Medicare no longer a budget buster as CBO shows reduction over the years

[ivwshane]

Have any empirical basis for this whatsoever?

Probably not but it sounds like we have another supporter for socialized health care!

 

[Fern]

As I said, reductions in rates paid by Medicare, for starters. Reductions in Medicare overpayments to Advantage plans, payment penalties to hospitals with high rates of preventable readmissions, etc.

Thanks.

I don't think it's reasonable to attribute savings from rate reductions to Obamacare. Setting rates in inherent to Medicare. It's been done before and it'll continue to be done even if Obamacare disappears.

OTOH, the other two I do. Would be nice if they would quantify any reduction(s) attributable to those.

Fern

 

[Texashiker]

Texashiker is, as usual, either exceptionally stupid or lying.

You said doctors were paid more in the 90s than now,

I have provided a link to affirm my stance.

Your own data affirms my statements.

How is providing evidence lying?

 

[rudder]

Sure, or you can make $73 per 10-15 minutes of medical advice.
The efficient operations will figure out how to make that profitable and grow, and the inefficient ones will disappear. You can cry for them, but I won't. Every other industry has figured out how to be more efficient and productive, it's time for Medicine to do the same and the government to stop subsidizing their inefficiency.

Who would have thunk that practicing medicine is just as easy as making a burger.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Does this make anything any clearer?
There is an example fee schedule at the link as well.

http://www.aafp.org/practice-management/regulatory/medicare.html

The Three Options

"There are basically three Medicare contractual options for physicians. Physicians may sign a participating (PAR) agreement and accept Medicare's allowed charge as payment in full for all of their Medicare patients. They may elect to be a non-PAR physician, which permits them to make assignment decisions on a case-by-case basis and to bill patients for more than the Medicare allowance for unassigned claims. Or they may become a private contracting physician, agreeing to bill patients directly and forego any payments from Medicare to their patients or themselves.

Physicians who wish to change their status from PAR to non-PAR or vice versa may do so annually. Once made, the decision is generally binding until the next annual contracting cycle except where the physician's practice situation has changed significantly, such as relocation to a different geographic area or a different group practice. To become a private contractor, physicians must give 30 days notice before the first day of the quarter the contract takes effect.

Those considering a change in status should first determine that they are not bound by any contractual arrangements with hospitals, health plans or other entities that require them to be PAR physicians. In addition, some states have enacted laws that prohibit physicians from balance billing their patients."

 

[Bitek]

You quoted a link from usa today from several years ago.

Here is another article - http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...tor-may-not-see-you-anymore-veronique-de-rugy

Fewer doctors taking medicare.

Medicare pays out less money.

Idiots rejoice.

Force medicare to pay fair market value for doctor serves and see what happens.

Since when are doctor's services based on a fair market? The AMA intentionally keeps the doctors in short supply by the number of med school admissions. Monied interests also restrict lower cost nurses from preforming some tasks that are well within their competency.

Why should taxpayers have to overpay for healthcare just to grossly enrich a protected class of worker? Time to break the cartel.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/11/20/doctors_pay_under_obamacare_cut_the_whining.html

 

[shira]

Physicians compared to others in the US of similar intellect and training (law partners, accountants, MBAs) are underpaid.

This point - even if true (which I claim is BS; for example, "law partners" is highly UN-representative of ALL lawyers, yet we're looking at ALL physicians) - is utterly irrelevant.

The OP's assertion - in essence - is that low Medicare payments to physicians are making it extremely difficult for those on Medicare to find physicians. But if being a physician in the U.S. remains a highly profitable enterprise - the most highly profitable enterprise of any physicians in the world - that's BS. It's irrelevant that some professions in the U.S. may be "more efficient" in terms of salary earned versus education-time invested. The bottom line is that physicians in the U.S make plenty, arguably far TOO much, and accepting Medicare patients remains highly profitable.

 

[fskimospy]

I have provided a link to affirm my stance.

Your own data affirms my statements.

How is providing evidence lying?

Your link did no such thing. You are lying about Medicare rates in the 1990s.

 

[Texashiker]

Your link did no such thing. You are lying about Medicare rates in the 1990s.

