The Wicked Witch of the West and Obamacare

[TimCallahan]

Loser pays would be a boon to society, and a tragedy for lawyers.

Agreed. That would help eliminate nuisance suits. However, how would you extend such a policy to affect emergency room abuse? Also, how would deal with the abuses I outlined in a previous post, the hospital charging $200.00 for an x-ray costing more like $50.00 and the lab trying to make me pay $ 30.00 just to have my blood drawn?

 

[DavidJames]

The average citizen would never be able to take the risk of losing and corporations would have more incentive to fight.

I may consider loser pays for FOTL'ers and litigious libertarians

 

[Spindrift]

I may consider loser pays for FOTL'ers and litigious libertarians

Well, since they seem to want to make up their own rules, they should get a court with it's own special rules. You didn't say "Gesundheit"! Case dismissed. Pay the bailiff 11 ounces of gold.

 

[Biscuit]

So what is the cause of 'overcharging? I suggest it is lack of market discipline which includes government subsidies and the requirement to treat all patients -- even illegal aliens. No, we don't and never heve let them die in the street, but today ER rooms are filled with non-emergencies and loaded with illegal aliens, just like our schools and our jails.

You are so right! This one was found in a wash NOT on the street.

 

[Chaos]

So, yes, there will be abuses - and are already. Educating people about the costs of such behavior might help; or it might be just like the abuses stemming from insurance claims in traffic accidents. As an example of the latter, consider that when my wife and I were involved in an accident that was totally the other party's fault. They sued us. Our insurance company easily defended against the suit, and it came to nothing. However, the fact that the company has to maintain a legal office full time to defend against such nuisance suits must account for a hefty portion of our premium. None of this has anything to do with government involvement, just human anture.

I used to work in insurance. Depending on who you listen to, anywhere from 1/3 to 3/4 of private liability insurance premiums goes to pay for fraud which is to small individually to be worth having an expensive lawsuit over. In the words of one of my superiors from back then, "you´d be surprised how many people ´accidentally sat down on´ someone else´s glasses".
The number is probably smaller in other private branches, but still substantial; not so much in commercial/industrial insurance, because their claims tend to be expensive enough to warrent a lawsuit if there´s a reason to believe it´s fraud.

So, it isn´t just healthcare.

 

[leftysergeant]

Government did not get involved in healthcare until 1965, when Medicare and Medicaid were passed by a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress. Costs immediately begin to accelerate.

Got statistics? I recall that the prices really started to spike with the increase of the numberof for-profit insurers and hospitals.

 

[Robert Prey]

Agreed. That would help eliminate nuisance suits. However, how would you extend such a policy to affect emergency room abuse? Also, how would deal with the abuses I outlined in a previous post, the hospital charging $200.00 for an x-ray costing more like $50.00 and the lab trying to make me pay $ 30.00 just to have my blood drawn?

One question at a time, please. As to the first, build a fence. Then build another fence. Then bring the troops home to patrol it. And also, bring in a brigade of German Shepherd's. At least that would take care of the illegals who abuse ERs. It's so obvious.

 

[jj]

Got statistics? I recall that the prices really started to spike with the increase of the numberof for-profit insurers and hospitals.

Oh, don't confuse this discussion with real facts.

 

[Robert Prey]

The average citizen would never be able to take the risk of losing and corporations would have more incentive to fight.

If the average citizen has a weak case, he should risk losing. Somebody posed something about "negative outcomes" insurance in some countries for bad health procedure outcomes. Sounds like a good idea. No litigation; just payment. I spose just like uninsured motorist coverage.

 

[jj]

One question at a time, please. As to the first, build a fence. Then build another fence. Then bring the troops home to patrol it. And also, bring in a brigade of German Shepherd's. At least that would take care of the illegals who abuse ERs. It's so obvious.

So you propose the same solution that Soviet Russia used?

 

[Tricky]

If the average citizen has a weak case, he should risk losing.

Do you really think than when Joe Average hires the only lawyer he can afford and that guy goes up against a battery of corporate lawyers with vast resources at their command, that the case is decided on merit alone? It's kinda sweet that you are so naive, but mostly it's sad.

 

[TimCallahan]

One question at a time, please. As to the first, build a fence. Then build another fence. Then bring the troops home to patrol it. And also, bring in a brigade of German Shepherd's. At least that would take care of the illegals who abuse ERs. It's so obvious.

Okay, whether I agree with that or not, you've at least come up with one idea. Now, what do you propose to do about the very real problem of medical providers overcharging. BTW, in addition to the two anecdotes I provide earlier, here's one that relates to the cost of Medicare:

A couple of years ago I had to go to the emergency room of a small hospital near Portland, OR. I had been vomiting to the point of yupping up bile (TMI, I realize, but necessary to make the point). When I got there via ambulance - which charged an excessive amount - I told the doctor that I'd had these symptoms before and that an injection of compazine usually took care of everything. In response, he ordered that I be given a shot of compazine. End of story . . . until months later, when I was served with a bill from the doctor for $ 300.00 for a "detailed physical examination." This was paid by Medicare.

