Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's why all the other first world nations with national healthcare have longer life expectancies and spend far less on healthcare as a percentage of GDP right?
Unless you are sick with something bad, then they let you die rather than taking care of you as when old you are not important to them. Oh and never need a hip or joint replacement, etc or you will wait, in pain, for a year or more to get it fixed under those plans. They are bare plans and favor the young and healthy only.
As expected. The bill would protect the little guy. This is about the big healthcare networks being regulated, as they should be.
Are you kidding? This bill is not about "protecting the little guy." (And anyone who thinks that concierge practices protect the patient is kidding themselves. The regular patient is priced out of most concierge practices.)
It affects all physicians: what they can charge commercial insurance companies and what they can charge self pay patients.
It's the doctors who are saying they will leave practice in Cali.
As to the hospitals, perhaps those should go no frills. No TV, no internet, maybe go back to wards with ten or twelve beds in one room. No private rooms for the legislators, either! You could take it a step further and have family members empty bedpans and mop the floors in patient rooms. Imagine the money saved!
I still don't get why you are trying to influence CA voters.
Your arguments aren't based in reality.
Let the doctors leave who are threatening to leave. We're not worried about being able to replace them.
And, since you obviously don't think your argument about physicians leaving is valid, now you're trying to say that the other workers in the hospitals will also leave? And members of families will have to do their jobs?
That's inane. Obviously, even you agree that your arguments don't hold water, if you're trying to convince us that even the janitors will leave and family members will have to do their jobs for free LOL. Just, really. Come on.
This is interesting and thanks for pointing it out suzy_q2010.
Is it weird that the first place my mind went to, after imagining CA looses some medical professionals, is how and where we will get their replacements? Ties in nicely with CA's stand on immigration.
Don't expect these same networks to all of a sudden start actually caring about the physicians in their networks. They will be quite happy to hire cheaper physicians, you can bet your life.
And they will then figure out how to maintain similar profits within the new system.
They, of course, will try not to expend any more effort or money than possible, but I'll bet they are actually already figuring out how they can make more money if physicians do actually leave the state, and are probably hoping this law actually does pass.
They'll point at how hard they tried to keep the American physicans, while grinning like Cheshire cats when they start hiring H1-B visa replacements who will be cheaper.
They aren't on anyone's side, except themselves. So, don't believe it for a second, that they care about the physicians who now work for them. That's completely naive.
Are you kidding? This bill is not about "protecting the little guy." (And anyone who thinks that concierge practices protect the patient is kidding themselves. The regular patient is priced out of most concierge practices.)
I agree. The point I was making was that the bill is directed toward commercial health care systems, not private offices, which was the conversation being discussed.
Any physicians I've seen at any point in my long life in CA have all worked for some large hospital or network, like Kaiser, or through a county government network. This includes dentists for me now, too. They all get paid salaries and benefits.
Other than the few years I had a Kaiser individual plan, my experience has been the polar opposite of yours, and I spent roughly the same number of years living in California as you have. Re the way you worded the above, it doesn't sound as though you have much, if any, experience dealing with doctors in private practice....which have been plentiful in California over the period of your long life.
Quote:
The physician who is self-employed, is the more rare beast nowadays. There is no gap in my understanding of how doctors get paid in my life in CA.
Your statement "how doctors get paid in my life in CA" is relatively meaningless. It only speaks to your personal experience.
There is a gap in your understanding of how physicians get paid outside of your own personal experience.
Quote:
Not sure where you live, or which health care plan you are in.
But, anyone with insurance, even if they can choose their own doctors or specialists, still pay those doctors and specialists through their insurance companies.
Are you saying, these insurance companies don't set the prices for the doctors in their networks? They just pay any amount the doctor submits? So, let's say your co-pay is $20. The insurance company pays the difference. And the insurance company will pay any amount the doctor submits to them?
Their prices are already set by the insurance companies. And yet, the insurance companies still somehow make enormous profits. So, who fills in the gap between what the insurance company allows the physician to charge, and the amount of their profits?
The insurance companies may try to lowball physicians if this law passes, blaming it on the new law. But, you can bet they'll keep their profits intact.
So, seems to me, physicians who are self-employed, who are in these insurance networks, should start marching like the teachers are, to get their fare share.
But, this does not mean that we should keep allowing huge health care networks to keep bilking everyone, patients and doctors alike - just because some self-employed physicians may suffer, so they can keep their profit margins.
If they're smart, they'll simply start their own physician-owned networks and to heck with the health care networks.
In no particular order:
1. You aren't a Physician (IIRC, you were a residential property manager), let alone a self-employed one, who has the requisite knowledge re what is involved re the profit structure in the practice of a self employed Physician.
2. It sounds as though you resent the money that Physicians make, with no regard to the fact that many Physicians educated in the U.S. complete their education with significant debt. They should be able to earn at a rate where they can at least somewhat comfortably pay that debt off. In a number of other countries where 'government healthcare' is the norm, the med students don't have to pay tuition, etc. Are you unaware that doctors in the U.S. often graduate with debt?.....Or do you not care about their ability to pay that debt off?
3. You have probably a greater vested interest than anyone else who has posted to this thread to see that this bill passes, to help insure that you get the most out of your more limited budget....and the heck with anyone else's perspective or needs (of which paying back loans would be just one).
4. Until your last paragraph, you seemed unaware of concierge medical practices. Even given the last sentence of yours that I quoted, you still seem unaware of concierge medical practices...but I can't tell with much certainty.
