Health care - administrative incompetence

[Gandalfs Beard]

GB, despite what you may think, we have to pay to see the doctor just like everyone else. "Professional Courtesies" are illegal if the doc also accepts Medicare.

Which doesn't answer any of the questions I asked, which all boil down to: how does someone pay if they can't afford the services?

If someone in your family knows how to administer "non-catastrophic" medical services, they are going to look after you (unless they are ********). That's not "professional courtesy." Professional Courtesy is when your family member gets ANOTHER doctor to offer you a freebie.

GB

 

[bookitty]

That's why we should allow people to buy insurance across state lines. Bigger risk-pool, lower costs.

But having one centralized system is bad if the government does it? Instead you would put it in the hands of those who have already mucked it up. AND negate any legislation to protect people that has been set up by individual states.

And I never said anyone should abuse the system.

I wonder if he's applied for disability? Once you have that going, you can get Medicare. The current system is far from perfect, but there are ways to get help -very few people are totally screwed.

Can't get insurance? Can't pay for the care you need? Go on Medicare! (And if you do then you'll be one of the millions of people that xjx will call a freeloaders. And remember, freeloaders are the reason we can't have nice things, like health care for everyone.)

Well, you are stuck in Cali and the economic mess that goes with it. Move to Texas. It's like a whole 'nother country!

Yes, it is. But I'm allergic to theocracies.

 

[xjx388]

As I read it, all three members have to exceed the $7,500 deductible. It doesn't look like just one person having $50K in health care would qualify. That is truly catastrophic.

The most you would be out of pocket in a given year in that plan is 22k. And that's only if some really :ed-up : went down. An HSA (or savings account) could take care of your out of pocket expenses.

Now, what's the next issue yer going to bring up . . .

 

[Garrison0fMars]

Can't get insurance? Can't pay for the care you need? Go on Medicare! (And if you do then you'll be one of the millions of people that xjx will call a freeloaders. And remember, freeloaders are the reason we can't have nice things, like health care for everyone.)

Why not let everyone buy into Medicare if they want, or are denied private insurance? (Yes, it's a buy in XJX, it's not "free")

 

[banquetbear]

Our employees have the same coverage at the same or lower prices. We contribute into their savings accounts as well as provide their catastrophic insurance. It's out there, but no one bothers to look. They'd rather whine about how unfair everything is.

I posted earlier a catastrophic plan for a family of four that would cost ~$260. I've attached a PDF. This was from ehealthinsurance.com. I'm sure there are conditions, etc. but it proves the point.

...holy crap!

Being completely serious here: the average American is supposed to understand what this document means?

 

[xjx388]

What about community rating? Ban on insurance companies from making a profit on basic health plans, drug negotiation? Remember, if you even remove one critical part of the ecosystem, it may very well tumble, and not be the "universal system" it is. You're essentially describing Obama/RomneyCare So I guess you liked the PPACA then?

Oh yeah, I didn't like a lot of it. But I'm all for compulsory insurance and a ban on barring pre-existing conditions.

 

[Garrison0fMars]

Oh yeah, I didn't like a lot of it. But I'm all for compulsory insurance and a ban on barring pre-existing conditions.

So then, you liked the PPACA then, yes?

 

[bookitty]

...holy crap!

Being completely serious here: the average American is supposed to understand what this document means?

Well, yes and no. Yes, they are supposed to know what it means so that they aren't surprised when they find out what isn't covered. No, this document was not written in such a way that the layman could easily understand those conditions.

 

[xjx388]

...holy crap!

Being completely serious here: the average American is supposed to understand what this document means?

Not that difficult. It has a deductible of $7500 per person/ $22k max for the family. After that, everything is covered 100% with no cap. Prescriptions are on tiers depending on how new they are or if there is a generic equivalent. Preventive care is covered with the deductible waived. There is mental health coverage as well. Pretty comprehensive when combined with an HSA.

 

[kellyb]

The most you would be out of pocket in a given year in that plan is 22k. And that's only if some really :ed-up : went down. An HSA (or savings account) could take care of your out of pocket expenses.
Now, what's the next issue yer going to bring up . . .

People on minimum wage only make $15K a year working 40 hours a week!

 

[Garrison0fMars]

People on minimum wage only make $15K a year working 40 hours a week!

Oh come on, can't you afford your OWN HEALTHCARE!?

 

[Architect]

Ah, you don't agree with their politics so they are liars. Got it. And 10 years is not that long ago when it comes to governmental matters.

It is when the UK Goverment increased spending on the NHS generally and cancer treatment in particular over the intervening period. But you've been told that already. Like I said, reading comprehension isn't your strong point.

Now I have to question your reading comprehension. It's not primarily about Scotland. And the only thing it says about Mid Essex is this

The word that was cut off mid-way might have been a hint of an editing problem. But not for you, apparently.