There was, of course, no "detailed examination," and the doctor working the emergency room on the night shift was doubtless paid for his time by the hospital. So, here's another egregious nickel-diming bit of waste, chargeable to human greed - regardless of what system was in place.

So, again, what is your response / solution to the problem of overcharging by medical providers?

 

[Robert Prey]

Okay, whether I agree with that or not, you've at least come up with one idea. Now, what do you propose to do about the very real problem of medical providers overcharging. BTW, in addition to the two anecdotes I provide earlier, here's one that relates to the cost of Medicare:

A couple of years ago I had to go to the emergency room of a small hospital near Portland, OR. I had been vomiting to the point of yupping up bile (TMI, I realize, but necessary to make the point). When I got there via ambulance - which charged an excessive amount - I told the doctor that I'd had these symptoms before and that an injection of compazine usually took care of everything. In response, he ordered that I be given a shot of compazine. End of story . . . until months later, when I was served with a bill from the doctor for $ 300.00 for a "detailed physical examination." This was paid by Medicare.

There was, of course, no "detailed examination," and the doctor working the emergency room on the night shift was doubtless paid for his time by the hospital. So, here's another egregious nickel-diming bit of waste, chargeable to human greed - regardless of what system was in place.

So, again, what is your response / solution to the problem of overcharging by medical providers?

The $300 bill wasn't just for your treatment, but for all the deadbeats that are treated for free. And since Medicare pays without concern for the monies it gets stolen from taxpayers, there is no market discipline. If a hotdog stand could charge $300 per hotdog, and people paid it, that would be very profitable. But people will not pay $300 for a hotdog if there is a guy across the street selling hotdogs for just 2 bucks. That is market discipline.

 

[Robert Prey]

Do you really think than when Joe Average hires the only lawyer he can afford and that guy goes up against a battery of corporate lawyers with vast resources at their command, that the case is decided on merit alone? It's kinda sweet that you are so naive, but mostly it's sad.

Right now we are amidst the Herman Cain scandal. It was reported that the accusers got $35,000 to just shut up and go away and the reason given by the legal eagles is that if the Restaurant Assoc. had to go to court, it would cost them a whole bunch more in attorney fess, win or lose. So there you have evidence that corporations also have to watch their bottom line when it comes to litigation. In a medical case, the corp. loses a whole bunch of money in attorney's fess, even if they "win."

 

[Robert Prey]

So you propose the same solution that Soviet Russia used?

On no. Very different. The Soviet's had their Iron Curtain to keep people IN, not to prevent people from getting in. Get the difference?

 

[stokes234]

The $300 bill wasn't just for your treatment, but for all the deadbeats that are treated for free. And since Medicare pays without concern for the monies it gets stolen from taxpayers, there is no market discipline. If a hotdog stand could charge $300 per hotdog, and people paid it, that would be very profitable. But people will not pay $300 for a hotdog if there is a guy across the street selling hotdogs for just 2 bucks. That is market discipline.

That's not a solution, that's just a very basic description of competition. There already is competition in american healthcare, and it isn't keeping costs down. You were asked what your solution to overcharging by medical providors was, can you answer?

 

[Skepticemea]

Green Jello is the same the world over.

Not true. In the UK it's Green Jelly. Shocking, I know!

 

[Spindrift]

Right now we are amidst the Herman Cain scandal. It was reported that the accusers got $35,000 to just shut up and go away and the reason given by the legal eagles is that if the Restaurant Assoc. had to go to court, it would cost them a whole bunch more in attorney fess, win or lose. So there you have evidence that corporations also have to watch their bottom line when it comes to litigation. In a medical case, the corp. loses a whole bunch of money in attorney's fess, even if they "win."

But to the average guy, he can't afford to spend $35,000 on his own case and if he loses also have to pay the $100,000 to the corporation he sued. The corporation only has to win a few of those cases in order to scare aware most people. And please don't be so naive as to equate winning a lawsuit with being right or wrong.

 

[keale]

On no. Very different. The Soviet's had their Iron Curtain to keep people IN, not to prevent people from getting in. Get the difference?

Its the exact same thing with the guns pointed in the opposite direction

 

[Robert Prey]

That's not a solution, that's just a very basic description of competition. There already is competition in american healthcare, and it isn't keeping costs down. You were asked what your solution to overcharging by medical providors was, can you answer?

Free up the market Get the government out of it. Allow H. insurance to be purchased without mandated coverage such as sex change operations, abortions, mental health, drug and alcohol treatments, pregnancy, etc., ED treatments, etc., etc., etc. And to be able to purchase across state lines. And to implement Negative Outcome insurance in place of in place of lawsuits.