NY Times Health care article. Hospitals are charging too much money to their patients (customers).

[Reckoner]

He's part of the problem because he demands government intervention, which leads to decoupling of prices from market forces, which leads to skyrocketing costs.

Out of curiosity, how would you explain the lower cost of healthcare in the UK, where prices are almost completely decoupled from market forces? I'm not trying to debate you, just curious.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

industrialized /= developed, good thing you're always right though!

Oh, why don't you define developed for us? Let's use your definition.

 

[darkjedi]

Oh, why don't you define developed for us? Let's use your definition.

I don't need to, the World Bank does, you should probably inform them of their mistake

 

[ruralsurg4now]

So why is it that the hospitals in nice areas with few uninsured people clogging up the ERs for their 'free' charity care are among the most expensive in the country?

Interesting, so you have a hypothetical hospital that is in a nice area who almost no uninsured people, but who provide charity care for these non-existent people, and for whom the cost is high? That's pretty convoluted.

Really? Really!? Guess my husband's acid reflux (for which he was denied coverage) was somehow more serious than cancer. Who knew? (By the way, he had coverage - just wanted to change to a plan that would actually pay some claims.)

Oh, so to be clear, your husband has acid reflux -- a problem shared by millions of people -- and he was denied insurance? OK.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

I don't need to, the World Bank does, you should probably inform them of their mistake

Sounds like you don't have an actual answer. Oh, well, more toilet paper.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

Out of curiosity, how would you explain the lower cost of healthcare in the UK, where prices are almost completely decoupled from market forces? I'm not trying to debate you, just curious.

Actually, most of Europe utilizes a two-tiered private/public system, don't they? Also, resultantly, if you recall, the UK had adopted the practice of importing loads of foreign physicians to work in their NHS. They started curtailing that, if I recall, after the bombing several years back.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Most people aren't denied insurance based on pre-existing conditions. You can have cancer and get insurance. Did you know that? So, "cancer" is your pre-existing condition and you aren't denied coverage. That's a line people use because Democrats have repeated it relentlessly. Second of all, no offense, but if you get your coverage through your job and get fired, guess what you could do? Get COBRA coverage. Then get another job. Although, really, there should be no expectation that your job is responsible for your healthcare, right? Just like there really should be no expectation that the government do so. But we've been trained to believe that.

Well yes now that the ACA does not allow denying coverage for preexisting conditions people aren't denied. Before then, I can't think of many other situations where an insurance company would outright deny an application unless you had a preexisting condition.

 

[darkjedi]

Sounds like you don't have an actual answer. Oh, well, more toilet paper.

u mad bro?

 

[Reckoner]

Actually, most of Europe utilizes a two-tiered private/public system, don't they? Also, resultantly, if you recall, the UK had adopted the practice of importing loads of foreign physicians to work in their NHS. They started curtailing that, if I recall, after the bombing several years back.

I think I might have misinterpreted your original post - I thought you were referring to the decoupling of costs from the consumer, a la the NHS. I only mentioned the UK because they lean so heavily in favor of the public option. I've just never seen data showing their costs skyrocketed after they implemented the NHS, although admittedly they are increasing.

 

[Jabbed]

I'm always right. Also, your first "no" was wrong.

1. IMF defines India as a developing country.
2. Germany has a problem with illegal immigrants. They do have access to social services and healthcare, when emergent. There was talk a few years ago about actually expanding healthcare coverage for illegal residents.
3. Patients with pre-existing conditions are often either denied coverage or effectively denied coverage as they are only offered plans with excessively high premiums or plans that specifically do not cover any complications resulting from their pre-existing conditions. Regardless, there's a significant barrier to entry as a result of their pre-existing conditions status.
4. Again, you're right. The interesting thing about providing healthcare to employees is that it is really only the employer's who perceive the costs. If insurance wasn't employer-mandated, then all employees would appear to get a raise as they receive the cost of their insurance plan as salaried income (as it is now, the employer factors in the cost of health insurance as part of the employee's cost of employment but the employee typically does not). This is actually a good idea, as it forces the individual to internalize more of the costs and responsibilities of their healthcare decisions.

Playing fast and loose with the facts there.

PS: You usually make interesting talking points but, in general, a shade less douche-baggery would be appreciated.

