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.
Um, no. The reason healthcare is so expensive is because doctors are in demand, and want to be paid Mercedes and Mansion type money, rather than Buick and 4-2 ranch type money. And since there are so few of them relative to the general population, they can get away with it.
By and large most docs do not and cannot set their prices. These are set by third parties, like Medicare, Medicaid and other insurance carriers. And with most docs these are indeed Chevrolet type money.
Well, you have some limited truth to what you say. The AMA artificially keeps the numbers of doctors low, insuring higher salary for doctors, but given the amount of training and time it takes to be a Doctor, I don't see that they are getting more than they should. Dealing with costs associated with Supply vs Demand is part of being a grown-up.
The AMA has been immaterial for many years. We are actually in a significant doctor and other HC provider expansion right now. Through central policy and some on the private side. The big constriction with MD docs remains limiting Medicare funding of residency slots. And that is Congress not the AMA, who I haven't heard from in decades.
Yeah tell me that when you have an infant who will die without heart surgery, or a spouse with cancer. It's easy to talk tough in the abstract, it's a lot different in 'real life'.
For instance in my medical office I make very little income taking care of Medicaid and Medicare. So those prices can't be seriously lower our I go out of business due to my typical office overheads.
Now the hospital makes good money. But only only a few percent over revenues. And about the same with insurers. Good money because of volume.
The main reason HC is so expensive is based on new, useful and expensive technologies and our unfortunate ageing demographics. Not only can we do more, we do more and for more patients. Our specialist based HC system is very technical and with very high resource use.
One can always negotiate on HC costs. The patient and the carriers.
For instance hospital bills are not revenues collected. Very different. An unbelievable hospital bill may in the end be reasonable in actual settlement.
I recently spent about 2 hours in an ER for a respiratory issue. Not in a single room, but a curtained-off area in an open area. No trauma-care, no blood, no emergency surgery, no sucking chest wound, or compound fracture, just me sitting on a bed with an IV and, briefly, a nebulizer. The bill, just for the bed (not including meds, treatment, Dr., etc.,) was $10,000. No doubt, much of that went to pay for others unable to pay (mandated by law). I ended up paying about $400 in co-pay, and had no involvement in payment other than getting a statement of benefits. That seems ridiculous to me that 2 hours in ER would be so expensive. The bill for the pee jug was $250!!!! I have no idea if BC negotiated a lower payment, and since it is OPM, I don't really care, and that is the rub when using OPM.
Single payer is the ultimate OPM scenario, and can't be made affordable.
The AMA has been immaterial for many years. We are actually in a significant doctor and other HC provider expansion right now. Through central policy and some on the private side. The big constriction with MD docs remains limiting Medicare funding of residency slots. And that is Congress not the AMA, who I haven't heard from in decades.
That contradicts all I have heard from experts in the field say. Just as DeBeers controls the supply of diamonds, the AMA controls the supply of Doctors.
. Oh well. By using the vehicle of Insurance, you only insure higher and higher prices.
Society simple cannot afford to give Cadillac-level care to everyone, regardless of the method of payment. The more "remote" the payer is from the patient, the higher prices will climb. This is geometrically more-true as technology develops new and expensive protocols/equipment/drugs - the costs to keep people alive ever-longer and longer will escalate.
People have to accept mortality, and when it's over, it's over. Bankrupting generations to come by saddling them with $Trillions of debt, isn't "right". If you can pay to keep yourself alive for a few more years, go for it. Otherwise, CYA L8R.
Wow, so you say just let them die? If you can't afford it then you just die.
I've lived in countries where they have government health care. It's a separate but equal system, where no one but the ultra-poor would ever use the government system. A broken arm is a 24 hour wait at the ER. A surgery is a 3-4 year wait list. Everyone on this forum would still use our private insurance. It would just be the permanent underclass using the government system.
It's the same as public schools. I think it's great that the poorest neighborhoods have schools for their kids, but people like you and I would never send our kids to them.
What country was that? I live in Australia and have NEVER had to wait. ER or any other clinic.
You have the right to speak, to print a newspaper, either paper, or digital. Yes, a right under the Bill of Rights.
However, that does NOT mean somebody has to buy you a printing press, paper, ink, or a staff of copy writers. You have a right to be "press", but YOU have to pay for what YOU want to do yourself.
Likewise, you have a RIGHT to seek medical service, but, again, paying for it is on YOU.
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.