- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 15, 2013 at 4:22 am #782646
redblackParticipantwell, geez, the hoop.
i think i’m going to get food poisoning and then die right on your front porch.
and, i swear to god, if you call the cops or any other public servant to remove my body from your property, i’m going to come back from whatever afterlife you believe in and call you hypocrite.
January 15, 2013 at 5:56 am #782647
hooper1961Memberpeople need to buy insurance against unforeseen risk. i buy home owners insurance (yes the bank forces it too) because I cannot afford to risk losing the home to a fire. however I carry a high deductible to keep the rate lower.
if carpenters were forced to rebuild a fire damaged home without getting paid because a person did not pay insurance the person who pays for fire insurance ends up paying more because the carpenters will charge them more to cover the cost to re-build the uninsured persons home.
but if carpenters refused to rebuild the uninsured persons home the cost to re-build the insured home would be less because they are not trying to recoup the unpaid rebuilding cost.
January 15, 2013 at 7:52 am #782648
WorldCitizenParticipantBoy, it’s a damn good thing building a home is different than practicing medicine.
January 15, 2013 at 5:14 pm #782649
JoBParticipanthoop..
so.. are you saying you think everyone should assume the high risk of wiping out their savings every year if a family member gets sick?
because that is what that high deductible does to underpaid employees
and you hoop.. what happens if your business fails and you have to make a choice between making the house payment and getting medical care for one of your kids?
will your fiscal responsibility have you paying the mortgage first regardless of the outcome for your kid?
reality bites hoop.
and when you get caught between the cracks…it doesn’t much matter who you are or how you have planned for your future…
January 15, 2013 at 8:15 pm #782650
hooper1961MemberJoB – that is what the insurance is for to pay for cost beyond the deductible.
The high deductible makes the monthly insurance premium lower. For example you can pay $800/month for a low deductible plan or say $400/month for a high deductible plan. You then set aside the $400/month into Health Savings account accordingly.
January 15, 2013 at 11:01 pm #782651
WorldCitizenParticipantI find high deductible plans work well for people who are healthy and don’t anticipate frequent doctor visits in the upcoming year. Of you have a chronic condition, then they’re not worth it.
January 15, 2013 at 11:29 pm #782652
hooper1961Memberhigh deductible plans are the best option; those people that use more services should pay more than those that don’t! Once the deductible is paid the insurance kicks in; that is what insurance is for.
January 16, 2013 at 3:38 am #782653
JoBParticipanthoop..
i have the option to choose almost any kind of plan i want..
and i can categorically state that even though we have more than adequate resources
the high deductible plan is NOT cost effective for us.
in fact, the high deductible plan would significantly increase our out of pocket expenses…
one size does not fit all hoop.
January 16, 2013 at 5:57 am #782654
hooper1961MemberNo it does not JoB; but foisting higher costs on those that do not use health services very much is also not equitable! Changing the rules on use of Health Savings Accounts was blatantly unjust as was done in ObamaCare plan.
January 16, 2013 at 4:58 pm #782655
JoBParticipanthoop..
so .. fix the real problem.
end the system that ties availability of reasonably affordable health care insurance to employment..
because most people become uninsured when they become unemployed
and when you can’t pay for housing or food, you can’t pay for high deductible insurance either.
equability doesn’t come when those who have resources can spend their health care dollars in the most advantageous way hoop..
it comes when everyone is covered at a basic level at a minimum cost to all.
our current system isn’t going to provide that..
condemning at least half our population to an early death because you don’t like the current system isn’t going to save you much either… in fact, it might cost you more.
emergency medicine is far more expensive even in the short run than a long run of preventative medicine..
and… preventative medicine can return citizens to gainful employment… making them taxpayers.
of course, i and too many others to count have already explained this to you
and you ignore every word we have to say.
when you want to have a conversation hoop…
let me know.
right now the only response to IS is IS NOT
January 16, 2013 at 5:31 pm #782656
hooper1961MemberJoB – actually I have heard you. Basic preventative care is very cost effective and I have no problem with making this type of care universally available; with co-pays. Where I think we differ is what is the level of universal care and what is an equitable way to pay for the care. People who smoke, are (cannot say it; but I was weigh over and lost it through diligent focus) need to pay more than those that are neither. This is a fairness issue!
Basic health care is cost effective. However many cancer treatments are very very expensive with low probability of success. Severely pre-mature babies are horrendously expensive. And many people at the end choose treatment that extends their life a few months at great expense versus hospice care. My mom has the green card that states DO NOT RESUSCITATE and she is fully insured.
January 16, 2013 at 5:52 pm #782657
PangolinPieParticipantCould be that THIS is part of the problem too:
That’s the bill issued to a guy who was in an accident and had a 4-day hospital stay. $125,991.11 was the total. Now tell me with a straight face that the guy should have had that much in savings!
January 16, 2013 at 6:11 pm #782658
hooper1961MemberPangolinPie – NO that is what insurance is for!
January 16, 2013 at 6:11 pm #782659
JoBParticipanthoop
i have insurance
and do not resuscitate orders
so?
it was the right choice for me..
i hope it’s the right choice for your mom.
but, it was our choice.
not yours
January 16, 2013 at 6:15 pm #782660
JoBParticipantPangoliniPie
my brother suffered a collapsed lung in Israel
he was in the hospital for 4 days
the bill? $16,000
$16,000 versus $126,000
does anyone really believe the medical care in the United States is THAT much better?
