly!!! THANK YOU!

If the government would get their hands out of the business and stop making more paper work, things would be cheaper.

If insurance would really be INSURANCE and not pay for everything even though it isn't an emergency, things would be cheaper.

If doctor's visits were pay out of pocket, doctors would have to fight to compete for the best care at the best price, which again would make things cheaper.

The economy, health care, and insurance would be much better off if things got simplified and direct, instead of more bureaucratic and regulated.

And Jnich67, thanks for your insights. You are right about all the mergers. I remember my dad's company going through a crap load of them. Even with the merger's they still shopped around for the cheapest one. Which they are actually using a regional one like you said. Although that regional one is gaining steam and slowly kicking the big guys in the butts in PA. That's the way free market economies work. Provide the best care and the lowest prices and leave the consumers decide. There are a bunch of choices out there, because there's a very large insurance company book that the doctor has to go through to find out what your plan details. I have a few friends in medicine; they love that book. HA!

The illegal immigrant argument is also correct; however, the government insurance will also cover non-emergency services. So not only the emergency operations and surgeries, but also the routine medical check ups and procedures will be covered by John Q Taxpayer. That money will be made up somewhere in the wonderful web of premiums or taxes.

You years of $30 premiums are definitely still attainable. The way insurance was originally conceived was to insure against bigger operations and other unforeseeable things. Now, insurance is suppose to cover everything. The insurance companies need to raise premiums to hire people to go through all the paper work that is sent because of one doctors appointment. What happened to the days when you went in and gave the doctor $40 bucks and he made you better. I would rather pay $40 doctors visits and $30 premiums then pay $10, insured doctors visits and $300-400 premiums. Those are the trade offs. I like the former rather then the latter.

Originally Posted by slt5103

What happened to the days when you went in and gave the doctor $40 bucks and he made you better. I would rather pay $40 doctors visits and $30 premiums then pay $10, insured doctors visits and $300-400 premiums. Those are the trade offs. I like the former rather then the latter.

Who is your doctor? Two years ago I went in for my first checkup (uninsured) in nine years. It cost me $200.00 with the bloodwork. A clean bill of health and when I turned 60 I decided it might be prudent to get insurance and I did. It started out at $460.00 per month and 6 months later when I went back for the same check up to the same doctor it cost $25.00 co pay. The insurance went up just a couple of months ago to $560.00 per month. Not because of any claims but because they can.

So if an uninsured person goes in for that checkup he is paying almost ten times what the doctor agrees to when you're covered with in this case blue cross. I was listening to Howard Dean and Bill Frist on Charlie Rose tonight. They don't agree on everything but they do agree that the system is broken and needs to be fixed.

Bill Frist (former senate majority leader of the republicans) pointed out that uninsured people die sooner. I wonder why that is since the health care is so great in this country ? Than again maybe they deserve it for making poor decisions ?

Well why do you think the doctors office can charge that??? Because the insurance companies will pay for it. If insurance companies no longer cover regular doctors check ups, do you think the doctors office would still charge that?? It is just that, INSURANCE!!! Insurance is suppose to help you cover unforeseen situations. A doctors visit is planned and scheduled in advance; having to be take to the hospital with a broken arm isn't. The broken arm requires procedures that aren't normally done. A check up and blood work are pretty normal medical occurrences, so why are they insured against? If they weren't insured would doctors be able to charge that much? No. It's the free market at work.

Jimmy's saying that it cost him $200 when he was self insured.

I've worked in insurance for over 15 years and almost half of that between two health plans, a national (Aetna which merged to Aetna/U.S. Healthcare) and a small county funded health plan for half of those 15 years. Half of that time was spent as an actual medical claims processor and data specialist compiling reports, etc.

Insurance companies pay contracted rates and contracted rates are based on the R&C (Reasonable and Customary) charges in a given locale. It's partly a game. If today most office visits are billed at $100 and an insurance company will pay 80% of the R&C but next year most office visits are billed at $150, an insurance company will then pay $120. The uninsured like Jimmy get the brunt of it paying the actual billed rate then.