 

[Espadaleader]

All I am saying is that persons can work full time and still not make a livable wage. They cannot afford housing, insurance etc. Then these people ask the government for welfare because the companies do not pay enough to their workers. Large companies are indirectly subsidized by the government because they pay people less the a livable wage when they have the margins to pay more. Small businesses are being crushed. Wall street is at a high point while middle America and small business are reeling.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

1. IMF defines India as a developing country.
2. Germany has a problem with illegal immigrants. They do have access to social services and healthcare, when emergent. There was talk a few years ago about actually expanding healthcare coverage for illegal residents.
3. Patients with pre-existing conditions are often either denied coverage or effectively denied coverage as they are only offered plans with excessively high premiums or plans that specifically do not cover any complications resulting from their pre-existing conditions. Regardless, there's a significant barrier to entry as a result of their pre-existing conditions status.
4. Again, you're right. The interesting thing about providing healthcare to employees is that it is really only the employer's who perceive the costs. If insurance wasn't employer-mandated, then all employees would appear to get a raise as they receive the cost of their insurance plan as salaried income (as it is now, the employer factors in the cost of health insurance as part of the employee's cost of employment but the employee typically does not). This is actually a good idea, as it forces the individual to internalize more of the costs and responsibilities of their healthcare decisions.

Playing fast and loose with the facts there.

PS: You usually make interesting talking points but, in general, a shade less douche-baggery would be appreciated.

1. Just so everyone knows, which neither Jabbed nor darkjedi wanted to tell you, there is no agreed-upon definition for "developed country" and the one they are citing is a comparative one which uses GDP PER CAPITA, which has not much to do with "development," particularly in light of the fact that India is one of the two most populous countries in the world.

2. Germany does have illegal immigrants. Do they have 30 million+? I don't think so.

3. If you're trying to say that people with acid reflux are "uninsurable," you should try again.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

u mad bro?

No, just noting that you never write anything more substantial than your current post, bro. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

Well yes now that the ACA does not allow denying coverage for preexisting conditions people aren't denied. Before then, I can't think of many other situations where an insurance company would outright deny an application unless you had a preexisting condition.

Given that the ACA hasn't kicked in yet, your post only demonstrates that you blindly follow liberal talking points. I.e., as soon as Obamacare passes, you suddenly claim that problems are all solved.

 

[darkjedi]

Given that the ACA hasn't kicked in yet, your post only demonstrates that you blindly follow liberal talking points. I.e., as soon as Obamacare passes, you suddenly claim that problems are all solved.

let me guess, libertarian?

 

[ruralsurg4now]

let me guess, libertarian?

Nope, but I can tell you're liberal.

 

[notbobtrustme]

let me guess, libertarian?

Medical professionals who are liberterians are the most hypocritical out there. NO GOVERNMENT INTRUSION INTO MY SECTOR EXCEPT TO KEEP ALL OTHER PEOPLE FROM PRACTICING MEDICINE THEN WE NEED GOVERNMENT TO STOP THEM.

Also, socialized medicine works. We know that. Every single developed country has some sort of UHC + price bargaining. The US doesn't because omgerdsocialismwarbalwarbalwarbalarbalwblrblbrlabrlar.

 

[darkjedi]

Nope, but I can tell you're liberal.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

Medical professionals who are liberterians are the most hypocritical out there. NO GOVERNMENT INTRUSION INTO MY SECTOR EXCEPT TO KEEP ALL OTHER PEOPLE FROM PRACTICING MEDICINE THEN WE NEED GOVERNMENT TO STOP THEM.

Also, socialized medicine works. We know that. Every single developed country has some sort of UHC + price bargaining. The US doesn't because omgerdsocialismwarbalwarbalwarbalarbalwblrblbrlabrlar.

Every single developed country also has long wait times and tells people that they are going to be refused treatment for things they can get treatment for in the U.S. omsdfjsdlkfjhjsdhfljsdhfiuwehrjhwekjfshljkdflsdhfjshdlfCAPITALISMjnsdkfjhkdsjfd

 

[Jabbed]

1. Just so everyone knows, which neither Jabbed nor darkjedi wanted to tell you, there is no agreed-upon definition for "developed country" and the one they are citing is a comparative one which uses GDP PER CAPITA, which has not much to do with "development," particularly in light of the fact that India is one of the two most populous countries in the world.

2. Germany does have illegal immigrants. Do they have 30 million+? I don't think so.

3. If you're trying to say that people with acid reflux are "uninsurable," you should try again.

1. As the IMF distributes loans to developing/developed countries on the basis of economic development, they arguably have the most informed opinion. There is no universally agreed upon criteria, although living standards, industrial development, and human development indexes are factored in the determination. GDP/capita is not the deciding factor, although it is itself a valuable measurement.

2. Your point was that illegal immigrants in Germany would be denied care whereas they have free access to care here, not the magnitude of the immigrant population (btw fact check: the illegal immigrant population in the US is estimated to be 10-13 million, not 30 million. In terms of relative populations, a little more than 1% of Germany's residents are illegal while roughly 3% of America's residents are illegal. Blaming healthcare costs on 3% of the country's populace probably doesn't seem to pinpoint a major cause.)

