# This is why you can't pay out of pocket for health care



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

I have been having some heart skipping going on. I went to my doctor last week, they took one tube of blood and did an ekg. I have to go back in 2 weeks.

I got the statement from my insurance company today. 574$. for one visit, a tube of blood and an ekg. Probably more than that coming next appointment too, since I had to wear a holter monitor for a day. 

You can't tell me people can afford to pay out of pocket for things like that, even on a payment plan, they just add up and up and up, especially when you have to go back for follow ups and possibly be sent to a specialist.

And please , Corny, I already know the "Wait till obamacare kicks in, you wont get treated at all, you will pay a million dollars and die" thing by heart, you dont have to post it yet again. :hand:


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

If you already know how bad it's gonna get, I'll just say I hope your tests came back good news and you enjoy good health.:thumb:


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Ummm. So it's gonna be economical to pay $4,000/yr for 20 or so years for a grand total of $80,000 or so to save $574 IF for some chance something MIGHT go wrong with me. Sounds smart, sign me up!!!!!


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

I don't disagree that health care costs are high, I just don't see the Democrat plan being the solution.

I, too, hope your tests results show nothing serious and that you feel better soon.


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

Shygal, I agree 100% that HC costs are out of control. In fact, you haven't even seen HALF the bills yet for your visit...the doctor you saw, the interpretation of your tests read by yet another doctor, and so forth. AGREED, without a doubt, RIDICULOUS. When I went into the hospital to have DD, I racked up some $45,000 or so in costs...sorry, but I seem to recall doing ALL the work. In fact, I will save the HC debate for another time, since if we are just talking about COSTS alone, I agree with you. OUT OF CONTROL.

Now, on to you. What did your preliminary EKG show? It is actually not out of the norm for a healthy individual to have premature Atrial Contractions (PAC) or Premature Ventricular Contractions (PVC) in small numbers. I know, me and my Lyme, but one of the frequently missed diagnoses for PAC's and heart blocks is Lyme. Trust me, I know that from experience now, after being misdiagnosed as having *unknown* heart episodes and doing my own research AFTER being diagnosed as late stage Lyme. I know, I am a broken record, but none of my HT friends should miss this possibility (even if they are libs, lol!). Stay calm, could be something as simple as too much coffee or stress! Or reading all the Obama bashing here could have something to do with it, lol.


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

What if NO ONE had health insurance and everyone had to pay out of pocket? I think after an adjustment period the prices would level out to a rational amount. I know doctors go to school a long time etc... but I have seen some office calls of five minutes that are billed for $300-400. When people have insurance they think little of these amounts, if they had to reach into their own pockets and pay the bill, they might think a bit more about it. Insurance has ruined any chance for an honest price structure in the medical arena.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

You might not have to pay $574 under Obamacare. You might be denied the blood test entirely. Or they may cover a very small portion and still make you pay most of it, after shelling out a ton of money for the coverage.

The uninsured don't understand deductibles and co-pays, and that is after paying out the wazoo for the coverage. And the folks that are so excited about this don't understand that they will pay more taxes at the state level, even if they don't pay more at the federal level. 

The people who don't want to buy insurance will then pay the fine, and go into the medicaid system, and that will burden the state, which will have no choice but to raise taxes on everybody to foot the bill.

So when you are covered by Obamacare, paying out thousands of dollars a year in extra taxes, paying for the insurance coverage, paying your deductible, your co-pay, (if you are lucky enough to not be denied the coverage), you will long for the day when you only had to pay $574!

And don't moan to us about * "not being able to afford"* your own health care. None of the democrat members of congress who voted for this monstrosity, nor the president care about whether the hard working Americans can afford to pay for the healthcare for those who don't have it. *We can't afford it.*

Some can't get it because of pre-existing conditions. I understand that. Some can't afford it, and many simply choose not to get it. Having sold health insurance in the past, I can assure you that many Americans choose not to have it. I sold health insurance for most of the companies that sell health insurance in California. I could put in the client information and the database would spit out numerous insurance options from all of the carriers with options ranging from the "Cadillac plans" with high premiums to smaller premiums for policies that covered less. Most clients simply chose not to get insurance because the chances were, they saved money by not getting it, even if they had to cough up $574 for their visit. Most of these people were wealthier than me. They had grander homes and drove nicer cars, and I can assure you that they earned more income. It was a financial decision that they made, and a gamble.

Obamacare was forced through against the express wishes of the American people. *We can't afford it*. Most Americans are already covered, and pay dearly for that coverage. Now we have to pay for yours too, and *we can't afford it*.


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

Uhh, the uninsured don't understand deductibles and co-pays?? Seriously?? The uninsured pay the entire amount, not just a $10 co-pay!


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Melissa said:


> Uhh, the uninsured don't understand deductibles and co-pays?? Seriously?? The uninsured pay the entire amount, not just a $10 co-pay!


If I go to the doctor at our local health dept., my copay is $25.00. They have a sign at the checkout that says if you will sign a form saying you are low income, the cost of your entire visit will be no more than $20.00.


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

The country made about the 1st 170 years or so with no health insurance and somehow people managed to still live their lives and pay the doctor.


----------



## Dr. Mom (Jan 13, 2008)

Shygal, I hope your tests come back okay. Let us know. 

I only have catastrophic insurance, with a high deductible, so I pay for my routine visits and lab work out of pocket. I don't even have them file the insurance, it wouldn't do any good. The nice thing about not having insurance is that you can shop around and get discounts. When you have insurance you are usually limited in when and where you can go. I found a hospital that gives a 40% discount on testing if you can pay for it at the time of service. One doctor's office charged me only for the cost after insurance would have paid. One doctor charged me $228 for a 10 minute visit. I wrote a letter and complained. They reviewed the charges and wouldn't change it. I told them I would take my business elsewhere.


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

About three weeks ago my wife had a sprained ankle and they did an x-ray and some blood work.Wouldn't you know it, she hasn't met her deductible.With the x-ray and blood work and the Dr visit about 400.00 we have to pay.

We have insurance! I remember back when I broke my ankle back a few years ago with no insurance,it was less than 100.00,Dr,x-ray and meds.In my opinion they just charge to much and do too many tests thinking the Insurance Company will pay without question,but if you are not insured or haven't met your deductible its an arm and a leg.

