Where do you stand on Healthcare?

[LouderVol]

There is no "free market" in healthcare aside from maybe a concierge practice that takes cash only. Most of those practices probably still benchmark the insurance healthcare rates when setting their own prices, so not even sure if they are either. The discount program available on your drug is only there because the system is so screwed up to being with, not because it is a "free market".

That's a fair point I don't know the cause of these discount programs. In this case I should have used "isn't required by some government regulation" instead of "free market".

 

[LouderVol]

So hospitals choose to take everyone that shows up at the ER either without insurance/under insured or are they forced to do so due to government regulations? I think you are only looking at it from the insurance point of view, if you look at the whole system, there is regulation both for and against the consumer that drives up cost everywhere.
I didn't say government was the magic pill. I said it was the voice of the people who want their families to get insured/taken care of, but don't like the costs.

Along your line of reasoning, though, I highly doubt the un-insured/under-insured before ACA are now receiving worst care than before when they didn't have good or any access to healthcare. I highly doubt the care you receive has gotten worse since ACA took effect.

Mine absolutely has, and I am not talking about this earlier issue.

I lost my doctor when ACA first hit, took me almost a year to find a new PCP that was taking new patients.

Further, I have a family history with a curable issue if you catch it early. After ACA I can no longer just be tested separately for it despite a well established family history. instead of being able to be tested every 3 months for it, I have to wait for insurance to cover it under the typical yearly bloodwork. I am too young and healthy apparently to check for this issue early. and further I can't get tested for the issue when they take the blood, they have to get the results from the typical stuff first, and then I get tested for this disease and have to wait for a second set of tests to come back. For a while I was able to pay out of pocket for the other tests, but apparently my insurance won't cover the typical blood work if I pay out of pocket for these "extra" tests.

 

[volkyries]

So you’re complaining about insurance setting prices while also praising the ACA that forced everyone to get insurance?

Yes, there’s less of a free market because of policies you openly support.

Also worth noting there are numerous companies that do not accept insurance and do set there own prices

You can be quite dense sometimes. Do you actually read what people write or do you just make up stuff in your head and respond to it? I never complained about prices nor praised ACA. I actually would love the second choice where health care is available to those who can or choose to pay. Get the government out, get my employer out of it, etc. I said there is no "free market" in health care and without the true absence of government with regulations that force care, control prices, etc., you will never have a free market. Repealing ACA will not create a "free market" and I question whether it would even get us closer to one.

I never said companies don't set their own prices, I said they most likely set them on the flawed basis of the insurance market rates.

 

[volkyries]

Mine absolutely has, and I am not talking about this earlier issue.

I lost my doctor when ACA first hit, took me almost a year to find a new PCP that was taking new patients.

Further, I have a family history with a curable issue if you catch it early. After ACA I can no longer just be tested separately for it despite a well established family history. instead of being able to be tested every 3 months for it, I have to wait for insurance to cover it under the typical yearly bloodwork. I am too young and healthy apparently to check for this issue early. and further I can't get tested for the issue when they take the blood, they have to get the results from the typical stuff first, and then I get tested for this disease and have to wait for a second set of tests to come back. For a while I was able to pay out of pocket for the other tests, but apparently my insurance won't cover the typical blood work if I pay out of pocket for these "extra" tests.

Man, that sucks. Sorry to hear you had to put up with all of that and still have to do so with the bloodwork.

 

[Vol8188]

You can be quite dense sometimes. Do you actually read what people write or do you just make up stuff in your head and respond to it? I never complained about prices nor praised ACA. I actually would love the second choice where health care is available to those who can or choose to pay. Get the government out, get my employer out of it, etc. I said there is no "free market" in health care and without the true absence of government with regulations that force care, control prices, etc., you will never have a free market. Repealing ACA will not create a "free market" and I question whether it would even get us closer to one.

I never said companies don't set their own prices, I said they most likely set them on the flawed basis of the insurance market rates.

Lmfao you praise the ACA while claiming you want an end to insurance? The affordable care act is the single most pro healthcare insurance piece of legislation in American history. The only thing that even comes close is FDR’s stabilization act of 1942. The ACA literally fined people if they didn’t buy health insurance.

If I wanted an end to McDonald’s I wouldn’t be praising a bill that forced people to buy McDonald’s.

