How would vouchers reduce Medicare costs?

[Anarchist420]

Could someone educate me on this? I read on the CATO institute's website that vouchers could reduce the cost of medicare, but I fail to see how they could.

I'm not really a CATO guy, because they're not dixiecratic/capitalist enough for me, but they have some good articles every now and then.

 

[charrison]

Could someone educate me on this? I read on the CATO institute's website that vouchers could reduce the cost of medicare, but I fail to see how they could.

I'm not really a CATO guy, because they're not dixiecratic/capitalist enough for me, but they have some good articles every now and then.

It would let consumers make better decisions about how money is spent and force providers to compete for those dollars.

 

[QuantumPion]

If the grocery store offered an all-you-can-eat plan to let you buy whatever you wanted with no limit for $500 a month, would you be inclined to buy more than $500 a month worth of groceries? How long do you think they would last before they would have to raise the price of their plan?

 

[Tom]

Vouchers are popular with conservatives because they hurt the poor and help the rich.

The only way they could save money is by making the value of the voucher less than the cost of the service, which means the consumer or provider has to make up the difference. Easy for a consumer who has the money, impossible for the poor who don't.

 

[QuantumPion]

It would let consumers make better decisions about how money is spent and force providers to compete for those dollars.

That's the argument but what the OP is looking for is the logic why.

The reason why is because when someone offers a plan for unlimited service at a fixed price, people tend to use more and more of that service until the supply is exhausted. It's human nature and basic economics.

If instead of offering people an unlimited service for free, you give everyone a debit card and tell them they get to keep whatever they don't spend, they tend to only spend what they really actually need and try to get the best price for that service.

 

[charrison]

Vouchers are popular with conservatives because they hurt the poor and help the rich.

The only way they could save money is by making the value of the voucher less than the cost of the service, which means the consumer or provider has to make up the difference. Easy for a consumer who has the money, impossible for the poor who don't.

That is not correct. It would force everyone with a voucher to make better decisions about how their money gets spent. You will find that doctors will bill services for less when they are paid for in cash, rather billed though insurance.

 

[QuantumPion]

That is not correct. It would force everyone with a voucher to make better decisions about how their money gets spent. You will find that doctors will bill services for less when they are paid for in cash, rather billed though insurance.

It doesn't force anyone to do anything. Generally people like to not waste their own money. They don't have any problem wasting other people's money though.

 

[Vette73]

That is not correct. It would force everyone with a voucher to make better decisions about how their money gets spent. You will find that doctors will bill services for less when they are paid for in cash, rather billed though insurance.

There is a shortage of doctors so why would they fight for people when they are booked up now.

And whats to stop a doctor from over billing as they know how much "free" money the person has and then kick them to the curb when they know they are at the limit.

CATO is a right wing nut group trying to pass ideas like this as good for all when all it does is help the rich.

 

[IronWing]

One can't make decisions on health care spending when providers refuse to provide prices until months after service.

 

[Vette73]

One can't make decisions on health care spending when providers refuse to provide prices until months after service.

And even then if you do get prices they can;t explain what they are and exactly where they went.

Oh that $500 charge was for a xray. What you did not get a xray, oh then maybe an exam yea you had one of those right?

 

[charrison]

One can't make decisions on health care spending when providers refuse to provide prices until months after service.

And as long as there is a 3rd party in the middle of ever single medical transaction, this practice will continue as someone else is paying the bill and not the end consumer.

 

[QuantumPion]

And even then if you do get prices they can;t explain what they are and exactly where they went.

Oh that $500 charge was for a xray. What you did not get a xray, oh then maybe an exam yea you had one of those right?

Hence why conservatives advocate, as a part of medical reform, that prices should be displayed and stated up front for all services.

 

[charrison]

There is a shortage of doctors so why would they fight for people when they are booked up now.

And whats to stop a doctor from over billing as they know how much "free" money the person has and then kick them to the curb when they know they are at the limit.

CATO is a right wing nut group trying to pass ideas like this as good for all when all it does is help the rich.

I have not read what CATO has proposed, but I am going to assume some sort of other insurance kicks in after the voucher is consumed.

 

[SammyJr]

If the grocery store offered an all-you-can-eat plan to let you buy whatever you wanted with no limit for $500 a month, would you be inclined to buy more than $500 a month worth of groceries? How long do you think they would last before they would have to raise the price of their plan?

I'm sure the old folks are having daily colonoscopies and biopsies for the sheer pleasure of it. That's definitely the reason that old folks see the doctor so much. If we took away their Medicare, they would visit the doctor as often as a twenty year old. It would usher in a new age!

 

[SammyJr]

That is not correct. It would force everyone with a voucher to make better decisions about how their money gets spent. You will find that doctors will bill services for less when they are paid for in cash, rather billed though insurance.

If people in the general public could make better decisions than their doctors, then why have doctors? Do you expect an 80 year old to be able to question why he needs a test or to have the energy or money to shop around?