Shygal,hope all goes well and they get your hearts rhythm back to normal and the blood tests come back fine :cowboy: We all will be on here arguing back and forth for many years to come.Even after we get control back this fall, we'll find something to differ about and keep it going back and forth from now on.:nana:


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

Let's see........the month of April looks like this in our house:

Colonoscopy for son last week: total out of pocket = $1,250

Hernia surgery for me yesterday: total out of pocket = $3,000

MRI for wife's left knee today: total out of pocket = $600

Next Tuesday wife's knee scope: total out of pocket = $500

Next Tuesday's $500 will get us to $6,000 out of pocket for the family...our deductible for the year. Everything after this will be "free"! 

We know that our deductible is $6,000 per year, so we put $500 per month away to cover. Anything not used in one year helps bridge the next.

We could use that money for a cruise, or flat panel TVs, and then complain about how we can't afford to pay our deductible (like one of my co-workers likes to do). But we don't.

Is it a sacrifice? Sure. But I don't want other people to have to pay my bills.

Oh, and I am glad not every year is like this!

Tim


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

blooba said:


> Ummm. So it's gonna be economical to pay $4,000/yr for 20 or so years for a grand total of $80,000 or so to save $574 IF for some chance something MIGHT go wrong with me. Sounds smart, sign me up!!!!!


Well, that's kind of the nature of insurance. You pay $4,000/yr on the chance that your house *might* burn down, and you probably think nothing of it.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

I got a hospital bill for $142 for a lab test on an annual physical last Friday- my doctor forgot to send my insurance with it. So without my having asked for anything from the hospital, they sent an attachment that said as a private pay, what I would have to pay was $67 plus if I paid within 30 days, they would take another 20% off.
And that tells you why insurance costs so much. Basically If I pay myself, it costs less than half of what they will bill the insurance .


----------



## Roadking (Oct 8, 2009)

A few months ago, I posted about my boy breaking a tooth. I turned down dental ins. when we got med. Annual checkups (2 kids 2 adults) 60 each. The broken tooth, and root canal and bonding 675. They goofed on one visit and charges 120 per kid for checkup, after quoting 60. " Our mistake, thats the insured charge ". Since insurance only pays so much, they over charge. Not untypical. Oh, the dental insurance would have added about 3200 to the actual cost of this years dental work.
Matt


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

Matt brings up a good point...does this bill cover dental? Vision?


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Well, that's kind of the nature of insurance. You pay $4,000/yr on the chance that your house *might* burn down, and you probably think nothing of it.


Mine is only about $450/yr.

I'd never pay $4000 for house insurance.


----------



## Dr. Mom (Jan 13, 2008)

Beccachow, according to the HC bill I read on line, the gov is paying off student loans for anybody who goes into the medical field. I believe I saw dentists specifically listed, so I would assume dental would be covered. Vision probably too.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Win07_351 said:


> Mine is only about $450/yr.
> 
> I'd never pay $4000 for house insurance.


$480 a year here. Nevada must live in a mansion.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Dr. Mom said:


> Beccachow, according to the HC bill I read on line, the gov is paying off student loans for anybody who goes into the medical field. I believe I saw dentists specifically listed, so I would assume dental would be covered. Vision probably too.


I doubt they will be covered. Medicare will only pay for dental or vision if it happens to be a medical necessity. It won't pay for things like glasses or getting teeth filled. My MIL had a common condition to old folks where one of her eyelids rolled in due to weak muscles around her eye and it caused her eyelashes to scratch her eye. Medicare balked at paying for the surgery to tighten the muscle. The doctor finally argued with them enough that they said okay.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Common Tator said:


> So when you are covered by Obamacare, paying out thousands of dollars a year in extra taxes, paying for the insurance coverage, paying your deductible, your co-pay, (if you are lucky enough to not be denied the coverage), you will long for the day when you only had to pay $574!


I pay for most of my insurance coverage.
I pay my deductable.
I pay my co pay.

This 574 is for the visit, Becca is right, it doesn't include the person reading the EKG, the cardiologist that will read my holter monitor, my visit that I havent BEEN to yet in two weeks, and will have to go see a cardiologist as well (specialists are 50 dollar copay), It is not one visit and done with, its not going to be "only" $574 by the time everything is done.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Win07_351 said:


> The country made about the 1st 170 years or so with no health insurance and somehow people managed to still live their lives and pay the doctor.


And the average lifespan back then was 35-40.
Do you really want to go back to that? Children were lucky to live past 2, go walk through an old graveyard someday and look at all the young children that died.


----------



## NickieL (Jun 15, 2007)

back when I didn't have insurance, about 5 and a half years ago, I got seriously ill. the bills added up to over 50,000 for a two week stay and a surgery. I was a housekeeper at the time, i made just enough money not to qualify for help on paying those bills....yet I couldn't afford to keep lights on or buy food but could not get help.

I will NEVER go without insurance, ever again. NEVER EVER.


I got a bill the other day for a dr visit...$250 for the visit. The lady putting in my form had made a mistake on my policy number but the insurance took care of it when I called. I pay $40 a month for coverage through my work. I'd rather pay the 40 then 250 just for a brief drs visit!


----------



## NickieL (Jun 15, 2007)

Win07_351 said:


> Mine is only about $450/yr.
> 
> I'd never pay $4000 for house insurance.


LOL mine is $150 a year........they don't cover mobile homes here for much.


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

Shygal said:


> And the average lifespan back then was 35-40.
> Do you really want to go back to that? Children were lucky to live past 2, go walk through an old graveyard someday and look at all the young children that died.


 Lets go waaaaay back.That one ain't old enough.Lets find a REAL old one,the one Methsela and his bunch is buried in.I recon God must have been the Dr back then.969 years??This day and time,if a Dr can get you to ninety,his office will be packed with folks saying "do me doc", "do me".:teehee:


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

Shygal said:


> And the average lifespan back then was 35-40.
> Do you really want to go back to that? Children were lucky to live past 2, go walk through an old graveyard someday and look at all the young children that died.



That had nothing to do with insurance. That was because medicine was not as advanced. Most deaths as you say were under age 2. Most of those were before age 1. That is what drove the average lifespan down to about 35. Even in ancient times, if a person made it past age two, they could reasonably expect to make it to age 60. Sure, illness and injury killed a lot of people that would have lived today, but that again was due to medicine not being as advanced as it is today.

