Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
For a given diagnosis (classified into a DRG), Medicare has a base payment rate they will pay a hospital. This payment is modified based on physical location, patient factors (housing, other medical problems), if doctors-in-training are helping in the care, and other factors. The amount is supposed to, on average, have the hospital break even or make a slight profit.
After all this, the payment is what the payment is. The hospital can bill whatever it wants; the amount Medicare will pay is already set by CMS.
Physicians are paid by a completely separate system, based on CPT coding and fee-for-service.
Hence, a hospitalization in the US involves at least TWO bills and TWO separate billing systems: one for the hospital (capitated and based on DRGs), and one for the physicians (based on CPT codes and fee-for-service).
In other countries the deal is reversed, those too poor for insurance are guaranteed the lowest prices for health care. In other countries access to health care is seen as a more important right than access to assault rifles. In other countries taxpayers choose to support health and compassion instead of war and prison. This is known as socialism. Americans prefer Fascism...
Any person in this country can walk (or be carried) into any emergency room and receive care, no matter what.
I think I'll stick with our 'Fascism' a couple more years, thanks.
That's a pretty low bar. I guess I just hold my country to a higher standard than you do.
I found another place that charged $150 per ultrasound if you paid cash up front, but shit, coming up with three hundred bucks at the drop of a hat was no easy task.
Thailand is even more popular for major surgery. Their hospitals range from "better than ours" to "dramatically better than ours". Mexico is popular, too, especially for high-end dental work.
You can save a HUNDRED GRAND OR MORE on some of these procedures, even if you have insurance -- because most American insurance turns out to be nothing of the kind when you actually need it.
You get the medical care that is only available to the super-rich in this country, better personal care, and a vacation out of the deal, all for a tiny fraction of what you would pay to the sharks in US hospitals. The US corporate medical establishment is making an absolute fortune off of us, the helpless insured. There's a reason why they're all so busy installing rosewood paneling everywhere in your local clinic; they don't know what else to do with the money.
"Compare these same procedures costs in a Dutch, French, Thai, Indian or other world class hospital system."
You still haven't convinced us of the India system (as Fnarf has some points you should respond to), but we'll let you have that one as a "gimme." Now you have to go over the Dutch, French, Thai & all other "world class hospital system", which, although rather general, a list can be adequately put together by looking at overall national health. There would be at least 15-20 other nations on that list.
So, you have your work cut out for you. Please refute how the US system is better than all these other countries. Please exclude personal anecdotes like you did w/ India, tho.
The more information that comes out about Seattle area hospitals, the better Virginia Mason seems.
Go CMS! Bureaucratic and tone-deaf as they are (and I deal with them on a daily basis) I'm still glad they're there.
Isn't nice now that Apple products are all the rage they've lowered their prices drastically so that even the poor, lower-class people can afford them over their competitors? It's nice to see a macbook cost less than a pc laptop.
There are two separate arguments to have about healthcare and markets. One of them is 'Should our healthcare system be market based?", and the other is "Is our healthcare system market based?" The former requires an opinion, while the latter is factual. These questions often get confused and muddled together.
what kind of asshole goes to the ER for a headache?
you deserve to be exploited.....
That is Fucking Awesome.
Where will "insurance" get the money to pick up most of the total tab?
wow
that's not fair.
why don't you cancel your insurance....
Why US HealthCare Costs Too Much
In an open free market the guy buying the product wants to get the best deal he can. Providers compete to provide the most value. The consumer chooses, there are winners and losers, the bottom line is the market drives the cost down as low as it can go.
What if the guy getting the service isn't paying for it?
And the guys providing the service know that?
The consumer doesn't shop around. Why should he? It isn't HIS money/
The providers don't compete to keep price down. Why should they? The consumer of the product doesn't give a shit how much it costs, he probably doesn't even bother to look at the bill.
The result is rising prices and an inefficient market.
It's why meals at a resturant that caters to business account customers costs more than one that caters to tourists.
When medical insurance came into vogue the US health care system switched to the inefficient model.
Consumers didn't care how much it costs, as Golob notes "with insurance picking up most of the total tab." why would they?
Providers didn't worry about keeping costs down.