Chris L

Exactly! If the insurance companies will pick up the bill for all the small things then doctors can charge that. If insurance companies only go for the things that you need insurance, doctors can't over charge for their services. It all goes in a nasty circle....

Re: Insurance would be cheaper without government interference.

Maybe. But healthcare would not be cheaper if we continue to treat the uninsured.

The problem does not lie in the insurance industry itself. The real core of the problem lies in the uninsured. Uninsured people will wait until they are on the verge of death to go and see a doctor. Then they go to the ER room, get treated at a price many many times more expensive than if they had just gone to a general practitioner to treat their illness. And THEN, they abscond and don't pay their bills. Why? Because they can't pay the enormous cost. The hospital send the collection agency, the poor person either cannot be found, used a fake name, doesn't have any assets to collect, etc.

Point being, those without insurance who use the ER rooms when they are on the verge of death, get treated and then don't pay the bill cause the hospital to raise its rates for everyone else in order to recuperate those costs. End result: higher health care bills, and by extension, higher insurance premiums.

How to solve the problem:
Well, one way would be to refuse service without payment up front. Essentially dooming the poor to a painful and slow death. Well, they got their liberty, but they did not get their life, which is also one of the inalienable rights. Hmmm, life...liberty... I think they would choose life. But apparently their opinions don't count so...moving on.

The other option is to provide everyone health insurance or health care. Force them to have health insurance so they will go see a doctor when they are sick rather than going to the ER room.



Re: Aliens. Yes, definitely a problem if we start offering free health care. However, I personally would rather address that problem through better border control. There wouldn't be an illegal alien problem if we kept them out of the country to begin with.... Thus, I think of it as a separate, although connected problem. But one that needs to be addressed through other means, not through the health care system.

Health care is NOT a right. It is a marketable service, but it is not a right.

Health care cannot be a right and it does not meet the requirements of a right. Health care requires the consent of others. Rights do not demand upon, nor infringe upon, the rights of others.

No one has a right to health care. But all of us do have a right to care for our health.

Originally Posted by honedright

Health care is NOT a right. It is a marketable service, but it is not a right.

Health care cannot be a right and it does not meet the requirements of a right. Health care requires the consent of others. Rights do not demand upon, nor infringe upon, the rights of others.

No one has a right to health care. But all of us do have a right to care for our health.

Just making sure, but you would doom those without the ability to pay for healthcare to death?

For example, a newborn on his way home gets into a horrible car accident. He is severely injured and would otherwise die if left untreated. His parents have insurance, but don't have the ability to pay for his health care. He is not on their policy because his parent's insurance did not enroll him as he is a newborn or because the insurance company messed up. Thus, the choices are to allow him to be treated in the ER room for free, or he must die.

Not going to say your wrong or anything, just making sure your view is consistent.

Originally Posted by Leighton

Just making sure, but you would doom those without the ability to pay for healthcare to death?

For example, a newborn on his way home gets into a horrible car accident. He is severely injured and would otherwise die if left untreated. His parents have insurance, but don't have the ability to pay for his health care. He is not on their policy because his parent's insurance did not enroll him as he is a newborn or because the insurance company messed up. Thus, the choices are to allow him to be treated in the ER room for free, or he must die.

Not going to say your wrong or anything, just making sure your view is consistent.

Any physician that would refuse to treat a dying infant, especially on the basis of inability to pay, would not only be breaking the law and his oath to medicine, but he'd also be sued so badly that his great-great grandchildren would be born poor.

If the parents screwed up and forgot to enroll the infant (stupid mistake?), why couldn't they sign a "promise to pay" agreement with the hospital and then pay off their obligation just like any other? Why should the public have to financially amend the mistakes of others?

If the screw up was the insurance companies, I'd imagine there would be some recourse there.

Never would happen.

1)If the child was born in the hospital (s)he would have had care billed to the insurance company already and would already be on the policy. All policies are required

2) The hospital is required to treat in this situation by law.

3) Medical personnel feel morally bound to treat in this kind of situation regardless of payor class.

bad example