I've already linked to a CIGNA guidance approving lapatinib. Here it is for the drug in question in the article. And CIGNA is one of the worst. Of course, you still won't find it compelling even though it proves my point.

Show me how widely it's covered. That's what we call "compelling".

Some of the biggest names in UK Medicine and they are echoing exactly what I'm saying here. They live your system everyday and know it better than any of us on here. You can dismiss them if you want, but that's just your ideology talking.

And yet they don't say what they believe is being cut and in what manner. You're reading a lot into a rather short letter. Come back when you have a more detailed account.

Again, you can dismiss the report, which was published in a peer-reviewed journal, if you want to. Doesn't make it any less true.

I'm sorry, but you don't appear to understand the context. The BMJ covers "news" pieces and more academic articles, the latter being peer reviewed.

Tell me, which category do you believe this is? And have you ever actually seen a copy of the BMJ in order that you can place tis in context?

PS: remind me of the date, again? And what's happened in the intervening period?

Now it's your turn. Cite me an article, journal, etc. that shows NHS has comparable clinical outcomes. Not life-expectancy, not infant mortality. Clinical outcomes.

Nice try, sonny. You were the one that was challenged (in the face of your own objection to their use) to identify other measures of clinical outcome. You conceded that you were unable to do so. It was one of the many (10?) you found so much difficulty with.

Better yet, cite me some real evidence that shows the NHS covers everyone's medical needs equally throughout the country.

Read this and then come back with a sensible question, XjX:

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_family/health/nhs_patients_rights.htm


It must annoy you, the way these facts keep getting in the way of your prejudicies. Have you considered doing research before you post?

 

[kellyb]

Oh come on, can't you afford your OWN HEALTHCARE!?

This is just craziness.

Must. Preserve. Graveytrain. At. All. Costs. For. No. Reason.

 

[banquetbear]

Not that difficult. It has a deductible of $7500 per person/ $22k max for the family. After that, everything is covered 100% with no cap. Prescriptions are on tiers depending on how new they are or if there is a generic equivalent. Preventive care is covered with the deductible waived. There is mental health coverage as well. Pretty comprehensive when combined with an HSA.

...what does PPO stand for?

What is RX deductible?

What are levels 2, 3 and 4?

What is a copay?

What is an emergency room access fee?

What is 0% coinsurance?

What does out-of-network mean?

What is the A.M Best rating?

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

You have to have FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS laying around for that plan to make sense. The deductible alone is TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS for a family.

Exactly. Which is why I pointed out that nearly all Private Insurance Plans (available in the US) are only affordable to those making at least 50-60K per annum. Like Bookitty I spent a lot of time researching all the plans available while I still owned a business. But after all business costs and household costs, I realized I still didn't have the funds necessary to get a plan that covered me, especially as none of plans offered to cover my "pre-existing conditions."


GB

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

And if I were you, I'd get back to your childhood teachers as they've obviously left out the reading comprehension part.

<snip>

Here's where you didn't say government should get out of healthcare:

That's not what I said. I said that eliminating the government and creating a free market health system would drive costs down. Why? Because it would reduce overutilization.

<snip>

And here you don't allude to it again (now you know what the term 'free market' means):

<snip>

I never said any of that. What I said was that there is a free market in Primary Care medicine and it works very well for what it can do, which is actually quite a bit. If this were extended into other specialties, costs would have to come down.
<snip>

Really dude, get checked out.

 

[xjx388]

People on minimum wage only make $15K a year working 40 hours a week!

Yup and they qualify for Medicaid for the most part, if they are supporting a family. If they aren't . . . they fall through the cracks of our current system. So yes, we need a change. Still don't see compelling evidence that a Single-payer (even with private option) system is the best solution.

 

[xjx388]

Here's where you didn't say government should get out of healthcare:



And here you don't allude to it again (now you know what the term 'free market' means):



Really dude, get checked out.

Uh-huh. And then you skipped all the posts where I said that there has to be some government regulation. You really should sue those teachers, they've failed you.

 

[kellyb]

Oh yeah, I didn't like a lot of it. But I'm all for compulsory insurance and a ban on barring pre-existing conditions.

You are describing/advocating....wait for it...Obamacare.

Jesus Christ.

I can't stop giggling.

 

[Emet]

Our employees have the same coverage at the same or lower prices. We contribute into their savings accounts as well as provide their catastrophic insurance. It's out there, but no one bothers to look. They'd rather whine about how unfair everything is.

I posted earlier a catastrophic plan for a family of four that would cost ~$260. I've attached a PDF. This was from ehealthinsurance.com. I'm sure there are conditions, etc. but it proves the point.

So does that mean you don't provide traditional health insurance for your employees?

You provide HSAs?