• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

This is one of the things that is wrong with OUR health system as it stands now....

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: lsd
On the other side of the coin you've got to ask WTH a visit costs $1000.
I recently had an OJI where I cut my finger pretty badly. For two visits (they said coming back to the ER was okay) the total cost was $1600. Workers comp insurance paid for it so I didn't care. The total time I waited + treatment/sutures removal was less than 1 hour.
Yeah, that's effin ridiculous.

Many of these so-called 'emergencies', perhaps even yours, could be handles with an out-patient clinic stafed by physicians assistants at a far lower costs. Our local hospital has those, however they are never never the actual hospital - you have to 'know' about them. IMO, that's the hospitals' own fault. They could locate an out-patient type facility within the hospital or very close. A $3 million savibng would pay for a nereby building easily.

Seems to me the hospitals like making $3 M off a few repeat users. That needs to change.

Fern
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,942
126
Originally posted by: winnar111
They can continue to be alive, with their chest pain, for as long a time as the Creator has given them.
so that is the compassionate conservatism?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: winnar111
Just don't admit them....
This. Since when is health care a right?? Please, someone point me to the founding document stating this.
Sadly everyone just has the assumption they are owed health care regardless of who they are or their ability to pay.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
welp so much for that argument
:disgust:

A ridiculous interpretation.

Fern
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,942
126
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: lsd
On the other side of the coin you've got to ask WTH a visit costs $1000.
I recently had an OJI where I cut my finger pretty badly. For two visits (they said coming back to the ER was okay) the total cost was $1600. Workers comp insurance paid for it so I didn't care. The total time I waited + treatment/sutures removal was less than 1 hour.
Yeah, that's effin ridiculous.

Many of these so-called 'emergencies', perhaps even yours, could be handles with an out-patient clinic stafed by physicians assistants at a far lower costs. Our local hospital has those, however they are never never the actual hospital - you have to 'know' about them. IMO, that's the hospitals' own fault. They could locate an out-patient type facility within the hospital or very close. A $3 million savibng would pay for a nereby building easily.

Seems to me the hospitals like making $3 M off a few repeat users. That needs to change.

Fern
It costs $1000 because they know they aren't going to pay. So 10x1000=10000 1 person pays you get $100 per person considering the people who dont pay. With uhc we won't have this problem and we should demand prices go down. Nobody wants to believe thaqt this is true or wants to believe that this would work but it will.
 

scruffypup

Senior member
Feb 3, 2006
371
0
0
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: lsd
On the other side of the coin you've got to ask WTH a visit costs $1000.
I recently had an OJI where I cut my finger pretty badly. For two visits (they said coming back to the ER was okay) the total cost was $1600. Workers comp insurance paid for it so I didn't care. The total time I waited + treatment/sutures removal was less than 1 hour.
Yeah, that's effin ridiculous.

Many of these so-called 'emergencies', perhaps even yours, could be handles with an out-patient clinic stafed by physicians assistants at a far lower costs. Our local hospital has those, however they are never never the actual hospital - you have to 'know' about them. IMO, that's the hospitals' own fault. They could locate an out-patient type facility within the hospital or very close. A $3 million savibng would pay for a nereby building easily.

Seems to me the hospitals like making $3 M off a few repeat users. That needs to change.

Fern
It costs $1000 because they know they aren't going to pay. So 10x1000=10000 1 person pays you get $100 per person considering the people who dont pay. With uhc we won't have this problem and we should demand prices go down. Nobody wants to believe thaqt this is true or wants to believe that this would work but it will.