 

[charrison]

I'm sure the old folks are having daily colonoscopies and biopsies for the sheer pleasure of it. That's definitely the reason that old folks see the doctor so much. If we took away their Medicare, they would visit the doctor as often as a twenty year old. It would usher in a new age!

But as mentioned by a previous article, the price of a colonoscope varies widely. The ceo of safeway put the price of this procedure somewhere between $700 and $7000. Which is why he switched his company to a more consumer directed health insurance to consumers would do a bit of price shopping.

And then you have this from the inventor of procedure...

http://healthcare-economist.com/201...scopys-cheaper-equally-effective-predecessor/

“[The sigmoidoscopy] looks at only half the colon. In that test, there’s no sedation, no day off from work, no jug of laxatives the night before and maybe no gastroenterologist. Your primary care doctor could probably do the procedure himself…

Colonoscopy is three to four times more expensive than the simpler sigmoidoscopy test. And the risk of complication is seven times higher. Still the idea caught on. And as it did, it transformed the profession of gastroenterology. We went from too many specialists to a national shortage.”

In fact, the inventor of the colonoscopy, Al Neugut, wrote an editorial in the JAMA this summer stating that he regrets inventing the colonoscopy. On Marketplace, Neugut said “If today, we were where we were in 1988, I would not institute colonoscopy based on the current evidence.”

 

[charrison]

If people in the general public could make better decisions than their doctors, then why have doctors? Do you expect an 80 year old to be able to question why he needs a test or to have the energy or money to shop around?

No I do not expect consumers to be smarter than doctors, but I dont think it is a significant problem to have a consumer shop around for common tests either.

 

[QuantumPion]

If people in the general public could make better decisions than their doctors, then why have doctors? Do you expect an 80 year old to be able to question why he needs a test or to have the energy or money to shop around?

Good question! So I take it you are a staunch opponent of medicare/medicaid/obamacare then, since these government programs take away the decision making from doctors and transfer it to bureaucrats!

 

[SammyJr]

Good question! So I take it you are a staunch opponent of medicare/medicaid/obamacare then, since these government programs take away the decision making from doctors and transfer it to bureaucrats!

Its inaccurate to group Medicare/Medicaid with Obama's health care plan. The former is Government run, the latter is private run with generous corporate welfare. The bureaucrats in Government aren't much different than in the private sector and being nonprofit, they have less reason to deny care.

If I were an old fogey, I'd be damn glad to be on Medicare. No private sector bureaucrat would approve a policy for an old guy, let alone approve expensive treatments.

 

[SammyJr]

No I do not expect consumers to be smarter than doctors, but I dont think it is a significant problem to have a consumer shop around for common tests either.

So a consumer is supposed to be able to judge the quality of the labs and imaging facilities? He's supposed to know who has better equipment? more accurate results? Better technicians? He's supposed to take time off of work to determine these things? If the company screws up, is he supposed to spend more money to sue?

 

[Darwin333]

If people in the general public could make better decisions than their doctors, then why have doctors? Do you expect an 80 year old to be able to question why he needs a test or to have the energy or money to shop around?

I can't make better decisions than my auto-mechanic but I can make a better decision on who my auto-mechanic is based on a whole slew of things including cost. If I wasn't paying the bill, cost would not really be an issue.

 

[Darwin333]

So a consumer is supposed to be able to judge the quality of the labs and imaging facilities? He's supposed to know who has better equipment? more accurate results? Better technicians? He's supposed to take time off of work to determine these things? If the company screws up, is he supposed to spend more money to sue?

They do that in every other industry that I can think of.

The very reason healthcare costs are so "hidden" as they are today is that the consumer has been completely removed from the cost of the medical services they receive. If I had to pay for my own MRI you are damned right that I would take the time to shop around.

Obviously that doesn't apply to some things in the medical industry such as emergency procedures or extensive surgery but for the day to day stuff I don't see how its much different than an auto-mechanic.

 

[QuantumPion]

Its inaccurate to group Medicare/Medicaid with Obama's health care plan. The former is Government run, the latter is private run with generous corporate welfare. The bureaucrats in Government aren't much different than in the private sector and being nonprofit, they have less reason to deny care.

If I were an old fogey, I'd be damn glad to be on Medicare. No private sector bureaucrat would approve a policy for an old guy, let alone approve expensive treatments.

You are unaware of the fact that medicare is the number one denier of medical insurance claims? They deny twice as many claims as all of the other insurance companies combined. Furthermore medicare rarely approves the use of new drugs and procedures, where as private insurance companies usually do since they see these as new avenues of profit generation.

 

[Ldir]

You are unaware of the fact that medicare is the number one denier of medical insurance claims? They deny twice as many claims as all of the other insurance companies combined. Furthermore medicare rarely approves the use of new drugs and procedures, where as private insurance companies usually do since they see these as new avenues of profit generation.

Those sound like made up facts to me. Can you prove them?

 

[QuantumPion]

Those sound like made up facts to me. Can you prove them?

http://biggovernment.com/ptuohe/2009/10/05/ama-endorses-largest-denier-of-health-care-claims/