What you’re wanting would cost more and likely provide lower quality care than what we have now. The only way to make it cost less would be to lower the quality of care. Once again, you’re wrongly seeing government as a magic pill. “If I just add a little more government here…”, that’s not how it works.

 

[volkyries]

Lmfao you praise the ACA while claiming you want an end to insurance? The affordable care act is the single most pro healthcare insurance piece of legislation in American history. The only thing that even comes close is FDR’s stabilization act of 1942. The ACA literally fined people if they didn’t buy health insurance.

If I wanted an end to McDonald’s I wouldn’t be praising a bill that forced people to buy McDonald’s.

What you’re wanting would cost more and likely provide lower quality care than what we have now. The only way to make it cost less would be to lower the quality of care. Once again, you’re wrongly seeing government as a magic pill. “If I just add a little more government here…”, that’s not how it works.

My original post was as a nation a choice has to be made (sorry, you don't get to make it alone), either have government involved, probably more so and really controlling healthcare or get government out and let the market figure it out. The current hybrid system of government dictating care policies, insurance requirements, etc is just blowing up the whole system and costing a lot of money and wasting resources. This goes beyond ACA and beyond FDR's act. It is 80 years of messing/rigging the system that got us here today.

I never claimed I wanted to end insurance. I am sure there would be plenty of insurance offerings in the future with a free market on healthcare.

 

[Vol8188]

My original post was as a nation a choice has to be made (sorry, you don't get to make it alone), either have government involved, probably more so and really controlling healthcare or get government out and let the market figure it out. The current hybrid system of government dictating care policies, insurance requirements, etc is just blowing up the whole system and costing a lot of money and wasting resources. This goes beyond ACA and beyond FDR's act. It is 80 years of messing/rigging the system that got us here today.

I never claimed I wanted to end insurance. I am sure there would be plenty of insurance offerings in the future with a free market on healthcare.

FDR’s act started this system and the ACA enshrined it. But either way your first post was far more than that. It was you making false claims about the other side of that coin, claiming that the people who say no would have to accept x, y, and z, all which are present in any system.

 

[OHvol40]

My original post was as a nation a choice has to be made (sorry, you don't get to make it alone), either have government involved, probably more so and really controlling healthcare or get government out and let the market figure it out. The current hybrid system of government dictating care policies, insurance requirements, etc is just blowing up the whole system and costing a lot of money and wasting resources. This goes beyond ACA and beyond FDR's act. It is 80 years of messing/rigging the system that got us here today.

I never claimed I wanted to end insurance. I am sure there would be plenty of insurance offerings in the future with a free market on healthcare.

There are way too many non-clinical people with MBAs who provide no real tangible benefit to the healthcare system that get rich off of healthcare in this country.

 

[hog88]

There are way too many non-clinical people with MBAs who provide no real tangible benefit to the healthcare system that get rich off of healthcare in this country.

That's every damn industry these days.

 

[hog88]

First step in reigning in HC costs (insurance) is to eliminate employer provided health insurance. Make it illegal if we have to. Have everyone purchase insurance on the open market and allow insurance companies to sell catastrophic plans. Make health insurance premiums 100% deductible regardless of income, allow contributions to health savings accounts and any interest gained to be pre tax. Require all health care provider to post rates or provide quotes when asked.

 

[OHvol40]

That's every damn industry these days.

I guess that’s what happens when you move from an industrial economy into a service-based economy.

 

[hog88]

I guess that’s what happens when you move from an industrial economy into a service-based economy.

That and a bachelors is almost equivalent to a HS diploma these days, everybody's got one.

 

[OHvol40]

That and a bachelors is almost equivalent to a HS diploma these days, everybody's got one.

Last I saw something like 37% of Americans have a bachelors or higher. They have devalued from both ends. Stagnant salaries for college grads, and an abundance of worthless, aimless degrees given out… but I digress.

 

[Vol8188]

There are way too many non-clinical people with MBAs who provide no real tangible benefit to the healthcare system that get rich off of healthcare in this country.

And you want to replace them with politicians?

 

[TheDeeble]

First step in reigning in HC costs (insurance) is to eliminate employer provided health insurance. Make it illegal if we have to. Have everyone purchase insurance on the open market and allow insurance companies to sell catastrophic plans. Make health insurance premiums 100% deductible regardless of income, allow contributions to health savings accounts and any interest gained to be pre tax. Require all health care provider to post rates or provide quotes when asked.