It makes little sense to believe that the cost of healthcare would go down for the average individual,...

first costs will be similar,... costs are costs unless you mandate less access, outpatient treatment, etc, which is not necessarily going to be appropriate in all situations,... if you don't mandate it,... the costs will be the same

second,... the government is inefficient and seems to be more so the larger the project,...

third,.... there is always some corruption, some amount that is siphoned from the best bang for the buck to special interests

fourth,.. instead of healthcare insurance premiums, you have higher taxes that will be hidden/bundled with others, so the true cost to the average individual is unknown, but it should be the same or higher,... it won't be less due to 2nd and 3rd points

fifth,.. a healthy young person who wants to save money and take the risk of no insurance as many do,... will now be forced to pay for it, taking away a choice, a freedom to decide what is best for them,... they have less discretionary spending

we can also debate about too much government dicatating too much to the individual,... kinda hand in hand with 5th point, though separate

While nobel in thought, it is not a better way,... just like true socialism and communism in thought are nice,... are not practical in real life as it takes away from freedom of choice, determination and other qualities that America has,... or at least used to have.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Originally posted by: Balt
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: winnar111
Just don't admit them....
This. Since when is health care a right?? Please, someone point me to the founding document stating this.
Sadly everyone just has the assumption they are owed health care regardless of who they are or their ability to pay.
So if someone gets shot in a mugging we should just let them die because they lost their insurance card along with their wallet. Good idea.
I do not think that is the type of "admittance scenario" that winnar is talking about.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: winnar111
They can continue to be alive, with their chest pain, for as long a time as the Creator has given them.
so that is the compassionate conservatism?
$10k/year/person is quite compassionate. They don't need $300k.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-
It costs $1000 because they know they aren't going to pay. So 10x1000=10000 1 person pays you get $100 per person considering the people who dont pay. With uhc we won't have this problem and we should demand prices go down. Nobody wants to believe thaqt this is true or wants to believe that this would work but it will.
Ain't buying it.

This 'excuse' is often raised here. Tell you what, check out the rate of 'no pays'. The local hospital here is county owned and the info is in our newspaper.

The rate is pretty damn low.

No matter, in this case, I think it irrelevent because I'm betting these people are on Medicaid; you know what Medicaid is?

I don't see UHC (UHI) changing Medicaid at all.

Fern
 

Atheus

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2005
7,313
2
0
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Atheus
If a dying child came to my door I would help it without hesitation and without asking for money. If you would not then you yourself do not deserve to live.
That's all well and good to say in the abstract; I'm sure most of us would say we'd help a dying child on our doorstep. But how far are you willing to go to "help"? Have you gone to med school or otherwise received some sort of training to truly allow you to be of assistance to the dying? You can't cure cancer or some other serious medical problem just using good intentions alone.
I pay into the National Health Service with my taxes. That's the whole point.
 

Atheus

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2005
7,313
2
0
Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how UHC (or in reality UHI) would help with this.
This particular problem would not be helped, in fact, if anything, it would be worse. Nowhere near as bad as children dying on the streets though.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,569
5,822
126
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how UHC (or in reality UHI) would help with this.
This particular problem would not be helped, in fact, if anything, it would be worse. Nowhere near as bad as children dying on the streets though.
you don't need UMC/UMI to not have children dying in the streets. nice strawman though.
 

Atheus

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2005
7,313
2
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how UHC (or in reality UHI) would help with this.
This particular problem would not be helped, in fact, if anything, it would be worse. Nowhere near as bad as children dying on the streets though.
you don't need UMC/UMI to not have children dying in the streets. nice strawman though.
Sure you do. Can you describe a non-universal healthcare system in which no child is left to suffer? That's a contradiction in terms. If you can describe such a system, then it immediately becomes universal, doesn't it? Because it doesn't exclude anyone...
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how UHC (or in reality UHI) would help with this.
This particular problem would not be helped, in fact, if anything, it would be worse. Nowhere near as bad as children dying on the streets though.
you don't need UMC/UMI to not have children dying in the streets. nice strawman though.
Sure you do. Can you describe a non-universal healthcare system in which no child is left to suffer? That's a contradiction in terms. If you can describe such a system, then it immediately becomes universal, doesn't it? Because it doesn't exclude anyone...
Firstly, if the child lives in a low income household they are covered ny Medicaid.

Secondly, if they can't qualify for medicaid we have the SCHIP program for people who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid.

Thirdly, the hospitals can't deny care to a 'dying' child.

UHC (UHI) is for some of those in the 'middle' (many self employed). The poor already get Medicaid, the more wealthy are already covered under their own insurance. The elderly are already covered under Medicare.

