Uninsured add $900 to health premiums-study

[Win]

Our local paper had an article this date stating that our neighboring Oklahomans with insurance pay an astounding $1781 per capita to cover the costs of uninsured health care costs. That number is expected to rise to $2911 by 2010.

Health care costs seem to be going the way of income taxes and social security: fewer and fewer people pay an increasingly larger share of the overall revenue collected for the benefit of other citizens.

As GA notes, economics has simply been abandoned when it comes to medicine, with predictable results.

I hate to be a cynic, but look for it to get worse before it gets better. Pols run like the plaque from anything that is broken and needs fixing, but will inconvenience or anger voters in the process of repair. Social Security reform is an ongoing example.

Every mean spirited and nasty thing that is said about the President and the lawmakers of both parties who want to fix the social security financing will be a hundred times worse if they were to dare to try to rein in the health care train wreck .....

I just don't see it happening. The easy way is to simply continue letting people who can afford to pay, just pay more and more to cover the costs. Ultimately, the system will collapse, but it will be in some other politician's term.

 

[opus1]

quote:

---

Originally posted by XS650:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Win:

quote:

---

Originally posted by brianl703:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.00698:

---

Looks dubious to me.

I wonder who 8 U.S.C. section 1401(h) was intended to confer citizenship upon?

---

Anyone born in this country regardelss of the status of their parents. That's the problem, it's a big lure that encourages illegals to give birth in this country.

---

They're called "anchor babies". As US citizens, they (or rather someone on their behalf) can then petition for citizenship for their parents.

I don't know how many actually bother since the government seems to bend over backwards to accommodate illegals as it is, but the option is there.

 

[opus1]

quote:

---

Originally posted by obbop:
.....Currently, I hear of a few doctors who do not accept insurance. All payments are cash, either the full amount or, payments accepted with many docs shunning interest on the amount due. The savings from not dealing with paperwork, rules, regulations of insurance firms etc. etc. results in large savings.

---

My dentist lost a lot of patients when the steel mills in the area decided to convert their dental plans to HMO-equivalents. He figured out that the low reimbursement from the companies wouldn't allow him to cover his costs and since he didn't want to lower his standards, he opted out of joining the network(s).

 

[OMCWankel]

Gary, you are correct in looking at the supply side of this problem.

In my area, there is some competition for the honest working poor, illegals included. This is the local "doctors clinic". I have used the services of a local clinic, even though I have good health insurance through my employer. The clinic services are good, and low priced. Payment is on demand, no paperwork or credit.

In other countries, the supply side is partially controlled, due to politicians noticing what you commented on, no real competition, no competitive cost control.

We might expand the numbers of local low cost clinics, and allow pharmacists to prescribe medications, like other countries have done.

Another supply side problem not yet mentioned is the high cost of provider insurance. This affects all providers, from the pharmacist to the surgeon, to the first responders. We all pay for the big damage awards handed out to the few. Without litigation control, expanding low cost clinics, and allowing pharmacists to prescribe drugs, will not work.

 

[Al]

If there ever is a solution, which I doubt there will..It will by utilizing "pay on demand" and the patient has a very limited right to sue. I would like thst to include Hospitals also. I would so go with a health care provider/hospital with almost no right to sue and pay half the cost. Its an idea whose time has more than come and yet it doesn't exist.

 

[motorguy222]

quote:

---

Originally posted by GROUCHO MARX:
Motorguy, I'll bet that the holter monitor's results were inconclusive and the the doctor will want a stress test.

---

Acyually there was an abnormality that showed up on the Holter.

I am having T-wave problems that keep showing up on EKG's.It may be nothing but it also could be.It showed up in an EKG in his office.

The doctor sent me for a good blood workup and an echocardiogram.

He also checked for diabetes,it runs in my family.

He said that he didnt want to think I have any blockages since I am young,he wants to get the results of the tests back before he decides what to do next.

I am on a medication that helps keep my blood pressure down and slow my heart rate.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

I'll bet that the holter monitor's results were inconclusive and the the doctor will want a stress test.