What's the negative you see with employer provided health insurance?

 

[OHvol40]

And you want to replace them with politicians?

Not necessarily. Don’t be so combative. Pointing out a flaw does not equate to offering a solution, I’m more interested in conversation than the tired old infighting, or pointing out how everybody else is wrong and stupid.

 

[Vol8188]

Not necessarily. Don’t be so combative. Pointing out a flaw does not equate to offering a solution, I’m more interested in conversation than the tired old infighting, or pointing out how everybody else is wrong and stupid.

Do you have a solution for your perceived flaw

 

[85SugarVol]

The whole health care system is broken, not just insurance. The real question is does everyone deserve access to health care and life saving drugs/care? If you say yes, then someone (government unfortunately) has to be involved to see that everyone gets some sort of chance to afford it. If you say no, then accept that a lot of people are going to die, reduce their quality of life, etc, by not being able or willing to pay for it. The problem today is that everyone says everyone should have access, but then everyone hates paying for the access or the costs involved. If we want the market to take over, we have to accept the market will let people die/suffer. Everyone says they are willing to let people die until it is their grandparent, parent, sibling, spouse, child, best friend, etc that is dying or suffering and then it is "how could we let this happen"/"something has to be done".

Insurance has screwed it up, pharm companies have screwed it up, med schools have screwed it up (by keeping supply of doctors low/controlled), med tech companies have screwed it up. Name an organization in the health care industry and they have probably had a hand in screwing it up.

Lol. What a frame job.

The real question is - Does everyone deserve access to “life saving” Heathcare?

If you say ‘yes’ - You might have to pay a little more money.
If you say ‘no’ - Then just accept people are going to die.

 

[hog88]

What's the negative you see with employer provided health insurance?

Limits choice and beholds people to an employer.

 

[Vol8188]

Lol. What a frame job.

The real question is - Does everyone deserve access to “life saving” Heathcare?

If you say ‘yes’ - You might have to pay a little more money.
If you say ‘no’ - Then just accept people are going to die.

Yep the false claim that creating a monopoly will somehow improve supply

 

[85SugarVol]

That's every damn industry these days.

 

[Vol8188]

Limits choice and beholds people to an employer.

I’d focus on the supply of healthcare side. Couple of easy examples that could improve supply:

My AEMT license lapsed while in grad school. In order to renew that it would’ve cost me around $700-800 between state fees, 50 hours of continuing education classes, in person cognitive test, and in person skills test. For someone who has already been an AEMT, I’d recommend either/or with the 50 hours or cognitive test.

Another example is surgery. Currently anesthesia is ran by mid levels with a doctor overseeing many 6 or so mid levels at a time. The same could be done for minor surgeries. Start an apprenticeship program for midlevels, have them work under a surgeon for one year focusing on specific/common surgeries such as debridements, ileostomies, and cholecystectomies.

Edit: I’d add a lot of basic amputations (toes, feet, possibly through the knees too). I’ve even seen simple dressing changes done by surgeons.

But then after a year you let those PAs work as surgeons with 1 MD overseeing 5-6 rooms

 

[TheDeeble]

Limits choice and beholds people to an employer.

I thought you were suggesting that to reign in costs, employer provided health insurance is a road block to

Have everyone purchase insurance on the open market and allow insurance companies to sell catastrophic plans. Make health insurance premiums 100% deductible regardless of income, allow contributions to health savings accounts and any interest gained to be pre tax. Require all health care provider to post rates or provide quotes when asked.

Separate from that, one isn't require to take the employer provided health insurance are they? I was under the belief you can not enroll and search out your own if you want.

 

[Vol8188]

Another huge cost deduction would be simply removing the entire concept of a “prescription drug”.

 

[hog88]

I thought you were suggesting that to reign in costs, employer provided health insurance is a road block to


Separate from that, one isn't require to take the employer provided health insurance are they? I was under the belief you can not enroll and search out your own if you want.

Employees are not forced to take teh employer provided insurance but the products you are offered by your employer are often limited. It's certainly limited to what insurance company is offered. And if you don't take the employer provided insurance and buy your own policy there is no tax benefit for you.

I do believe that getting the employer out of the equation would reign in some cost for insurance coverage.