I still content our real problem is not lack of HI, it's expensive and limited coverage under HI. Until that's solved talk of UHC/UHI is typical Washington "ready, fire, aim", and quite likely a boon to HI companies. You'll now be forced to buy their crappy products at exhorbitant rates. A nice 'give-away' to those campaign contributors, oops I mean companies, getting lots of new customers (no matter that they are unwilling customers).

Fern
 

Atheus

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2005
7,313
2
0
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how UHC (or in reality UHI) would help with this.
This particular problem would not be helped, in fact, if anything, it would be worse. Nowhere near as bad as children dying on the streets though.
you don't need UMC/UMI to not have children dying in the streets. nice strawman though.
Sure you do. Can you describe a non-universal healthcare system in which no child is left to suffer? That's a contradiction in terms. If you can describe such a system, then it immediately becomes universal, doesn't it? Because it doesn't exclude anyone...
Firstly, if the child lives in a low income household they are covered ny Medicaid.

Secondly, if they can't qualify for medicaid we have the SCHIP program for people who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid.

Thirdly, the hospitals can't deny care to a 'dying' child.
So everyone is covered? That's universal then isn't it. I don't know enough about your system to argue in detail but I don't see how anyone can deny that 'healthcare for everyone' as a concept (rather than 'UHC' as an American political thing) is a good idea.

Having said that I have read some nasty stuff about the American system - cancer patients sleeping in parks becasue they are too ill to work, while waiting for their 'free' chemo, for example.

I still content our real problem is not lack of HI, it's expensive and limited coverage under HI. Until that's solved talk of UHC/UHI is typical Washington "ready, fire, aim", and quite likely a boon to HI companies. You'll now be forced to buy their crappy products at exhorbitant rates. A nice 'give-away' to those campaign contributors, oops I mean companies, getting lots of new customers (no matter that they are unwilling customers).
I don't get that - in a social healthcare sytem the govt would set the price of drugs. The pharms business would have to comply because they only have one customer. Not that I'm saying that's a good thing.

Anyway I, personally, won't be buying anything. I don't see doctors but if I did it would come out of my taxes.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Fern has this pretty much nailed down. If you are on Medicaid then you have about the best healthcare. Medicaid patients often go to the closest place regardless of cost and refuse to pay copays because they can. Often it's so they can get beer or cigs. No one will reform the system because the race card gets pulled out, so there is a lot of pandering to them. That's wonderful government run health care for you.

 

DLeRium

Lifer
Feb 19, 2001
20,158
20
81
Originally posted by: NeoV
The big problem with this is the lack of electronic medical records - there is nothing to flag Hospital B that the patient was just at Hospital A yesterday.

When you go to a hospital, you should give them your ID, they pull up your medical records - regardless of what hospitals/doctors you have been to in the United States - and it has your medical history, your insurance info, etc. You shouldn't need to fill out 5 pieces of paper, and the hospitals wouldn't need an army of data entry people. Whatever treatment you receive, whatever perscriptions, whatever X-Rays/MRI's, etc, etc - should all be part of this database that every medical facility in the country has access to.
Well it'd be nice if everything worked like this. Ideally you would have an electronic record of everything. Isn't it disgusting how there's no electronic record of a lot of things and there's no centralized database. It's funny how lots of friends of mine can get Taiwanese passports (myself included) because our parents are citizens and have resident cards (another story of abuse too), and then people like to use the Taiwan passports to travel (after the Mumbai stuff you know). The customs agents in Taiwan will backdate stamp your US passport for you so that when you return to the US you can appear legit. You would think the whole travel thing is well documented electronically. Yet it's still a joke to cheat the system so your green card doesn't get revoked because you don't come to the US enough blah blah blah.

It's just like taxes. Wouldn't it be nice if you just typed in your SSN and Turbo Tax can pull your W-2s and 1099s like no other? Like BAM. My mom just gave me a lecture about what a mess I make and at this rate I'm going to one day lose my tax forms that come in the mail and get screwed.