---

The insurance companies are in on it too, GM. They don't pay the premiums ..just administer them. I have sleep apnea. It's not a condition that you typically lose. My machine is old (I forget how old). So, if I need a new machine, after a certain period of time, they want another sleep study ($2300 last time) ..to allow the trial rental of the new machine ($1400 last time) ..to authorize the purchase ($2500 last time, IIRC). So all tolled ..the tab was about $6000 last time ..and to "justify" another machine purchase, they're willing to spend another $6-7k (probably 3k minimum for the new sleep study) just to avoid being scammed for $2500 (which is a crime in itself).

There is no way out of this trap that they've formed. This isn't any term of "managed" anything ..it's manipulated care. That is, the progression in testing/treatment is designed to be expensive. You then understand why your premiums go up, you're deductibles go up, and your service provided goes down.

 

[MikeR]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:
The problem is simply that medical costs are unthrottled. The doors are closing on the grab bag ..but most of the damage has been done. There is no "economy" in medical care. There is just shortages of services. The technician still gets a good hourly wage, ..the medical equipment supplier still makes very expensive and quickly obsolete proprietery devices, physicians (although lower than past evolutions), are still very far up the economic food chain (surgeons especially)...and the blank check keeps getting written. Any attempt to contain costs is subjected to any (and every) "end runaround". If the government limits $/procedure ...they merely find more procedures. Medicine is basically a private enterprise with a government like taxation funding base. They get paid no matter what they do.


Basically you've given a dog a bone everytime it rolls over ...so it just rolls over everytime it wants a bone.

---

Agreed.

I'm amazed that the article doesn't mention the cost differential between insured and uninsured patients. Insurance companies have massive negotiation leverage and the uninsured take up the slack. The same procedure will cost an uninsured patient around 6x what an insurance company will pay.

We can't count on it changing anytime soon, either. The Repubs are quick to scapegoat trial lawyers, while writing blank checks to the drug companies. The Dems wish to socialize the current system without addressing the cost issue at all (ensuring FURTHER waste.)

mr

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

I'm amazed that the article doesn't mention the cost differential between insured and uninsured patients. Insurance companies have massive negotiation leverage and the uninsured take up the slack. The same procedure will cost an uninsured patient around 6x what an insurance company will pay.

---

Well, if you're uninsured, but econimically viable, most providers will give you a discount. What is the REAL crime is when you ARE INSURED, but not COVERED for an expense. You are then expected to pay the full amount.

This has happened to me on several occasions. I'll give you three in particular:

School nurse thought my daughter was on drugs. Got her Ped to write a script for drug screening. It wasn't covered. They expected me to pay $325 even though the exact same service for DPW or any other agency was $62 ..and a mulititude of covered lab charges took like time and material in lab resources. They went on, on that item, the $5/month club, just to cost them as much in adminstrative/clerical time as they got for the service.

Routine transport for my athsmatic daughter from the local hospital to Children Hospital. CHOP jumped on the oportunity to handle the transport. The bill, elevated to "advanced life support" simply due to her having routine therapudic O2, jumped to $1150. My plan only covered $150. They refused to yield on the fee. I pointed out that I could have rented a Winabego and two per diem nurses for less ..they agreed and more or less told me to eff myself. I then pointed out that if my plan had covered the charge that the bill would have been $500 (+/-) ..and that charge would be the same for DPW, Medicare, HMO, etc. They agreed, but still declined to grant me that rate. I finally theatened to report the relationship between the private ambulance service with CHOP for investigation to the state attorney general's office. That was the last bill that I received from them.

My daughter had oral surgery. We got "preapproved" for the procedure. The hospital would not allow the procedure without preapproval. We got the preapproval from BC/BS (premier blue) and had the surgery performed. This is the same identical procedure that my son had performed, without preapproval, one year earlier. The insurance company then kicked back the claim ..which was $2500. The hospital then decided to bill me for the $5000 "list" price.


btw- NEVER worry about getting jacked for a service already performed that you're getting screwed for due to "paper chasing". You can silence any and all medical bills with $5/month. I have a few chitheads that are extended out to 2010 in my Quicken calender. If they annoyed me more than others, I use $5.01 since it will require more data entry for the smaller outfits that don't have electronic transfers in place.