Insurance, government provided or not, isn't going change anything. The healthcare reform did nothing to address the real problem which is doctors charging whatever the heck they want while hiding behind a false price structure. People didn't need insurance in the past, because a doctor was like any other business, you knew the cost or at least had a good estimate up front. Try getting that info now. You get the runaround and they charge based on your insurance. The reform that was needed was to bring an actual free market back to health care prices. I believe Melissa said it, there would be a period of price correction. Once we were through that though, I would wager that no one would need health insurance to the degree they need it today. Shopping around would go a long way in keeping price down.

I'm sorry that you are sick and hope you recover soon. Keep us posted. I will be praying for your recovery here.

Kendall


----------



## Wags (Jun 2, 2002)

Doctors charge the prices they do in part because of the high cost of malpractice insurance. Our family doc used to Labor & Delivery along with his family practice, but the extra insurance he had to carry for that (above what he was already paying) finally drove him to drop the L&D. 

I strongly believe that tort reform would go a long way to reducing costs that are passed along to consumers.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Melissa said:


> Uhh, the uninsured don't understand deductibles and co-pays?? Seriously?? The uninsured pay the entire amount, not just a $10 co-pay!


Apparently you don't understand them either Melissa. Even with insurance if you have a deductible, you pay 100% of your costs until the deductible is met and insurance kicks in. A copay can be a certain dollar amount, or it can be a percentage of the total. 

But first things first. There is the insurance premium that must be paid every month. Hundreds of dollars paid month in, month out. Thousands of dollars per year. And you pay this whether you see a doctor or not. The uninsured only pay if they see a doctor.

If the uninsured had the fiscal discipline to set aside the money that they would otherwise spend for insurance, they could easily come out ahead, provided they don't have a major medical issue. There were many years when we paid out more for insurance than we would have paid in medical bills if we were uninsured and had to pay the whole bill in cash. And, without insurance, we could have negotiated with the doctor or hospital. That is not an option if you are insured.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Shygal said:


> I pay for most of my insurance coverage.
> I pay my deductable.
> I pay my co pay.
> 
> This 574 is for the visit, Becca is right, it doesn't include the person reading the EKG, the cardiologist that will read my holter monitor, my visit that I havent BEEN to yet in two weeks, and will have to go see a cardiologist as well (specialists are 50 dollar copay), It is not one visit and done with, its not going to be "only" $574 by the time everything is done.


I read the OP carefully, and I understood that you were complaining that you had to pay $574 because you are uninsured. Even the title makes it sound that way. "This is why you can't pay out of pocket for health care".

Now it seems that you have insurance, and you are complaining because you have out of pocket costs.

Just who do you want to pay your medical bills? Are you asking your elected representatives to steal more from the rest of us? Or perhaps you want all medical professionals to work for free? :stars:


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Good luck with that Shygal, I hope it's nothing serious.



> Just who do you want to pay your medical bills?


CT, I would think if she has medical insurance she would be expecting the insurers to pay her medical bills. What is so hard to understand about that? $574 for one visit, a tube of blood and an ekg seems incredibly exorbitant to be paying out of pocket when she's already paying for medical insurance.

.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Common Tator said:


> I read the OP carefully, and I understood that you were complaining that you had to pay $574 because you are uninsured. Even the title makes it sound that way. "This is why you can't pay out of pocket for health care".
> 
> Now it seems that you have insurance, and you are complaining because you have out of pocket costs.
> 
> Just who do you want to pay your medical bills? Are you asking your elected representatives to steal more from the rest of us? Or perhaps you want all medical professionals to work for free? :stars:


I dont think you read it carefully at ALL, Im not complaining about having out of pocket costs, or having to pay 574 dollars , yeesh  I even said "insurance statement" quite clearly.

Im saying that is why people CANT be expected to pay out of pocket for things, that is the cost for one visit, and when there is something wrong, you are going to have many many more visits than one. Yet people like you seem to think its so simple for people to save up and pay out of pocket. Good for you that you didn't have anything happen one year. Suppose the next year something catastrophic happens? Try negotiating a half million dollar ICU bill, negotiating that down to even HALF is going to ruin most people. and then guess who gets to pay for your gamble? Me, and the "rest of us". 

I pay my own medical copay and my insurance :grump: Just who do you think you are, assuming I am stealing from the "rest of us" ? 

As for wanting all medical professionals to work for free, since Im a registered nurse, that would be pretty stupid for you to assume.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

What Mellissa is saying is that medical professionals are in a buisiness. Without insurance middlemen, they would have to price to what the average person in their community can afford out of pocket or go out of buisiness. Doesnt matter what they paid for education, they would be forced into economic reality and decide if they could make a living or not. Or whether there was a more lucrative occupation though they still would be saddled with their medical education debt either way. Simple as that. 

Rural vet clinics do many of the same things as human hospitals/clinics, yet charge much less though vets are trying to get people to buy into medical insurance for pets so they can raise prices futher and they want to try and specialize in treating pets of stupid rich people since that is apparently very lucrative. Funny I just didnt realize there were that many stupid rich people out there for all the professionals to specialize in catering to their needs at very high price and their needs alone.

I agree best thing would be to eliminate all public and private medical insurance, but its simply not on anybody's political radar. The insurance people dont want it, the medical people dont want it, the legalized drug pushers dont want it, the politicians taking bribes from the rich insurance and medical people and drug pushers dont want it. The consumer wants somebody else to pay for their bills and take care of them. So it simply isnt going to happen. There are too many people making too much money off current system. You notice this bill that passed had to offer the moon to those money people to get any changes at all. In order to get any significant change that would actual cut costs, either the system has to collapse enough where the money people become moneyless and weak or you need a very strong minded benevolent dictator running the show that executes anybody arguing his decisions. Neither option very wonderful. So what happens in reality is that all the vested special interests greed in many areas finally ramps up to point the system collapses. Look at Greece right now. They are in a world of financial hurt, yet nobody is willing to give up their own little vested piece of the pie in order for the system to recover.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Win07_351 said:


> The country made about the 1st 170 years or so with no health insurance and somehow people managed to still live their lives and pay the doctor.


And the doctor came to the house AND spent more than 10 minutes with you. MAN THE OLD TIMES WERE HORRIBLE!!!



Nevada said:


> Well, that's kind of the nature of insurance. You pay $4,000/yr on the chance that your house *might* burn down, and you probably think nothing of it.


I gamble $700/yr down on the house BECAUSE ITS REQUIRED. Once it's no longer required I will probably drop it, although that's in a dream world. I'm not a gambling man,apparently you are NEVADA. That's all it is. Your gambling that the cost of insurance is less than the price of whats covered. ALTHOUGH THE HOUSE (insurance companies) ALWAYS WINS (you should know that)



Shygal said:


> And the average lifespan back then was 35-40.
> Do you really want to go back to that? Children were lucky to live past 2, go walk through an old graveyard someday and look at all the young children that died.


That couldn't have anything to do with having no refrigeration,taking a crap in a hole next to your well,untreated water, weekly/monthly baths in that dirty water, or not being medically knowledgeable. It was all insurance that saved lives!!!! Glad you cleared that one up.



Shygal said:


> I dont think you read it carefully at ALL, Im not complaining about having out of pocket costs, or having to pay 574 dollars , yeesh  I even said "insurance statement" quite clearly.
> 
> Im saying that is why people CANT be expected to pay out of pocket for things, that is the cost for one visit, and when there is something wrong, you are going to have many many more visits than one. Yet people like you seem to think its so simple for people to save up and pay out of pocket. Good for you that you didn't have anything happen one year. Suppose the next year something catastrophic happens? Try negotiating a half million dollar ICU bill, negotiating that down to even HALF is going to ruin most people. and then guess who gets to pay for your gamble? Me, and the "rest of us".
> 
> ...


My CASH Dr's visit cost me $125, and I'm pretty sure they would have even waived that cost since I went to a nonprofit hospital. I requested the low income assistance paperwork since I was thinking it would be $500+ and I did qualify(at $38,000/yr for 1 person) although when I saw it was only $125 I paid my full price. If the hospitals were so broke they would lower their financial assistance a bit or drop it all together. Do you know why they charge more for insurance companies? Because they can!!!! If you have someone telling you they are willing to pay you $5/doz for some eggs what are you going to charge? Do you charge everyone that price?


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> That couldn't have anything to do with having no refrigeration,taking a crap in a hole next to your well,untreated water, weekly/monthly baths in that dirty water, or not being medically knowledgeable. It was all insurance that saved lives!!!! Glad you cleared that one up.


You are the second person that that went right over your head.

I never said insurance had ANYTHING to do with it. I was responding to a poster that said that 170 years ago, people did not have insurance and they got along just fine. I asked them if they wanted to go back to that time, where kids were lucky to live past 2 and the lifespan average was 35-40. Its really not that difficult to follow. Then again, apparently it was for some


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> You are the second person that that went right over your head.
> 
> I never said insurance had ANYTHING to do with it. I was responding to a poster that said that 170 years ago, people did not have insurance and they got along just fine. I asked them if they wanted to go back to that time, where kids were lucky to live past 2 and the lifespan average was 35-40. Its really not that difficult to follow. Then again, apparently it was for some


Here's a link you should visit and do some research on. http://nyspi.org/

What is this thread about? Time travel or Insurance?


----------



## mountainlaurel (Mar 5, 2010)

I don't have insurance. I own a small business. So now, I either pay for insurance that I can't afford or pay the fine, which ever is cheaper. What if I can't pay either. I go out of business.

So now, not only will my employees not have health insurance, they won't have a job. And I'm not the only small business like this. 

The large business's like AT&T say they will just pay the fine. Their employees have health insurance and it's cheaper for them to keep their own plan and pay the gov.s fine.

But other large companies that can, will just move out of the country. So now, those employees won't have either their insurance nor a job. 

Way to fix a problem.:bored:


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2010)

Common Tator said:


> If the uninsured had the fiscal discipline to set aside the money that they would otherwise spend for insurance, they could easily come out ahead, provided they don't have a major medical issue. There were many years when we paid out more for insurance than we would have paid in medical bills if we were uninsured and had to pay the whole bill in cash. And, without insurance, we could have negotiated with the doctor or hospital. That is not an option if you are insured.



See, that works until you realize there are a whole class of folks called "The Working Poor". It's what happens when you're working, but not getting paid enough to make any advancements. 

If you're getting $10 an hour it's really hard to put $500 a month aside for deductable and co-pays. At $10 an hour you're making $400 a week, or $2K a month before taxes. So let's say you're bringing home $1,500 a month. Can people really live a decent life on $1,000 a month? Nowadays that's next to impossible.


----------



## NickieL (Jun 15, 2007)

Tonya said:


> See, that works until you realize there are a whole class of folks called "The Working Poor". It's what happens when you're working, but not getting paid enough to make any advancements.
> 
> If you're getting $10 an hour it's really hard to put $500 a month aside for deductable and co-pays. At $10 an hour you're making $400 a week, or $2K a month before taxes. So let's say you're bringing home $1,500 a month. Can people really live a decent life on $1,000 a month? Nowadays that's next to impossible.


So true, so true. I bring home just a little more then that a month, especially if I get some overtime BUT nobody is getting overtime these days. Around these parts, its a pretty good job what I have. It's either hospital work or the mills that have the best jobs.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> Here's a link you should visit and do some research on. http://nyspi.org/
> 
> What is this thread about? Time travel or Insurance?


For goodness sake, are you deliberately being obtuse?

Someone ELSE brought up how people could afford the doctor back 170 years ago, indicating those days were better. I said yes, kids died before 2 years old generally and the lifespan was 35-40, would they prefer going back to that as well? That post has nothing to do with insurance. 

Im really not about to explain this again.


----------



## wwubben (Oct 13, 2004)

blooba said:


> And the doctor came to the house AND spent more than 10 minutes with you. MAN THE OLD TIMES WERE HORRIBLE!!!
> 
> I gamble $700/yr down on the house BECAUSE ITS REQUIRED. Once it's no longer required I will probably drop it, although that's in a dream world. I'm not a gambling man,apparently you are NEVADA. That's all it is. Your gambling that the cost of insurance is less than the price of whats covered. ALTHOUGH THE HOUSE (insurance companies) ALWAYS WINS (you should know that)
> 
> ...