I swear we lack a lot of IT and automation in this world, and this is why mature private companies have it all down, but working at a startup, I can see how we totally struggle without sufficient electronic records. Now apply this on a larger scale with the government and bureaucracy and you get all hell breaking loose. Some people should do a study to see how we can speed things up by centralizing systems and integrating systems and adding connectivity, etc.

ANYWAY.. about healthcare, I honestly do favor moving to HSAs. Learn to control your own damn money.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Originally posted by: DLeRium
Originally posted by: NeoV
The big problem with this is the lack of electronic medical records - there is nothing to flag Hospital B that the patient was just at Hospital A yesterday.

When you go to a hospital, you should give them your ID, they pull up your medical records - regardless of what hospitals/doctors you have been to in the United States - and it has your medical history, your insurance info, etc. You shouldn't need to fill out 5 pieces of paper, and the hospitals wouldn't need an army of data entry people. Whatever treatment you receive, whatever perscriptions, whatever X-Rays/MRI's, etc, etc - should all be part of this database that every medical facility in the country has access to.
Well it'd be nice if everything worked like this. Ideally you would have an electronic record of everything. Isn't it disgusting how there's no electronic record of a lot of things and there's no centralized database. It's funny how lots of friends of mine can get Taiwanese passports (myself included) because our parents are citizens and have resident cards (another story of abuse too), and then people like to use the Taiwan passports to travel (after the Mumbai stuff you know). The customs agents in Taiwan will backdate stamp your US passport for you so that when you return to the US you can appear legit. You would think the whole travel thing is well documented electronically. Yet it's still a joke to cheat the system so your green card doesn't get revoked because you don't come to the US enough blah blah blah.

It's just like taxes. Wouldn't it be nice if you just typed in your SSN and Turbo Tax can pull your W-2s and 1099s like no other? Like BAM. My mom just gave me a lecture about what a mess I make and at this rate I'm going to one day lose my tax forms that come in the mail and get screwed.

I swear we lack a lot of IT and automation in this world, and this is why mature private companies have it all down, but working at a startup, I can see how we totally struggle without sufficient electronic records. Now apply this on a larger scale with the government and bureaucracy and you get all hell breaking loose. Some people should do a study to see how we can speed things up by centralizing systems and integrating systems and adding connectivity, etc.

ANYWAY.. about healthcare, I honestly do favor moving to HSAs. Learn to control your own damn money.
Actually many hospitals are linked. That's hardly relevant. The hospital doesn't want all that paperwork, but the government requires most of it. The government also requires that if they go to 10 hospitals a day they get seen if it's precisely for the same thing. The government is already the hospitals overlords. They don't need even more power to abuse health care.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: Skoorb
This happens in Canada, of course. And in fact, more often, because since nobody there pays anything when they show up, not even a copay, the opportunities for abuse are more readily available. That is why there has been talkin the past of forcing users of the Candian health system to pay a small copay to help them put some skin in the game.
Thank you; sadly this knowledge will probably be just passed over.
You could go further. There could be multiple contracts to differentiate between different levels of risk. Either way, the insurer would come out OK because you will see how fast individuals tell you how much of a risk they are (through their choice) even though you won't hear it out of their mouths. Hence, you have some with deductables and some without. The low risk people will chose the contract with the deductable and the ones with high risk will chose the other.
As a matter of fact I do like to go further, with that very example.
High deductible encourages people to take care of themselves more, eat healthier etc. That's my huge problem with state funded healthcare, are they going to mandate that I do cardio instead of HIIT or suicides/sprints, and tax me more? Will they tax me more because I have a higher BMI than someone just as tall even though my body fat is only 5% and theirs is 15%?
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,352
9
0
If you travel to a foreign country and are severely injured and cannot produce documentation of your ability to pay, is it okay for the hospital in the visiting country to refuse you?
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Originally posted by: Atheus
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: Atheus
If a dying child came to my door I would help it without hesitation and without asking for money. If you would not then you yourself do not deserve to live.
That's all well and good to say in the abstract; I'm sure most of us would say we'd help a dying child on our doorstep. But how far are you willing to go to "help"? Have you gone to med school or otherwise received some sort of training to truly allow you to be of assistance to the dying? You can't cure cancer or some other serious medical problem just using good intentions alone.
I pay into the National Health Service with my taxes. That's the whole point.
The whole point is that the National Health Service rations care, either by denying some treatment types outright, or by delays in providing it. That's the only way that costs can be contained in a universal model, since when healthcare is "free" the demand becomes infinite.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,977
848
126
Originally posted by: her209
If you travel to a foreign country and are severely injured and cannot produce documentation of your ability to pay, is it okay for the hospital in the visiting country to refuse you?
Based on my experience, it depends on the country.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
11
76
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01


