It is basic math that we cannot reduce healthcare costs in this country without reducing the amounts we pay doctors and hospitals. If we want to pay more then taxes need to go up. If we want to pay less than we need to either deregulate or enact price controls like the United Kingdom's NHS or Canada's health care system
Take Trackhead's case, for example. Despite the hassle and small out of pocket expense those greedy health insurance bastards covered the rest of a $1,000,000 bill. I'm happy he's alive. He (and we) got the deal of lifetime. By many accounts the NHS is no longer providing that level of care
Who decides, though? You're describing a system where hospitals are given a blank check to charge whatever they want. If that's what people want then they should demand a law requiring insurers pay any and all expenses no matter what
More of the system that got us to this point isn't gonna fix the system. Business as usual is business as usual.
Health insurance should prioritize the policy holders needs 1st. And then fight the hospital about overcharges after. If the insurance thinks the hospitals are price gouging, then they can sue the hospital and the hospital, drug provider have to show proof for why something costs as much as it does. this would likely result in standardization of healthcare costs.
What we have is a government-subsidized payment plan funneled through insurance companies. It's not really insurance in the economic sense. Americans pay large amounts hidden as private insurance premiums to disguise the fact it's big government.
Our insane healthcare payment system is in fact highly regulated to do what californiagrown describes. When it come to Medicare & Medicaid the costs are mostly standardized. Doctors will tell you private insurance authorizes more and pays better
I don't have a problem with private insurance if the insurance coverage is fair and swift. Where i can understand some "activism" is when insurance companies delay/deny covered care as a policy point to increase profits. Time is money to them, but time is health/life to the policy holder. That is theft of services resulting in bodily harm and/or death, and it is unacceptable. It is morally unacceptable and the people responsible for such policies should be treated the way a violent mugger would be.
The issue is the “benefits” are bestowed by hospitals and presented as if they are nicer people than the other side who want to deny these benefits. That way they can hide the costs and scare people even if it costs people more than it should
Rats at McDonalds?!
https://www.latintimes.com/altoona-m...are-ceo-568519
Insurance reform should be Elon and Vivek's second job. We all know it.
The nice people are the ones trying to save my life. The bad guys are the ones who kneejerk deny coverage of anything expensive as matter of policy, no matter if it is time sensitive or not.
There are two distinct issues and maybe we are talking past each other. There is the issue of fraudulent denial/delay of claims and care by insurance companies. And there is the issue of price gouging and fraudulent insurance claims by healthcare providers.
The first is an issue of right vs wrong with lives on the line. The second is an issue of right vs wrong with money on the line. The problem that should be prioritized seems clear.
The first reducing that needs to be done is to profits distributed to shareholders of hospitals and insurance companies. Reducing drs pay will just result in fewer drs in the lower paying specialties.
This is a story on out-of-network shenanigans by a company called Multipath and the ins cos that crushed folks and some providers.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/07/u...smid=url-share
TL;DR
“I knew they were not fair,” said one former MultiPlan negotiator, Kajuana Young."
Clutch your pearls harder. Violence will always be an answer, when dialogue breaks down and things get bleak people will resort to violence. I’m not saying that is the case with this murder though. Seems like a kook and not motivated by desperation.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
The assassin is a kook who quite literally made a political statement
If you want to change things, one place to start is the fact that no one knows how often private insurers like UnitedHealthcare deny claims because as a general rule they are not required to publish that data.
The two issues are absolutely related. How is that not obvious?
? Wasn’t there a chart posted in this thread about UHC and the rate of denial or percentage of denials that they have in relation to other insurance companies? They were the worst, probably why he was targeted.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I'm not sure that's actually correct. The US system spends a lot of money on all of the middlemen - for example, the recent investigations of pharmacy benefit manager companies, who theoretically control drug costs but in practice make plans more expensive for the purchaser. AFAIK, the total effect of the PBMs is not a huge percentage of drug costs, but these middle layers of the healthcare system are everywhere. I know somebody who studies this stuff professionally who regularly points out that the main difference between the US and European healthcare systems is that the US has about the same level of care outcomes but spends 2-3x as much per capita.
I don't condone vigilante violence at all or think it's funny; one reason is pure self-interest, if violence becomes more common, I'm more likely to be a subject of it than some rich exploiter guy who can buy security. However, I think pearl-clutching about how terrible this is, is ducking the issue that consolidation of power in rich people and corporate America is priming the pump for explosions of rage, including from people who are only a little out of balance.
Living in a country where the guy with enough stamina to write a 35 page manifesto committed acts of terrorism was tolerable. Living in a country where everyone pissed off enough to write a long Amazon review rant feels the way they can be heard is to commit violence, will not be.
Maybe fewer doctors, maybe not. The AMA works hard to reduce the supply of doctors and also to limit the type of work nurses, PAs, and NPs can do.
Take for example anesthesiologists discussed earlier in this thread. It went viral that insurers were limiting the amount paid out to anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology is one of the cushier well paid specialties in medicine. Their job can actually mostly be done by nurse techs, but thanks to the cartel that elevates the status of doctors in the U.S., they instead receive exceptionally high pay for a job that doesn't necessitate that level of training
Right, I mentioned that on the previous page. What we know about UHC denying claims is based on consumer surveys, not legally required publicly available information. I'm saying it should be a legal requirement
The U.S. spends a lot of money for health care. But we pay more but get nothing in return story is simply not true. If a person has a good health plan in America they mostly get better care with shorter wait times here than other countries. If a person has a serious life threatening illness America is a better place to be than a socialized system that will declare advanced treatment not cost effective and phase it out
A lot of insurance claim denials are for the most advanced most expensive treatment options that might not even be available at any cost in other countries
Sure, here's a Canadian example of woman who is diagnosed with cancer and told she has maybe 2 years to live and that she is not a candidate for surgery but Canada would provide medical help committing suicide. The woman decides to consult with foreign doctors and get treatment in Baltimore.
“Universal healthcare really doesn’t exist,” Ducluzeau said. “My experience is it’s ‘do it yourself’ health care and GoFundMe health care:
https://globalnews.ca/news/10118619/...united-states/
Bookmarks