Why do you have to buy insurance on your house?We don't have to here in Iowa.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

Tonya said:


> See, that works until you realize there are a whole class of folks called "The Working Poor". It's what happens when you're working, but not getting paid enough to make any advancements.
> 
> If you're getting $10 an hour it's really hard to put $500 a month aside for deductable and co-pays. At $10 an hour you're making $400 a week, or $2K a month before taxes. So let's say you're bringing home $1,500 a month. Can people really live a decent life on $1,000 a month? Nowadays that's next to impossible.


This appears to be the subject for a whole 'nuther thread...titled "Just what are we entitled to as Americans?"

I don't think we are guaranteed a particular outcome...but that seems to be what many folks believe.

For the first 28 years of my life, I was working poor. I grew up poor and I worked minimum wage jobs while in school to have any money because my folks didn't have anything to spare. I spent 4 years in the Marines, in the 70's, before the Reagan pay hikes (started at about $270/month). Then I worked through my university years (janitorial work, sacking groceries, unloading sides of beef at a packing plant). Finally started making "real" money in 1986 after graduation.

I would not expect someone making $10/hour to be able to put away $500/month for health care deductible. I would expect that at some point in an adult's life they would either figure out a way to put themselves in position to do that, or accept that it is not a high enough priority for them, and move on.

But to recognize a need, complain about it, while not actively working to change the circumstances is not the American way. And it is not the American way, to expect someone else to foot the bill. At least it hasn't been....but the entitlement mentality has been growing leaps and bounds in this country since the 60's. I don't think this will end well.

Please remember I am still on Vicodin from my surgery 2 days ago...so a little grace for rambling is requested! :smiley-laughing013:


Tim


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

Win07_351 said:


> Mine is only about $450/yr.
> 
> I'd never pay $4000 for house insurance.



I was wondering about that too since I just recently got a quote from Farmer's for 600.00 annual for $300,000 and $120,000 content 25,000 medical with an additional 100.00 a year for flood...total 700.00 annual.


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

Shygal said:


> I dont think you read it carefully at ALL, Im not complaining about having out of pocket costs, or having to pay 574 dollars , yeesh  I even said "insurance statement" quite clearly.
> 
> Im saying that is why people CANT be expected to pay out of pocket for things, that is the cost for one visit, and when there is something wrong, you are going to have many many more visits than one. Yet people like you seem to think its so simple for people to save up and pay out of pocket. Good for you that you didn't have anything happen one year. Suppose the next year something catastrophic happens? Try negotiating a half million dollar ICU bill, negotiating that down to even HALF is going to ruin most people. and then guess who gets to pay for your gamble? Me, and the "rest of us".
> 
> ...


Just why are you so offended when you advocate that the government steal from others for HC...even if you are not currently doing that.. you think it is a good thing so certainly it should not offend you since you believe in it...


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

tarbe said:


> This appears to be the subject for a whole 'nuther thread...titled "Just what are we entitled to as Americans?"
> 
> I don't think we are guaranteed a particular outcome...but that seems to be what many folks believe.
> 
> ...


If that is the vicodin talking...pass it around because you made more sense than any post that I have read in a long time.... well said. Thank you.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

beccachow said:


> Shygal, I agree 100% that HC costs are out of control. In fact, you haven't even seen HALF the bills yet for your visit...the doctor you saw, the interpretation of your tests read by yet another doctor, and so forth. AGREED, without a doubt, RIDICULOUS. When I went into the hospital to have DD, I racked up some $45,000 or so in costs...sorry, but I seem to recall doing ALL the work. In fact, I will save the HC debate for another time, since if we are just talking about COSTS alone, I agree with you. OUT OF CONTROL.
> 
> Now, on to you. What did your preliminary EKG show? It is actually not out of the norm for a healthy individual to have premature Atrial Contractions (PAC) or Premature Ventricular Contractions (PVC) in small numbers. I know, me and my Lyme, but one of the frequently missed diagnoses for PAC's and heart blocks is Lyme. Trust me, I know that from experience now, after being misdiagnosed as having *unknown* heart episodes and doing my own research AFTER being diagnosed as late stage Lyme. I know, I am a broken record, but none of my HT friends should miss this possibility (even if they are libs, lol!). Stay calm, could be something as simple as too much coffee or stress! Or reading all the Obama bashing here could have something to do with it, lol.


I agree about costs so high, so are homes. How about ins. on mtg payments? Instead of paying 1K or even more for your mrtg, you pay $1500.00/mo in ins. for someone else to pay. Its about like health ins.
We could've paid 1100/mo for COBRA at one time...decided to take the risk even tho DH has a kidney that's one big sstone. + ruptured discs.
Sure enuf, he had a stone lodge. Ins paid ~ 20K for lithotripsy 8 yrs ago, we could get it cash for 11K. So less than a yr of saving ins payments & "violla". Or we coulda gone to Mexico & got the whole thing for $3500.

It is really unfortunate that some are plagued w/bad health & some are not. Life's not fair. I feel those of us who can, should help those less fortunate. But soon we'll be buying houses for everyone who an't afford one...b/c its a "RIGHT".

Some who have had health bills that make them sell their homes...which is more important-a home or your health? Very unfortunate to have to downsize b/c of bad health...a neighbor near me just had that happen.

BTW, Becc, SG is an RN...

Hey, Sg-hope the holter shows you're FINE!


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Melissa said:


> What if NO ONE had health insurance and everyone had to pay out of pocket? I think after an adjustment period the prices would level out to a rational amount. I know doctors go to school a long time etc... but I have seen some office calls of five minutes that are billed for $300-400. When people have insurance they think little of these amounts, if they had to reach into their own pockets and pay the bill, they might think a bit more about it. Insurance has ruined any chance for an honest price structure in the medical arena.


Post of the day award.

I was in charge of an HMO clinic, the am't of folks who came in b/c they sneezed was insane!!


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

tarbe said:


> Let's see........the month of April looks like this in our house:
> 
> Colonoscopy for son last week: total out of pocket = $1,250
> 
> ...


Wow, prayers for healing & NO MORE illness for you!

Patty


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Well, that's kind of the nature of insurance. You pay $4,000/yr on the chance that your house *might* burn down, and you probably think nothing of it.