It costs $1000 because they know they aren't going to pay. So 10x1000=10000 1 person pays you get $100 per person considering the people who dont pay. With uhc we won't have this problem and we should demand prices go down. Nobody wants to believe thaqt this is true or wants to believe that this would work but it will.
Yeah, and that'll work the same way price ceilings always do, and the way it went in Canada. You say, "UHC will only pay you $60 for lancing a boil." Doctors say, "Fine, I don't accept UHC at my office. Private insurance only." So you scratch your head, look in the socialist authoritarian playbook and go, "Aha! We're outlawing private insurance! What now, Doctor Smartypants?" But he doesn't say anything, because he's gone to another country where he can be paid his true market value. You're left with only the doctors who recieve enough utility from helping people to make up the difference in pay between your country and others. As a result, you now have long lines for procedures and a lower standard of care. You attempt to fix this by subsidizing the costs of medical schools and allowing more people to go to them. Most of these people take your education and flee the country. Then you start attaching strings to the education, like a requirement to remain in your country for 8 years practicing medicine after medical school. And now look, you've dehumanized doctors and have the emmigration policies of Cuba.
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,625
4
81
Maybe they haven't been taking their United States daily vitamins! (Prozack and Prednosone)

The US is a horrid candidate for state provided health. This county has the worst eating habits in the world, the worst exercise habits and we suck down more red meat, pork, salt and lab made sugars and other chemicals then you can shake a stick at.
 

CitizenKain

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2000
4,480
14
76
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: Majes
Good point Mike...
I would argue that its not really a valid comparison. Slavery, while it can certainly be broken down into different degrees, is not nearly as complex as providing health care to everyone. From a certain point of view you either provide it or you don't, but you don't have to be constantly freeing someone for the rest of their lives as opposed to constantly providing medication or treatment... This is particularly evident when you consider that some people have conditions with no cure. How would you even compare that?
voting rights
freedom of speech
property rights

your logic clearly fails, and besides, the right to continue to be alive is pretty obviously a right.


The argument that healthcare is not a right is really just covert eugenics. Some people don't 'deserve' to keep living because they are too sick, poor, etc.
They can continue to be alive, with their chest pain, for as long a time as the Creator has given them.
I wasn't aware we put imaginary things in charge.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,942
126
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Fern has this pretty much nailed down. If you are on Medicaid then you have about the best healthcare. Medicaid patients often go to the closest place regardless of cost and refuse to pay copays because they can. Often it's so they can get beer or cigs. No one will reform the system because the race card gets pulled out, so there is a lot of pandering to them. That's wonderful government run health care for you.
You guys are really going down the wrong path. These services are not ideal and most good doctors wont take them. Infact I know of one doctor who was fired for taking too many medicaid patients. The doctors have their schedulers punt the people down the field until they go somewhere else. UHC will lower costs because insurance companies are skimming 30% off the top of our health care, hospitals are padding their losses by increasing payments on little things like crutches and emergency room visits. Why does medicaid have a 2% overhead and insurance is 30%? If you guys work in the insurance industry then fine I understand why you would argue this but otherwise its a win for everyone including healthcare pros.

I know I am slightly contradicting myself by saying medicare isn't high quality and uhc will be good :D A lot of things will need to be worked out but it is the right path. I think we can increase what healthcare professionals and pharma make and still lower the bottom line.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY