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.
Yeah lets all go to the McDoctor making minimum wage and get our leeching treatments. Hospitals couldn't even afford to sterilize and dispose of used needles with the profits you'd be talking about. Who cares anyways? Just throw that stuff into those socialists parks.
You are misquoting - I assume for effect.
The tax exemption was for charging 3 times minimum wage.
Roughly $50K / annum.
And this salary is for a system with ZERO malpractice insurance premiums.
Zero Tax liability.
Zero Tax record keeping.
Zero administrative overhead.
Zero insurance paperwork (yeah!)
Zero influence of outsiders on treatment options
Zero need for office staff, which the patient ultimately paid for.
Zero credit - pay cash up front - no billing hassles.
Zero need to finagle "business deductions"
I dunno about Tibet. But my friend just returned from a "medical vacation" in Thailand, and he saved a bundle.
And while in Panama, he had a root canal and crown installed for (wait for it)
(wait)
$110 U.S.
... And they gouged him for being a damn Yankee.
Oh my, it's so hard. Let's see - - - I saw 4 patients / hour over 8 hours...
Do I just multiply 8 x 3 x minimum wage, and I'm done?
Accounting, when there are no taxes to futz with, is pretty simple.
No deductions for "business expenses" or worry about disallowed items.
No need to collect receipts. Or decipher scribbled notes - in bad handwriting.
OMG, physicians would LOVE being tax exempt.
Don't you want to keep records to know how many patients you saw? Do you think a doc in this kind of operation would have NO overhead? No rent to pay, equipment to buy, utility bills, etc? Is s/he going to operate in a tent on pubic land somewhere? Is s/he going to send all his/her pts to the health dept for their shots? Uh, you haven't thought this through.
You are misquoting - I assume for effect.
The tax exemption was for charging 3 times minimum wage.
Roughly $50K / annum.
And this salary is for a system with ZERO malpractice insurance premiums.
Zero Tax liability.
Zero Tax record keeping.
Zero administrative overhead.
Zero insurance paperwork (yeah!)
Zero influence of outsiders on treatment options
Zero need for office staff, which the patient ultimately paid for.
Zero credit - pay cash up front - no billing hassles.
Zero need to finagle "business deductions"
I didn't even quote you in that post, so yeah sure I guess it was for effect.
There is no such thing as ZERO malpractice insurance premiums. TORT reform will just cap settlements.
How are you going to get rid of administrative overhead? Do medical records keep themselves?
There will be almost zero treatment options when there is no profit or subsidies. Medical equipment is not cheap, medicine isn't cheap, clinical work ups are not cheap. Sure you can probably get away with talking to a doctor and not actually recieving any care for the amount of spending you are talking about. God help you if you actually get sick or have a disease.
I don't think you really understand the reality of modern healthcare. This isn't a corner burger joint, this is 1/6 of your economy and the reason that we are living longer healthier lives.
Don't you want to keep records to know how many patients you saw? Do you think a doc in this kind of operation would have NO overhead? No rent to pay, equipment to buy, utility bills, etc? Is s/he going to operate in a tent on pubic land somewhere? Is s/he going to send all his/her pts to the health dept for their shots? Uh, you haven't thought this through.
Patient records are simple - the insurance companies made them complex.
Overhead expenses could be treated as a surcharge. Upscale physicians with pricey digs would slap on a hefty surcharge (not unlike Cabbies passing on high fuel prices to the passengers).
Physicians in donated digs, or associated with non-profits, could charge minimal surcharge.
As long as it covers cost, it's not a profit and not subject to taxation.
Assuming 24 patients / day (low est., I know) x 5 days x 50 weeks = 6000 visits. If the office overhead was minimal - as in an office located at home - perhaps $2 surcharge (12,000 / annum). That's in addition to the salary.
Still not too exorbitant. But you have to wonder, if folks had to pay up front for the office overhead, they might just pinch pennies.
Maybe house calls would become economically viable again.
I cannot believe there are people out there who are against tort reform.
Besides the ones who have sued a doctor or hospital and got rich quick off a mistake in an inexact science.
I would like to see if there are any studies that tell us how much our litigous society costs us in healthcare each year.
Patient records are simple - the insurance companies made them complex.
Overhead expenses could be treated as a surcharge. Upscale physicians with pricey digs would slap on a hefty surcharge (not unlike Cabbies passing on high fuel prices to the passengers).
Physicians in donated digs, or associated with non-profits, could charge minimal surcharge.
As long as it covers cost, it's not a profit and not subject to taxation.
Assuming 24 patients / day (low est., I know) x 5 days x 50 weeks = 6000 visits. If the office overhead was minimal - as in an office located at home - perhaps $2 surcharge (12,000 / annum). That's in addition to the salary.
Still not too exorbitant. But you have to wonder, if folks had to pay up front for the office overhead, they might just pinch pennies.
Maybe house calls would become economically viable again.
I wasn't arguing about the taxation. I was just saying, whether you paid tax or not, you'd want to keep records. At least I would.
There is no such thing as ZERO malpractice insurance premiums. TORT reform will just cap settlements.
My suggested tort reform was "satisfaction guaranteed or your money back - nothing more."
There would be no settlements.
NADA.
Quote:
How are you going to get rid of administrative overhead? Do medical records keep themselves?
How much effort is there to slap a file in a cabinet?
Remember, no voluminous regulations, insurance overhead, etc.
Quote:
There will be almost zero treatment options when there is no profit or subsidies.
The specific reform was only in reference to paying personnel costs, not adjunct issues. Frankly, maybe the whole health care industry should be put on a tax exempt - for - low cost basis.
Quote:
Medical equipment is not cheap, medicine isn't cheap, clinical work ups are not cheap.
So use "mass production", set up poly clinics with shared instruments. Set up "production lines" for certain procedures.
Quote:
Sure you can probably get away with talking to a doctor and not actually recieving any care for the amount of spending you are talking about. God help you if you actually get sick or have a disease.
In all the years, I've been visiting physicians, I can't recall any budget busting devices used on me or my children.
It was the same old take basic measurements, use the stethoscope, look down a throat, peer into an ear, fill out a prescription, and push us out the door - in 5 to 15 minutes or less.
Now, a dentist, I can agree that he has a hefty hardware collection. But that's another issue.
Quote:
I don't think you really understand the reality of modern healthcare. This isn't a corner burger joint, this is 1/6 of your economy and the reason that we are living longer healthier lives.
And I suspect that 6/10ths of the expense is bloat, overhead, tax insanity, legal heifer dung, expletive deleted waste from bureaucracy. And if excised, I suspect that the industry would be lean and mean, service machine. But that's my opinion - worth $.02 and a hand shake.
Of course, the scary thought - what if physicians had to work under a national health care system like England's or Canada's?
OH, you'd love THEIR system ... triage, queues, waiting, waiting, waiting - to be paid modest wages.
[quote]As with the massive boondoggle of the stimulus package, which Obama foolishly let Congress turn into a pork rut, too much has been attempted all at once; focused, targeted initiatives would, instead, have won wide public support. How is it possible that Democrats, through their own clumsiness and arrogance, have sabotaged healthcare reform yet again? Moderator cut: COPYRIGHT
Last edited by katzenfreund; 08-12-2009 at 09:49 AM..
if they do.. they better not roll up and make claims to get on medicare...
government should keep track of who's voting what on this bill.. and let them know that if they're voting against healthcare for everyone.. they're voting against their access to medicare when they're retired...and their own government sponsored medical coverage while in office
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.