Maybe your house, but all our taxes, ins, etc combined don't add up to that much! In fact I just looked-our 180K home costs $980/yr for ins.

More loss of cred, NV.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Dr. Mom said:


> Beccachow, according to the HC bill I read on line, the gov is paying off student loans for anybody who goes into the medical field. I believe I saw dentists specifically listed, so I would assume dental would be covered. Vision probably too.


If anyone is dumb enuf to get a fed loan for med school, they'll owe 6 yrs of their life to the feds right off the bat.


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

Oh. Shygal, didn't mean to talk down to you about cardiac dysrhythmia...boy is my face red!

Anyhow, I am in agreement with her here (mark this day in history). Her complaint isn't that she has to pay $500, she has insurance to pay for that. Her query is, how can the uninsured be expected to pay that? And it is a valid point. There probably isn't one of us that disputes the skyrocketing price of health care. How to handle it, now THAT is our dispute. A simple, one page bill should have been, "Address fraud amongst the recipients of Social Services, take the money saved from cutting off unneeded benefits and expand the scope of medicaid so that people in the gap (too much money for Medicaid, too little to afford insurance or to pay healthcare) can be covered. Even a sliding scale of Medicaid would be acceptable, if you are in that gap, let us look at your finances and adjust your Medical Assistance to suit your specific need." Wow, we could hire extra people to work the cases, we could save $$ on the fraudulant abuse of recipients, and everyone could stick with their private insurance, get Medicaid to help, or remain uninsured. And look, I did it in one paragraph.

BECCACHOW FOR PRESIDENT, 2012


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Shygal said:


> I dont think you read it carefully at ALL, Im not complaining about having out of pocket costs, or having to pay 574 dollars , yeesh  I even said "insurance statement" quite clearly.
> 
> Im saying that is why people CANT be expected to pay out of pocket for things, that is the cost for one visit, and when there is something wrong, you are going to have many many more visits than one. Yet people like you seem to think its so simple for people to save up and pay out of pocket. Good for you that you didn't have anything happen one year. Suppose the next year something catastrophic happens? Try negotiating a half million dollar ICU bill, negotiating that down to even HALF is going to ruin most people. and then guess who gets to pay for your gamble? Me, and the "rest of us".
> 
> ...


But your insurance bill is far different than what a private payer pays. If someone with no insurance tells them up front, they can often get things 50% or more cheaper than you pay with insurance.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Shygal said:


> And the average lifespan back then was 35-40.
> Do you really want to go back to that? Children were lucky to live past 2, go walk through an old graveyard someday and look at all the young children that died.


All due respect, that was due to the childhood illnesses that are either cured now or controlled by vaccines, but you knew that. I don't think we'd go back to dying of TB, diarrhea, small pox, whooping cough, etc etc.

Edited to add-Sorry Kendall j, didn't see your BETTER post b/4 I posted.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

mountainlaurel said:


> I don't have insurance. I own a small business. So now, I either pay for insurance that I can't afford or pay the fine, which ever is cheaper. What if I can't pay either. I go out of business.
> 
> So now, not only will my employees not have health insurance, they won't have a job. And I'm not the only small business like this.
> 
> ...


Post of the day award.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

beccachow said:


> Oh. Shygal, didn't mean to talk down to you about cardiac dysrhythmia...boy is my face red!
> 
> Anyhow, I am in agreement with her here (mark this day in history). Her complaint isn't that she has to pay $500, she has insurance to pay for that. Her query is, how can the uninsured be expected to pay that? And it is a valid point. There probably isn't one of us that disputes the skyrocketing price of health care. How to handle it, now THAT is our dispute. A simple, one page bill should have been, "Address fraud amongst the recipients of Social Services, take the money saved from cutting off unneeded benefits and expand the scope of medicaid so that people in the gap (too much money for Medicaid, too little to afford insurance or to pay healthcare) can be covered. Even a sliding scale of Medicaid would be acceptable, if you are in that gap, let us look at your finances and adjust your Medical Assistance to suit your specific need." Wow, we could hire extra people to work the cases, we could save $$ on the fraudulant abuse of recipients, and everyone could stick with their private insurance, get Medicaid to help, or remain uninsured. And look, I did it in one paragraph.
> 
> BECCACHOW FOR PRESIDENT, 2012


Post of the day award!
And ya got my vote!


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

Well, in order to be a true Bill, I need to hide something in there about ear marking one zillion dollars for research of the mating habits of manatees in Kansas.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Shygal said:


> I dont think you read it carefully at ALL, Im not complaining about having out of pocket costs, or having to pay 574 dollars , yeesh  I even said "insurance statement" quite clearly.


If you aren't complaining, why did you start this thread?



Shygal said:


> Im saying that is why people CANT be expected to pay out of pocket for things, that is the cost for one visit, and when there is something wrong, you are going to have many many more visits than one. Yet people like you seem to think its so simple for people to save up and pay out of pocket. Good for you that you didn't have anything happen one year. Suppose the next year something catastrophic happens? Try negotiating a half million dollar ICU bill, negotiating that down to even HALF is going to ruin most people. and then guess who gets to pay for your gamble? Me, and the "rest of us".


Now you are the one assuming. I have health problems. Hubby has health problems and we have insurance. We have been continuously insured for our entire marriage. We have remained continuously insured since we were young and healthy, so there has never been the issue of pre-existing conditions for us. All of our conditions developed while we were insured. And we have out of pocket costs too. Of course.

Most of those who are now complaining that they can't get insured because of pre-existing conditions, developed those conditions while they were uninsured by choice. They spent their money on other things when they were young and healthy and insurable. Now they have problems, and want the rest of us to bail them out for their bad decisions. They gambled and they lost.

I was making the point that many of the uninsured are uninsured by CHOICE. And they made the choice that they would rather spend their income on other things than insurance. I didn't say it would be easy to set aside money for medical bills. But that would be a choice that they could make. Obviously, most folks don't make the decision to set aside money for health care. Not when there are nicer cars to buy, and houses that they can't afford but buy anyway.

Do you really believe that people will no longer be required to pay for things out of pocket under Obamacare? Seriously? Look at Medicare. Government insurance for he elderly. Even with that government insurance, they still have significant out of pocket costs. Why do you believe it will be different under Obamacare?