Inevitably the result is/was cost rising (way more than the cost of other goods in the economy)
Annual coverage limits actually make it worse; people who have not used up the limit go out and consume health care they would not otherwise.
The economics of healthcare will not right themselves until the people consuming the product give a shit how much it costs and can shop around (and when people who live healthy and consume less healthcare are rewarded financially- currently their reward is to subsidize the unhealthy slob's healthcare)
To see how it could work look at Lasik surgery that is not covered by insurance and where costs fall and providers use technology to cut costs, something that NEVER happens elsewhere in healthcare.
It's not because hospitals and doctors are crooks. Though they are. It is the inevitable immutable outcome of an economic system where the feedback loop of consumer-price concern-provider is broken.
In a free market crooks have to compete like everyone else to get your dollar.
You're Welcome.
and that is also the EXACT same reason college costs go up so much more than the costs of other goods.
if students were paying their own tab (with money they worked for and actually earned themselves) tuition would stay in check (and students would make much more enlightened choices about the education they consume.....)
Be Careful.
You're learning so much your head might explode.....
which is also why Obamadoesn'tcare will make the situation worse.
Throwing more people into the pool of "I don't give a shit what healthcare costs because now insurance is paying for it" will worsen the situation.
If you want The Troll to tell you how to fix it we will.
if you ask nice.
There's a problem with your explanation: Healthcare is not like other products in that you do not have the option of choosing "none of the above."
If one shops around for the best deal on Lasik, one viable option is to not get Lasik at all. Same with going to college, as @27 writes. One can easily choose to not go to any college at all.
But if you get hit by a bus and are lying mangled on the street, you don't have the option to stay on the street.
If you get cancer, sure, you could choose to do nothing at all, but health providers know that very few people would consider that a viable option.
The people who "choose" to do nothing in circumstances like that are probably not "choosing" it at all... they simply cannot afford any other option.
Products that people must have to survive should never be restricted to the free market only. There should ALWAYS be a government funded option. Food, shelter, healthcare... these things should never be available ONLY to people with money.
Thank you for your comment.
You propose a government funded option for those with no money?
Very 1966.
What Liberals propose today is a government funded option for everyone.
What percentage of American't currently get their healthcare from government?
And Liberals want to grow that number.
Are there REALLY that many people with "no money" ?
And, actually, lots of people choose "none of the above" in healthcare.
Especially if they are paying for it themselves.
Healthcare is not as vital as food.
But grocery stores do not exploit that position to raise prices the way healthcare is.
But food and shelter are interesting analogies.
We will give you a hint at the solution.
Is every American entitled to live in a home as nice as Bill Gates does?
Is every American entitled to eat at a five star restaurant every night?
I had two children on the NHS. Prenatal care? 100% covered. Ultrasounds? 100% covered. Prescriptions? 100% covered (during the pregnancy and for a year after the birth, and for all children up to age 16). Complicated delivery with emergency procedures (which I had)? 100% covered. Regular house calls from a healthcare worker after the birth (automatic for everyone)? 100% covered. Postnatal checkups for mother and baby? 100% covered. I can only imagine what all of this would have cost us in the US, even with good private insurance.
The NHS isn’t perfect. But the UK spends less than half what the US does per capita on healthcare, and has higher average life expectancy and lower infant mortality. Besides, if you live in the UK and you aren’t satisfied with the NHS, you still have the option of going private.
The bottom line: nobody in the UK is going to face financial ruin if they have a car accident or a life-threatening disease. As an American, you don’t need to travel to the third world to see the maimed and sick abandoned by their country’s healthcare system. Just look in your own backyard.
There is nothing wrong with its explanation, because it wants as many poor or brown corpses as possible on the streets. Making sure that only the wealthy can afford decent health care and food is just another route to its dream of America being filled with poor or brown corpses.
This is what "starve the beast" actually means, because this is the desired and actual result of such a philosophy.
oh boo hoo hoo....
we can't find some rich person to pay our way in life and we can't borrow enough from our kids to buy all the goodies we want....WHAAAAA....what's a Liberal to do? :(
Side note, I have a PA friend who constantly complains about people coming to the ER with a harmless cold, blister, etc. Sure they usually release them quickly, but that takes time and resources. How to best fix that problem? (Thanks for letting me pick your brain on this.)