Lets use your own data from the early 2000s.

Apparently the most common Medicare billing code for an office visit is 99213. The price paid by Medicare at a non-facility for 99213 in 2000 varies somewhat by location, but is about $45.

Go to this page.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/04/09/health/medicare-doctor-database.html?_r=0

Type in your doctors name, practice, and zip code.

One of my doctors is reimbursed at $51 per visit for existing patients.

From your own data, doctors were reimbursed at around $45 in the year 2000 for medicare patients. You did not say if that was new or existing. I am going to bet it was existing.

Today, one of my doctors is being reimbursed at $51 for existing medicare patients.

So seriously, for the last time, TH is full of shit.

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=45&year1=2000&year2=2014

$45 in 2000 is equal to $62.26 in 2014, not the current reimbursement of $51.

How am I full of crap?

 

[fskimospy]

You're attempting about three different lies right now. First you're comparing apples to oranges, second you're assuming your doctor was billing under the same codes and circumstances that I was referencing, and third you're attempting to pretend you never said that in absolute dollar amounts that charges were higher in the 90s.

The first toe might just be your usual problems with logic, but the third is undeniably a blatant lie. Shame on you.

 

[hal2kilo]

Medicare has a searchable tool that allows you to look at codes and see relative billing over years. (although it only goes back to 2000). There are multiple different areas and billing codes, but for the sake of simplicity you can look at the first one.

Apparently the most common Medicare billing code for an office visit is 99213. The price paid by Medicare at a non-facility for 99213 in 2000 varies somewhat by location, but is about $45. The same office billing code price today is around $80 or more. (facility prices show a similar ratio)

Play with it yourself if you want to: http://www.cms.gov/apps/physician-fee-schedule/search/search-criteria.aspx

So seriously, for the last time, TH is full of shit.

Try P&N Ignore, one dose will get rid of the nagging TH whine.

 

[Texashiker]

You're attempting about three different lies right now.

As usual you are presenting no facts to backup your stance.

How about something, anything of value?

How is using your own stats lying?

 

[fskimospy]

As usual you are presenting no facts to backup your stance.

How about something, anything of value?

How is using your own stats lying?

I've already done exactly that. You made a concrete claim, that Medicare reimbursements were higher in dollar value in the 90s than they are today. This was a lie.

Either show evidence that this was not a lie, or shut it.

 

[Texashiker]

I've already done exactly that. You made a concrete claim, that Medicare reimbursements were higher in dollar value in the 90s than they are today. This was a lie.

Either show evidence that this was not a lie, or shut it.

I have presented exact and detailed proof.

Have you been to the page at the new york times I linked to? Did you look up some of your doctors or some of the doctors in your area? How much are those doctors getting reimbursed for an existing medicare patient?

One of my doctors is getting reimbursed at $51 for existing medicare patients. To keep up with inflation that payment needs to be $62.26.

Adjusted for inflation, one of my doctors is getting paid $11.26 less per patient today than he was in 2000.

How difficult is that for you to understand?

Post your zip code. I will pull a random doctor and see what he/she is getting paid for existing medicare patients.

 

[ivwshane]

I have presented exact and detailed proof.

Have you been to the page at the new york times I linked to? Did you look up some of your doctors or some of the doctors in your area? How much are those doctors getting reimbursed for an existing medicare patient?

One of my doctors is getting reimbursed at $51 for existing medicare patients. To keep up with inflation that payment needs to be $62.26.

Adjusted for inflation, one of my doctors is getting paid $11.26 less per patient today than he was in 2000.

How difficult is that for you to understand?

Post your zip code. I will pull a random doctor and see what he/she is getting paid for existing medicare patients.

So your proof is anecdotal evidence? Do we need to tell you what the problem is with that?

 

[Texashiker]

So your proof is anecdotal evidence? Do we need to tell you what the problem is with that?

Post your zip code. Lets pull a random doctor, see what medicare is reimbursing her/him for an existing patient.

eskimospy said there is a page that shows historical medicare payments dating back to 2000.

Run the payments from 2000 through - http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=45&year1=2000&year2=2014

The numbers speak for themselves.