5. A number of people put the most emphasis on a particular doctor, not that every cent is covered by insurance. If their insurance covers everything but the co-pay...fine. If the doctor they want to see doesn't take their particular insurance or (increasingly) doesn't take insurance at all...they just pay out of pocket. It doesn't sound as though you have much, or any, interaction with people who pay their medical expenses guided by what I outlined.
6. Given the composition of your post, it's obvious that you are unaware that the person you're replying to (stan4) IS a Physician.
Okay, trying to make some connection between you living in Georgia, managing a property in Detroit, and a proposed law in CA regarding health care.
The subject is the proposed law in California, and how it might alter the behavior/decisions of Physicians. Where the OP lives or manages property is irrelevant.
Quote:
You're just repeating your propaganda about physicians retiring or leaving the state, and the illogical conclusion that no physicians would replace them, and therefore, all of the millions of Californians will have zero doctors to attend to their health care needs, if this bill passes.
The OP's words would only fit a more traditional definition of propaganda if the OP is a lobbyist. The OP has stated three times that she is not a lobbyist. Are you asserting that the OP is lying about that? The OP stated her motivation...that she doesn't want such legislation to spread to her state. She seems sincere to me. Other posters in this thread have found the OP to be credible, including at least one poster who has self defined as left leaning on some other threads. I imagine that you would support this law for all states, and wouldn't mind if all states became like California, or more like California. Is unimaginable to you that someone might sincerely hold a different view?
Quote:
I still say that's illogical, and trying to convince Californians that this will happen if they don't vote against this bill is unrealistic.
^^^^^ I don't believe the above sentence for a second. If you truly felt that the OP's desire to have the bill defeated is completely unrealistic, you wouldn't care one whit about the OP trying to influence anyone's opinion. You're fretting that the OP and others might influence the vote on this bill enough to prevent it from passing.
Quote:
I don't know if physicians can unionize or not, but that shouldn't prevent them from creating their own health care network, which would not be a union. I am quite sure there is no law against anyone creating their own health care network. Even if they happen to be physicians. As long as they only charge prices that fall within the maximums allowed by this new law, for instance.
You may say you're not a lobbyist. But, you are lobbying.
There you go again, doubting the OP's sincerity without anything concrete to justify that doubt. The OP comes across as less self serving in this thread than you do.
I still don't get why you are trying to influence CA voters.
Your arguments aren't based in reality.
Let the doctors leave who are threatening to leave. We're not worried about being able to replace them.
And, since you obviously don't think your argument about physicians leaving is valid, now you're trying to say that the other workers in the hospitals will also leave? And members of families will have to do their jobs?
That's inane. Obviously, even you agree that your arguments don't hold water, if you're trying to convince us that even the janitors will leave and family members will have to do their jobs for free LOL. Just, really. Come on.
Are you being deliberately obtuse? I have explained that I started the thread because I thought the topic might be of interest to Californians posting here. They are the people who will have to live with the results.
Apparently my sarcasm did not come through well. My joke about family members mopping floors was to point out that would also save money, which this misguided bill proposes to do. So would cutting out the amenities that hospitals now offer to attract patients. You could also add a law to prevent doctors and hospitals from advertising. That would save money, too. After all, these days your insurance company chooses your doctors and hospital for you. Doctors and hospitals really do not have much competitive advantage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe
Don't expect these same networks to all of a sudden start actually caring about the physicians in their networks. They will be quite happy to hire cheaper physicians, you can bet your life.
And they will then figure out how to maintain similar profits within the new system.
They, of course, will try not to expend any more effort or money than possible, but I'll bet they are actually already figuring out how they can make more money if physicians do actually leave the state, and are probably hoping this law actually does pass.
They'll point at how hard they tried to keep the American physicans, while grinning like Cheshire cats when they start hiring H1-B visa replacements who will be cheaper.
They aren't on anyone's side, except themselves. So, don't believe it for a second, that they care about the physicians who now work for them. That's completely naive.
I don't think you understand what "networks" are. That applies to insurance companies: the panels of doctors that contract to see their patients. Kaiser is the only insurance plan of any size that directly employs its own physicians. The bill is not about what insurance companies agree to pay or what the patient share of costs will be. If the state decides to lower fees below what the insurance companies are already paying, those companies will be happy. They pay the doctors less, but are highly unlikely to lower premiums. Result: higher insurance company profits, patients still paying high premiums, deductibles, and copayments.
H1-B physicians do not want to be paid less than they could make in another state, either. In fact, if there is a scarcity of physicians, they will have to be paid more.
Your only choice might be a Nurse Practitioner. I believe there is a place for NPs, but they should supplement MDs (or DOs), not replace them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe
I agree. The point I was making was that the bill is directed toward commercial health care systems, not private offices, which was the conversation being discussed.
No, the bill applies to every physician in the state, not just those who are employees.
"(6) A physician and surgeon or other professional who is licensed in California to deliver or furnish health care services and who is a member of a health profession in which some professionals bill independently for their services.
(7) A physician organization or medical group.
(8) Any other provider of a health care service that is licensed, certified, or otherwise regulated by the state and that bills separately or independently for that service."
That is every single physician in the state.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Other than the few years I had a Kaiser individual plan, my experience has been the polar opposite of yours, and I spent roughly the same number of years living in California as you have. Re the way you worded the above, it doesn't sound as though you have much, if any, experience dealing with doctors in private practice....which have been plentiful in California over the period of your long life.