Shygal said:


> I pay my own medical copay and my insurance :grump: Just who do you think you are, assuming I am stealing from the "rest of us" ?


I actually referred to Congress and Obama stealing from the rest of us. 

I pay my own premiums and co-pays too. Let me clarify. Hubby gets the insurance through his employer. We pay part of the premiums and employer pays part. He has remained in this job for the past two and a half decades for job security, and for the insurance. He could have gotten different jobs that didn't offer insurance, but paid much much better. This was a choice that we made. I am not complaining about any of the sacrifices we have made regarding insurance. It was a conscious decision so that the insurance would be there for us and our children if it was needed.

This was a good gamble on our part. I have had several surgeries. Hubby broke his back at our ranch the year we bought it. He was hospitalized for a week. We were so very glad to have that insurance. It made our other decisions easier to swallow. The decision to buy used cars and maintain them and drive them forever, rather than buying new and spending hundreds of dollars per month for car payments, extra car insurance and extra DMV taxes.



Shygal said:


> As for wanting all medical professionals to work for free, since Im a registered nurse, that would be pretty stupid for you to assume.


Good. Now we have established that I am stupid. Far too stupid to figure out who you want to pay your out of pocket costs. So please enlighten me. Either you want the government to steal the money from the rest of us, or you want medical professionals to work for free. Both are horrible options. So if you have a better idea, now is the time to tell us. And use small words, so I can understand them. :cowboy:


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

There is no set price for any medical service - the charge is what the traffic will bear. So those with insurance pay more for the same service than those without. And those who don't pay are carried by all. 
I agree that too much time and money are wasted by diddling with everyone's individual insurance. Now if the health care bill had made a requirement for all companies selling insurance have to cover these basic services at a uniform cost with the same paper work, it might have helped in at least this. The insurance companies would then have to compete based on efficient coverage of this basic package plus really make their money on the "extra's." Sort of like car sales where the basic cost of the car has a small margin of profit but the car companies make a killing on the add-0ns.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> You can't tell me people can afford to pay out of pocket for things like that, even on a payment plan


Yes, they can.
Most spend more than that on their cell phones, TV and internet per year


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Her query is, how can the uninsured be expected to pay that? And it is a valid point.


They can be expected to pay because nothing in life is free.
There's little difference in paying the bills, and paying insurance premiums.
That $500+ Dr visit is a few couple of months of premiums.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They can be expected to pay because nothing in life is free.
> There's little difference in paying the bills, and paying insurance premiums.
> That $500+ Dr visit is a few couple of months of premiums.


One has to wonder how people who can't afford to pay for their own health care find the means to pay for a transmission or engine repair for their car when it breaks down. How do they pay for a new hot water heater or a new furnace for their home?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

beccachow said:


> Well, in order to be a true Bill, I need to hide something in there about ear marking one zillion dollars for research of the mating habits of manatees in Kansas.


I LOVE manatees!

And I grew up in Kansas. And my mother's name was Dorothy.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Tonya said:


> See, that works until you realize there are a whole class of folks called "The Working Poor". It's what happens when you're working, but not getting paid enough to make any advancements.
> 
> If you're getting $10 an hour it's really hard to put $500 a month aside for deductable and co-pays. At $10 an hour you're making $400 a week, or $2K a month before taxes. So let's say you're bringing home $1,500 a month. Can people really live a decent life on $1,000 a month? Nowadays that's next to impossible.


 ok, so lets say once this health insurance mandate is in place a person making $10/hr that has to have insurance costing $1310/yr has a surgery that costs $150,000. Well not only are they paying over $100/month for the insurance they will also be required to pay the 15% copay which equals $22,500. Now that is more than they make in a year plus they are required to still pay for the insurance or pay a $700 fine to NOT HAVE INSURANCE. What a good plan. 



wwubben said:


> Why do you have to buy insurance on your house?We don't have to here in Iowa.


Well I still owe, bank requires it.



poppy said:


> One has to wonder how people who can't afford to pay for their own health care find the means to pay for a transmission or engine repair for their car when it breaks down. How do they pay for a new hot water heater or a new furnace for their home?


Well there we go, lets require everyone to carry home warranties and car warranties. The government will pay for it so we'll be set!!!


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Tricky Grama said:


> I LOVE manatees!
> 
> And I grew up in Kansas. And my mother's name was Dorothy.


_*THE *_Dorothy?????


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Aintlifegrand said:


> Just why are you so offended when you advocate that the government steal from others for HC...even if you are not currently doing that.. you think it is a good thing so certainly it should not offend you since you believe in it...


Again, you ASSume everything without knowing anything about it, just another chance to think you are throwing a barb.

If you had paid attention rather than jumping to conclusions, you would know that I have said on here that I was not for the HC plan as it is. Kind of blows a hole in your little theory now, doesn't it.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They can be expected to pay because nothing in life is free.
> There's little difference in paying the bills, and paying insurance premiums.
> That $500+ Dr visit is a few couple of months of premiums.


Do you understand that its not going to be ONE visit for most people? That there are follow ups, referrals to specialists, tests, etc? 

500 dollars for one visit, adds up when you are going 3-4 times a month, Im not quite sure why you don't get that.

You can end up going for that 500 dollar visit three or four times a month. You can end up in the hospital after those visits, you can need a procedure done after those visits, plus follow up visits after the procedure. 

You seem to think that health problems are taken care of in ONE VISIT.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Common Tator said:


> If you aren't complaining, why did you start this thread?


To point out to people that it is not realistic to pay out of pocket for what things cost when you go to the doctor. Was it that difficult to understand, really?


Common Tator said:


> Do you really believe that people will no longer be required to pay for things out of pocket under Obamacare? Seriously? Look at Medicare. Government insurance for he elderly. Even with that government insurance, they still have significant out of pocket costs. Why do you believe it will be different under Obamacare?


Id LOVE to know where you even got the idea that I think this, or said this, or even insinuated it. This has NOTHING to do with "Obamacare". Nothing. 



Common Tator said:


> Far too stupid to figure out who you want to pay your out of pocket costs. So please enlighten me. Either you want the government to steal the money from the rest of us, or you want medical professionals to work for free. Both are horrible options. So if you have a better idea, now is the time to tell us. And use small words, so I can understand them. :cowboy:


This has nothing to do with my out of pocket costs. Nothing. I PAY MY OUT OF POCKET COSTS, what about that is so difficult for you to understand?


