JMS

Obamacare...(new title): GOP DEATH PLAN: Don-Ryan's Express

5,288 posts in this topic

14 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

@Ron78that's how hospitals work in Guatemala, but imagine having to pay $15,000 to leave the hospital. Insurance is just pre-healthcare financing. The problem is that politicians and the healthcare industry aren't doing a damn thing to address healthcare costs, instead they just want to find ways to pay for continually exploding healthcare costs. Republicans wouldn't dream of ever putting rate caps on services because in captialism everyone deserves the right to be able to ransom their neighbor's life for small fortunes.

 

$15,000 to leave?  That is not how the direct pay model works.  You pay a monthly fee for "membership" to a provider instead of paying an insurance premium (and all the overhead that comes with insurance).  Insurance companies cost both medical providers and patients tons of money.  If you could work out a system that eliminates the need for medical insurance, you could reduce the cost of Health Care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ron78 said:

 

$15,000 to leave?  That is not how the direct pay model works.  You pay a monthly fee for "membership" to a provider instead of paying an insurance premium (and all the overhead that comes with insurance).  Insurance companies cost both medical providers and patients tons of money.  If you could work out a system that eliminates the need for medical insurance, you could reduce the cost of Health Care.

I see so little difference between that and insurance other than one being managed by a third party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AsburySkinsFan said:

I see so little difference between that and insurance other than one being managed by a third party.

 

It cuts out the middle man.  Insurance companies make money by assessing high premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurances.  Also, by negotiating discounts with providers and delaying or outright denying payment to providers.  If you could eliminate the insurance companies, it would reduce costs for both patients and providers.  It has been tested in really small markets with success.  If you implemented it on a large scale, I am willing to bet it would be more successful because of greater pooling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ron78 said:

 

It cuts out the middle man.  Insurance companies make money by assessing high premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurances.  Also, by negotiating discounts with providers and delaying or outright denying payment to providers.  If you could eliminate the insurance companies, it would reduce costs for both patients and providers.  It has been tested in really small markets with success.  If you implemented it on a large scale, I am willing to bet it would be more successful because of greater pooling.

What's to stop the healthcare provider from just pocketing the difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AsburySkinsFan said:

What's to stop the healthcare provider from just pocketing the difference?

 

Competition on the free market.  You would have options.  What's to stop insurance companies from pocketing the difference?  They make out like bandits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, visionary said:
Trump doesn't understand the healthcare bill

There you go GOPers, there's your hero. But then you don't care because Trump doesn't need to understand anything just so long as he is your empty suit.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprise that Trump has no grasp of this health care bill.  Sad.

Edited by Dan T.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Ron78 said:

 

Competition on the free market.  You would have options.  What's to stop insurance companies from pocketing the difference?  They make out like bandits.

If that were true then it would happen with insurance companies. Instead the prices are all foing up uniformly. The insurance companies already pocketbthe difference, and they are all in competition with one another yet their products remain very similar. What you would end up woth under your plan is a 21 year old healthy stud paying nickles for his "membership" whereas the 70 year old senior get milked. There's nothing in your pman that would help even the drastic swings that take place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

Surprise that Trump has no grasp of this health care bill.  Sad.

 

It's sad, but not surprising. I'm not exaggerating when I say, there's people in this thread that would have a better grasp of a health care bill than Trump. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ron78 said:

Eliminate the middle man (commercial insurance companies) and you will reduce the cost of health care.

 

I keep hearing this claim made.  But I'm not really certain that it's all that clear.  

 

One of the things about Obamacare, is that it mandated that for every dollar the insurance companies take in, they had to pay our 80 cents to health care providers.  

 

Which might make one think that eliminating the insurance companies would reduce costs by 20%.  But I'm certain that a good chunk of that 20% goes towards paying overhead costs.  The army of paper pushers who do all of the work to turn a claim into a payment.  

 

And I don't have any confidence at all in the thought that the federal government will be vastly more efficient at pushing paperwork, than private insurance companies are.  Get rid of the private bureaucracy, and you've simply replaced it with a government one.  

 

Yeah, in theory, if you eliminate BCBS, you've eliminated the cost of the BCBS CEO.  But how much of BCBS' revenue does the CEO get?  1%?  0.5%?  

 

I really don't buy the casual assertions that having the government replace insurance companies really gets rid of a whole lot of costs.  

 

(Now, maybe, if people could produce some actual statistics, maybe I could be convinced.  For example, what percentage of the money taken in for Medicare, gets spent on overhead?  Show me that Medicare, right now, is running, say, 5% overhead, and maybe I'll believe that assertion.)  

 

 


 

Now, I could believe that transitioning to a single payer system might reduce overhead costs, by creating one single billing and accounting system, for everybody.  

 

i look at a doctor's office or a laboratory, and the impression I have is that, for every person actually providing health care, they have two people coordinating the billing with the insurance companies.  I don't think it's guaranteed, but it does feel likely, to me that if we go to single payer, maybe medical offices could cut their billing staff in half, simply because there would be only one billing system, and one set of rules.  And every employee would know those rules, and how to work them.  

 

I could believe that maybe going to single payer might result in reduced overhead costs on health care, as a result of standardization.  

Edited by Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.