3. I was referring to cancer (your example).

1, 2, 3

 

[ruralsurg4now]

1. As the IMF distributes loans to developing/developed countries on the basis of economic development, they arguably have the most informed opinion. There is no universally agreed upon criteria, although living standards, industrial development, and human development indexes are factored in the determination. GDP/capita is not the deciding factor, although it is itself a valuable measurement.

2. Your point was that illegal immigrants in Germany would be denied care whereas they have free access to care here, not the magnitude of the immigrant population (btw fact check: the illegal immigrant population in the US is estimated to be 10-13 million, not 30 million. In terms of relative populations, a little more than 1% of Germany's residents are illegal while roughly 3% of America's residents are illegal. Blaming healthcare costs on 3% of the country's populace probably doesn't seem to pinpoint a major cause.)

3. I was referring to cancer (your example).

1, 2, 3

1. Except the IMF is focused on monetary status alone, which has little to nothing to do with what we're discussing. If we were talking about credit ratings, sure.

2. No, my point was that Germany doesn't deal with the issues that America does, therefore any attempt at comparisons between the two countries is fradulent. BTW, fact check, there's also no consensus on the numbers of illegals. The number is always changed depending on what the left wants. If I want to deport them, suddenly the number jumps to 60 million and it's impossible to deport that many people. If we want to argue that illegals have "little" impact on healthcare costs (laughable) then suddenly it falls to 5 million. It's pretty amusing.

3. That's great, except people with cancer can get insurance. Sorry to let you know that. Also, Doktormom claimed that her husband who has acid reflux is essentially uninsurable due to that sole fact.

1, 2, 3

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Given that the ACA hasn't kicked in yet, your post only demonstrates that you blindly follow liberal talking points. I.e., as soon as Obamacare passes, you suddenly claim that problems are all solved.

The high risk pools have been open since 2010.

 

[KnuxNole]

Ruralsurg4now spreads his cancer like wildfire...especially if the topic talks about liberal stuff or dating

 

[ruralsurg4now]

The high risk pools have been open since 2010.

Except nobody enrolled in them and they're currently closed to enrollment.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

Ruralsurg4now spreads his cancer like wildfire...especially if the topic talks about liberal stuff or dating

Yeah, but I keep my dating talk separate.

 

[T3ckFr3s]

Why do people say this. This just isn't true.

Apologies, got caught up in the moment. US healthcare is sub-par, not horrible. Edited my post accordingly.

 

[darkjedi]

Ruralsurg4now spreads his cancer like wildfire...especially if the topic talks about liberal stuff or dating

it all makes so much sense now

 

[ruralsurg4now]

it all makes so much sense now

I don't know what to do with all this toilet paper!!

 

[Jabbed]

1. Except the IMF is focused on monetary status alone, which has little to nothing to do with what we're discussing. If we were talking about credit ratings, sure.

2. No, my point was that Germany doesn't deal with the issues that America does, therefore any attempt at comparisons between the two countries is fradulent. BTW, fact check, there's also no consensus on the numbers of illegals. The number is always changed depending on what the left wants. If I want to deport them, suddenly the number jumps to 60 million and it's impossible to deport that many people. If we want to argue that illegals have "little" impact on healthcare costs (laughable) then suddenly it falls to 5 million. It's pretty amusing.

3. That's great, except people with cancer can get insurance. Sorry to let you know that. Also, Doktormom claimed that her husband who has acid reflux is essentially uninsurable due to that sole fact.

1, 2, 3

1. Yes, it does. There is unequal access to care through out India due to unequal development.

Try doing this in Germany. Go into the country illegally, obtain social benefits, get hospitalized and obtain free care. Go for it. It works in America and I can guarantee that because I take care of such people, so that's not just some "talking point" that I made up.

2. This was worded very ambiguously then, because it sounds as if you're implying that illegals cannot obtain care in Germany, as opposed to here in the States. As for the questionable number of illegals, that's fine. You can say that there is no valid estimate, but don't claim that there are "30+ million" running around when you yourself admitted that you have no authoritative data. (You're pigeonholed out of blaming illegals at this point.)

3. Patients with pre-existing conditions (cancer) are often either denied coverage or effectively denied coverage as they are only offered plans with excessively high premiums or plans that specifically do not cover any complications resulting from their pre-existing conditions. Regardless, there's a significant barrier to entry as a result of their pre-existing conditions status. I don't care about acid reflux.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

1. Yes, it does. There is unequal access to care through out India due to unequal development.

2. This was worded very ambiguously then, because it sounds as if you're implying that illegals cannot obtain care in Germany, as opposed to here in the States. As for the questionable number of illegals, that's fine. You can say that there is no valid estimate, but don't claim that there are "30+ million" running around when you yourself admitted that you have no authoritative data. (You're pigeonholed out of blaming illegals at this point.)

