Re: Health care (again) -- WAS: DSC 832 on Cable VoIP

[JoeRaisin <joeraisin2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

G. Morgan wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 22:07:43 -0800 (PST), mleuck <m.leuck@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> The
>> emergency room charges $50 to make up for the shortfall of Medicare
>> funding from the federal government, the "free" emergency care they
>> are required to give to the poor, all the lawsuits from someone
>> stubbing their toe while waiting for a doctor and the fact they can
>> charge $50 for 2 Tylenol pills.
>
>
> Okay then, here is the solution.  We need tort reform so people can't
> sue Dr's for ridiculous amounts in frivolous lawsuits.  Now the
> doctor's malpractice insurance gets to come down.  And they aren't
> scared to do their job.
>
> The "free ER care" is already subsidized by you and me in the form of
> higher premiums, so are we not already in a "socialist" system?
>
> So how about hospitals and insurance companies figure out what it
> "really costs" for treatments.  And pay and bill accordingly.  Without
> adding in all the uninsured "walk-ins".  Those are the people that
> will be eligible for the Public ----> OPTION <----  right wingers keep
> forgetting to add that's it's only an OPTION, an insurance of last
> resort.  For folks that can not afford a regular policy.
>
> Doctors, nurses, and everyone else still gets paid the same.  What
> needs to happen is cut out the inefficiency and waste.  And that's
> exactly what a Public OPTION will force the current carriers to do.
>
> No more $50 Tylenol after that.
>
> And, yes... I do believe in capitalism very much so.  I just think
> it's disgraceful that people suffer because the company execs. want a
> better stock price, that translates into a better Mercedes next year
> for them.  They automatically deny almost everything automatically the
> first time, and you have to fight them tooth and nail just to get the
> care you need.
>
> I'm not saying they don't deserve to make a profit.  That's the very
> first thing my college instructor said on day one, "the purpose of
> business is to make a profit".  But, they are letting PEOPLE suffer
> and DIE for this profit.  All I'm saying is re-analyze everything,
> find out the TRUE cost of heath care.  And limit what the insurance
> companies are allowed to deny for medically necessary procedures, and
> get rid of that fucking pre-existing condition rider crap.  I can't
> believe that's even legal!
>
> Humor me please....  Go to the insurance carrier's web site of your
> choice and get a quote.  For a decent policy, not one that only pays
> 70% and makes you pay a $5000 deductible.  Get a quote comparable to
> the insurance you have now, and what you think is reasonable coverage
> for the average man of our age.  When you get the number, report back
> with it....  Then we'll figure out what the minimum salary is to live
> on while paying that premium.
>
> I think you'll see that non-skilled laborers, and people without real
> marketable skills are completely priced out.  And that's why YOU pay
> more, and why we need a last resort public option.
>
> Or you do prefer just to say, "screw 'em, let 'em die?".

The TRUE cost is what the market will bear.

Under the current system the consumer has no incentive to shop their
'consuming' around for the best price.  In fact, prices are artificially
determined through negotiations between insurance companies and providers.

Check out your next emergency room or hospital stay bill and see the
difference between what they accept from the insurance company and what
you would pay if you didn't have it.

Our current tax laws are a contributor in this since the providers can
point to what they charge those without insurance (highly inflated IMHO)
and what they get paid from insurance companies.  That difference
translates into a tax break for each payment accepted from insurance
companies since the portion not paid is considered a "write off."

Also, if you own a business or get insurance through your employer the
premiums you pay are deducted or taken from pre-tax dollars.  If you buy
your own insurance you cannot do this.

Level the tax field by either making insurance premiums deductible or
not for everyone.  By using a combination of HSA'a (pre-tax dollars) and
catastrophic coverage you make health insurance more like auto insurance
in that it isn't used for minor expenses such as routine office visits
so folks are more apt to look at how much an office visit costs before
signing up with a particular doctor reconnecting the consumer with the
provider and, as it always does, the competition will result in a
general lowering of prices.

I still think those who are denied insurance due to 'preexisting
conditions' should fall under medicare/medicaid.  I know it's already
bloated and inefficient but it's also unfair to require insurance
companies to insure someone who will be taking more than they are paying
right of the bat.  That would just make premiums even more expensive for
everyone.  Same thing would happen if laws governing auto insurance was
restructured so the insurance companies were not allowed to raise rates
or decline coverage to people who make accidents or risky driving a hobby.

I do agree that tort reform is needed to bring down the cost of that
insurance - Frankly, I think the bulk of such reform should be aimed at
the lawyers in that any lawsuit deemed frivolous results in the lawyer
not being allowed to collect any fee whatsoever, and being required to
pay any court related expenses.

As it is, some lawyers seek out clients for small-time lawsuits knowing
that regardless of outcome, they get at least something out of it with
no risk to them at all.  Even those who advertise "no fee unless you
win" are only out 'time' which is written off on their taxes at their
highest rate structure.

Hit 'em in the wallet and the number of these speculative small pay-out
suits (which (cumulatively) are really what costs the insurance
companies the big bucks - not the few large high-profile ones) will
decline considerably.