Excessive costs aren’t less excessive when covered by insurance
a 10% deductible would still have left someone insured in America paying almost as much out of pocket as the entire bill in Israel..
a 20% co-pay? you could buy a car for that.
January 16, 2013 at 6:56 pm #782661
hooper1961MemberJoB – yes do not resuscitate is a personal choice. but people who do not purchase insurance have also made a choice that should be do not resuscitate. i do not want to interfere one iota in another persons personal choice as long as that person is paying; but if they are relying on taxpayers then they do not have the right to foist cost onto future generations.
and JoB after the deductible is paid insurance kicks in. and how much of the bill is the hospital simply cost shifting from patients who did not pay?
January 16, 2013 at 7:22 pm #782662
WorldCitizenParticipantJust to be clear, Hooper, is this what you’re saying?
“I’d rather someone else die so that I don’t have to pay higher taxes.”
January 16, 2013 at 7:41 pm #782663
JoBParticipanthoop
“how much of the bill is the hospital simply cost shifting from patients who did not pay?”
a better question would be how much of the cost of the high end equipment that attracts well insured patients to a medical institution is paid for by the less well insured patient who simply needs basic hospitalization?
and of course.. how much of that bill goes to how many profit centers?
January 16, 2013 at 8:00 pm #782664
hooper1961Memberworldcitizen – people who choose not to buy insurance made the decision and i do not want to foist the cost onto future generations
job – post #42 has some validity with how much is a reasonable return on capital.
i think we all agree the existing system is too expensive and needs to be fixed. what is the best most equitable way to fix the system is a valid question. obamacare is not a good answer.
a system that totally socializes the cost is not equitable (smokers and people who are (cannot say) need to pay more. And those that use services more need to pay more (co-pays). And there are many highly expensive procedures (some cancer treatment for example) that should not be included in basic coverages.
January 16, 2013 at 8:12 pm #782665
WorldCitizenParticipantWow.
January 16, 2013 at 9:01 pm #782666
skeeterParticipantHooper I usually agree with you, but on this topic I disagree. Conceptually, I think you are correct. People should be free to make decisions and live (or die) with the consequences. Ideally each individual in society figures out what level of risk he can assume and purchase insurance for whatever level of coverage is needed to keep him/her healthy and financially solvent if something bad happens. A classic example is car insurance. If I have enough money in the bank to buy a new car, I can cancel the comprehensive/collision on my car to save insurance money. If I do *not* have enough money in the bank to buy a new car, I better keep insurance on my existing car so that I will be able to buy a new car if someone steals my car.
However…
If just one person in the country is in need of medical care but does not have medical insurance, then we have a problem. A big problem. A potentially very expensive problem. Maybe the person doesn’t have medical care because he is poor. Maybe because he is irresponsible. Maybe because he lost his job. Maybe because he just has other things he wants to spend his money on – housing, vacations, dinner out, etc. The problem is that *regardless* of why he/she doesn’t have medical coverage, he is now society’s problem. Why? Because our society has decided we will not let him die in the street. We will provide care for him. Ultimately, someone else will pay for his/her medical services because nothing in life is free. If the patient is not paying for the care then someone else is.
So unless we are ready to let uninsured people die in the street, we’re going to need some mix of laws and taxes and charity care to service the uninsured.
The Republican presidential debates were interesting. One question posed to the candidates was something like this: “A man walks into a hospital in dire need of medical care. He doesn’t have insurance. What should we do?” None of the candidates had a thoughtful answer. And that is pretty much why I support the ACA. Because no one else has a better answer.
January 16, 2013 at 9:02 pm #782667
LindseyParticipant@worldcitizen, not only that, but he’s advocating that even people with insurance shouldn’t be treated if their outcomes aren’t what he deems good enough. Like in post #36, where he basically is saying that very premature babies and older people with inoperable cancers be left to die so he can save some money, theoretically. Pretty sure that puts him squarely in the “heartless troll” category and his posts should be treated that way. There’s no responding to this garbage.
January 16, 2013 at 9:53 pm #782668
kgdlgParticipantSkeeter, I am pretty sure hoop is arguing for allowing those darn people that don’t buy insurance to die on the street. Because they deserve it. Because there are affordable options out there for all working people to buy policies. According to him.
January 16, 2013 at 11:22 pm #782669
miwsParticipantJust to be clear, Hooper, is this what you’re saying?
“I’d rather someone else die so that I don’t have to pay higher taxes.”
That’s exactly what he’s been saying for months, if not years.
It reeks of a cleansing of society, to rid it of the ill, weak, and less fortunate…..
Mike
January 17, 2013 at 12:00 am #782670
JanSParticipantwell, Hoop, I chose to not purchase health insurance, I suppose, because the choice was eith pay rent and buy food, or buy expensive health insurance. Does this mean I should just go off and suffer because of it? You know, me with having had cancer, and kidney failure, and open heart surgery, etc. Should I have just been denied? No soup for you? Is that what you’re saying? I made one choice that you don’t agree with so I’m just expendable? Sub-human?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.