3. Patients with pre-existing conditions (cancer) are often either denied coverage or effectively denied coverage as they are only offered plans with excessively high premiums or plans that specifically do not cover any complications resulting from their pre-existing conditions. Regardless, there's a significant barrier to entry as a result of their pre-existing conditions status. I don't care about acid reflux.

1. You can say that about America, too. What's your point?

2. I'm fine with agreeing with any number you want. Point is that there are more here than in Germany.

3. That's actually still not true, since I've applied for coverage for people who are poor. But let's say that it was true, then that's just moving the goalposts. That means that any time someone can't afford insurance -- even if they have NO pre-existing conditions -- you can claim they were "denied coverage." Now we can start saying "you can be denied coverage even with NO conditions ...AMERICA SUCKS!!!"

 

[darkjedi]

1. Yes, it does. There is unequal access to care through out India due to unequal development.

You won't be able to convince someone so woefully uninformed on basic economics with 'facts', don't you know they have a liberal bias?

 

[ruralsurg4now]

You won't be able to convince someone so woefully uninformed on basic economics with 'facts'

So he can't convince you, huh? That's terrible.

 

[darkjedi]

So he can't convince you, huh? That's terrible.

 

[The Buff OP]

I don't know what to do with all this toilet paper!!

Them Costco deals! I could **** for days.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

This is actually the best post you've ever made.

 

[CarlosDanger]

3. That's actually still not true, since I've applied for coverage for people who are poor. But let's say that it was true, then that's just moving the goalposts. That means that any time someone can't afford insurance -- even if they have NO pre-existing conditions -- you can claim they were "denied coverage." Now we can start saying "you can be denied coverage even with NO conditions ...AMERICA SUCKS!!!"

Actually it is true. Theres not much disagreement on this even politically. You're starting to sound like Fox, just asserting some stupid anecdote and then claiming that it negates basic facts. But I guess its better than the world class journalists at the Times, and the many revered health economists who probably haven't thought it through as thoroughly as you, because you've been a doctor for a couple years.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

Actually it is true. Theres not much disagreement on this even politically. You're starting to sound like Fox, just asserting some stupid anecdote and then claiming that it negates basic facts. But I guess its better than the world class journalists at the Times, and the many revered health economists who probably haven't thought it through as thoroughly as you, because you've been a doctor for a couple years.

Thanks for letting me know that what I've done for patients never happened. I'll keep that in mind.

 

[CarlosDanger]

Thanks for letting me know that what I've done for patients never happened. I'll keep that in mind.

oh, stop being a drama queen, you know what I mean. Its a well known phenomenon that insurance companies discriminate and cherry pick. I'm truly happy that you were able to find a way to help your patient, but your one anecdote that we know 0 details about doesn't negate what we're talking about in the slightest.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

oh, stop being a drama queen, you know what I mean. Its a well known phenomenon that insurance companies discriminate and cherry pick. I'm truly happy that you were able to find a way to help your patient, but your one anecdote that we know 0 details about doesn't negate what we're talking about in the slightest.

No, they don't "discriminate." You seem to not comprehend how insurance works.

 

[DokterMom]

Thanks for letting me know that what I've done for patients never happened. I'll keep that in mind.

I pity the patients who have to decide between bitter condescension and contempt and no medical care at all.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

I pity the patients who have to decide between bitter condescension and contempt and no medical care at all.

It's OK because if they have acid reflux they apparently can't get any care, so it's all good.

 

[CarlosDanger]

No, they don't "discriminate." You seem to not comprehend how insurance works.

Yes.....they effectively do. Are you kidding me with this? Get outa here dude.

 

[ruralsurg4now]

Yes.....they effectively do. Are you kidding me with this? Get outa here dude.

Oh, so they "effectively" discriminate. You mean because people with more medical problems have higher rates? You just figured that out? At some point, you'll figure out how insurance works.

 

[mcloaf]

I can't believe you guys still read ruralsurg's posts.

 

[darkjedi]

I can't believe you guys still read ruralsurg's posts.

but his posts make me feel so warm and fuzzy

 

[DokterMom]

It's OK because if they have acid reflux they apparently can't get any care, so it's all good.

I only know what the insurance company told me when they turned him down -- (Assurant Health)
But come January 1st, it actually will be all good.

 

[The Buff OP]

Alright, I'm back. So I see this is still an ongoing discussion.
Should I throw a lil hint of URM spice into the discussion too?

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Alright, I'm back. So I see this is still an ongoing discussion.
Should I throw a lil hint of URM spice into the discussion too?

I heard insurance companies deny coverage to all URMs.

 

[Reckoner]

I heard insurance companies deny coverage to all URMs.

Only if they go DO/Caribbean

 

[The Buff OP]

I heard insurance companies deny coverage to all URMs.

I say URM's are the superior population of the homo sapiens species.