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.
We have hear a lot from the conservative base of the Republican Party aka Tea Partiers how Free Market Health Care will save everyone money. Whats to stop a doctor from charging whatever the market bears and then forcing people into bankruptcy. Heres a case where a guy went in for a simple surgery and because he didnt look closely at all the forms he signed he was hit with a $117,000 bill and no one is looking out for his best interests. If he had been on Medicare the bill would have been a fraction of what it was...So Tea Party-Conservatives how do you convince Americans that a $117,000 bill is a small price to pay for freedom.
In recent years, unexpected out-of-network charges have become the top complaint to the New York State agency that regulates insurance companies. Multiple state health insurance commissioners have tried to limit patients’ liability, but lobbying by the health care industry sometimes stymies their efforts.
This happened despite regulations.
Aren't you usually complaining that "Tea Partiers" are wanting to keep their Medicaid that they have paid for?
In recent years, unexpected out-of-network charges have become the top complaint to the New York State agency that regulates insurance companies. Multiple state health insurance commissioners have tried to limit patients’ liability, but lobbying by the health care industry sometimes stymies their efforts.
This happened despite regulations.
Aren't you usually complaining that "Tea Partiers" are wanting to keep their Medicaid that they have paid for?
Actually its Medicare which most recipients have only paid in 13% to 40% what they take out...in other words its a wealth transfer from the young to the old.
I am confused. When someone schedules surgery, they know to the penny how much they are required to pay and oftentimes have to do so upfront, for the surgery to proceed. How are these" assistant surgeons" crawling out of the woodwork without the patient and the insurer's buy in.
There are endless studies that compare and contrast medical protocols between US healthcare and that of other developed nations. Generally speaking, surgery and over medication are substantially more common in the US than elsewhere with no better outcomes. Those other countries all have MD comprised comparative- effective panels. In the US the Republicans called them death panels.
I am confused. When someone schedules surgery, they know to the penny how much they are required to pay and oftentimes have to do so upfront, for the surgery to proceed. How are these" assistant surgeons" crawling out of the woodwork without the patient and the insurer's buy in.
There are endless studies that compare and contrast medical protocols between US healthcare and that of other developed nations. Generally speaking, surgery and over medication are substantially more common in the US than elsewhere with no better outcomes. Those other countries all have MD comprised comparative- effective panels. In the US the Republicans called them death panels.
In this $117,000 case he signed a waiver without really looking and that allowed the bill to happen. I have had three surgeries and to tell you the truth I never looked at any of the paperwork. I was in an HMO and I knew everything would be in-network. They also never tell you what the bill will be except you can figure you will pay your deductible.
Actually its Medicare which most recipients have only paid in 13% to 40% what they take out...in other words its a wealth transfer from the young to the old.
So what you are saying is you would move seniors into a program like Obamacare with networks and oversight from the private sector. What you would be advocating would be something similar to Avik Roy has suggested with the private sector health insurance companies given the authority to slap down outrageous fees. Would that be Obamacare on steroids?
We have hear a lot from the conservative base of the Republican Party aka Tea Partiers how Free Market Health Care will save everyone money. Whats to stop a doctor from charging whatever the market bears and then forcing people into bankruptcy. Heres a case where a guy went in for a simple surgery and because he didnt look closely at all the forms he signed he was hit with a $117,000 bill and no one is looking out for his best interests. If he had been on Medicare the bill would have been a fraction of what it was...So Tea Party-Conservatives how do you convince Americans that a $117,000 bill is a small price to pay for freedom.
I always know what I'm paying for a car, a house and even my dog, before I signed on the bottom line.
Get the doctors out of the insurance business. When they file you don't have a clue what your cost are going to be.
If you filed after the treatment, you may shop around for the value you wish, before the procedure takes place.
The complications would be the difference. Doctor gives you a price, so complications come out of his pay and cost, because he under bid the work.
So what you are saying is you would move seniors into a program like Obamacare with networks and oversight from the private sector. What you would be advocating would be something similar to Avik Roy has suggested with the private sector health insurance companies given the authority to slap down outrageous fees. Would that be Obamacare on steroids?
No. Technically, that is what you said.
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.