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

poppy said:


> One has to wonder how people who can't afford to pay for their own health care find the means to pay for a transmission or engine repair for their car when it breaks down. How do they pay for a new hot water heater or a new furnace for their home?


Sometimes they DONT find the means. They go WITHOUT. You dont really wear those rose colored glasses do you?


----------



## Guest (Apr 17, 2010)

blooba said:


> ok, so lets say once this health insurance mandate is in place a person making $10/hr that has to have insurance costing $1310/yr has a surgery that costs $150,000. Well not only are they paying over $100/month for the insurance they will also be required to pay the 15% copay which equals $22,500. Now that is more than they make in a year plus they are required to still pay for the insurance or pay a $700 fine to NOT HAVE INSURANCE. What a good plan.
> !!!


Thanks for pointing out why we need a single payer system!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Shygal said:


> poppy said:
> 
> 
> > How do they pay for a new hot water heater or a new furnace for their home?
> ...


That's a fact. The previous owner of my house was in bad financial shape. They lived without a furnace or AC for at least 2 years. They used portable electric space heaters in the winter and nothing but fans in the summer.

I can only afford to install a proper furnace & AC system because I have a homestead to sell. I couldn't imagine a summer in Las Vegas with no AC.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> To point out to people that it is not realistic to pay out of pocket for what things cost when you go to the doctor. Was it that difficult to understand, really?
> Id LOVE to know where you even got the idea that I think this, or said this, or even insinuated it. This has NOTHING to do with "Obamacare". Nothing.
> This has nothing to do with my out of pocket costs. Nothing. I PAY MY OUT OF POCKET COSTS, what about that is so difficult for you to understand?


1. Sounds like propaganda advocating Obamacare.
2. Keyword is WHEN you see the doctor. Very rarely does a healthy individual HAVE to see the doctor. 


Tonya said:


> Thanks for pointing out why we need a single payer system!


lol.....yea a taxpayer payer system.....sounds great sign me up.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> they took one tube of blood and did an ekg. I have to go back in 2 weeks.
> I got the statement from my insurance company today. 574$. for one visit, a tube of blood and an ekg. Probably more than that coming next appointment too, since I had to wear a holter monitor for a day.





Shygal said:


> Do you understand that its not going to be ONE visit for most people? That there are follow ups, referrals to specialists, tests, etc?
> 
> 500 dollars for one visit, adds up when you are going 3-4 times a month, Im not quite sure why you don't get that.


$500 was for more than just a visit, take your false lies to the previously posted site and talk to the "experts" I have given you a referral for. And my referral costs nothing.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

I'll be leaving this discussion until Shygal quits insulting everybody who disagrees with her.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Shygal said:


> Sometimes they DONT find the means. They go WITHOUT. You dont really wear those rose colored glasses do you?


I don't see many people walking. I had to write a check to the IRS yesterday for a few thousand dollars and I am not rich. How about a government program to help me pay my taxes? BTW, how many of those people you say go without have things like cell phones and IPods?


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Tricky Grama said:


> I LOVE manatees!


How do you cook them? The ones I killed had a lot of fat on them.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Shygal said:


> And the average lifespan back then was 35-40.
> Do you really want to go back to that? Children were lucky to live past 2, go walk through an old graveyard someday and look at all the young children that died.


We just had a lengthy thread here about the joys of delivering at home with no physician present. Many thought it was a wonderful idea...


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> $500 was for more than just a visit, take your false lies to the previously posted site and talk to the "experts" I have given you a referral for. And my referral costs nothing.


It was 574 dollars and it was for the visit and what they did during it. I am not going to another site, and you have a lot of nerve telling me I am lying. 

You just don't get it, do you.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Common Tator said:


> I'll be leaving this discussion until Shygal quits insulting everybody who disagrees with her.


My heart is broken 

And you aren't disagreeing with me, you are insisting I am saying things I am not saying, you are insisting my thread is about something that it is not, and you are insisting that I am complaining about paying out of pocket costs.

You are the one insulting people, saying I expect you to pay for me, etc when there is NOTHING about that in what I said. And the poster above you accusing me of lying....about what? 

Like I said, my heart is broken.


----------



## NickieL (Jun 15, 2007)

Shygal said:


> Sometimes they DONT find the means. They go WITHOUT. You dont really wear those rose colored glasses do you?


Bingo.


----------



## shanzone2001 (Dec 3, 2009)

Cornhusker said:


> _*THE *_Dorothy?????


If she is THE Dorothy, can you post the address for Oz...some hostile people here need to find him and get a heart!!!! :bash: I think that if some posters did not come here to argue and insult that they would be amazed with all of their free time!!!


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Shygal you must have insurance that I've not come across.

I know when I was ill for 11 days, went to doc twice, had blood taken, x-rays, and a cortizone shot the first time, a pennicilin shot the 2nd time.

Each time was a $20 co-pay, so $40 except I did have to purchase prescriptions, on was co-pay of $40 for pinnicillin pills. The first z-pack was about $10 co-pay.

so, your insurance must not cover much.
What type do you have? Mine is one of the Blue Cross/Blue Shield varieties via work - I do have to pay about $40 a month as my portion of the premium.

So why was your's so much?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> _*THE *_Dorothy?????


Nah, just one out of "HUNDREDS" of Dorothys.

Patty


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

AngieM2 said:


> Shygal you must have insurance that I've not come across.
> 
> I know when I was ill for 11 days, went to doc twice, had blood taken, x-rays, and a cortizone shot the first time, a pennicilin shot the 2nd time.
> 
> ...



Sigh...........

This thread is not about how much I had to pay. I have repeatedly said it was the insurance statement. The statement they send you to show you what THEY PAID.

This thread is about the high cost of health care, that it cost 574$ for a visit that they took blood and did an ekg in (I dont think the ekg is included in that), and how can they expect people to be able to afford that out of pocket, and for the other office visits that will occur until the problem is solved.

I have said this more than enough times now. I HAVE insurance. I PAY for it. I pay a 20 dollar copay for an office visit. 50 dollars for a specialist. My prescriptions are 20-30-50 copay depending if they are generic or not. If the provider is not in network I pay for most of the cost. 

Even though a few of you have insisted that I am complaining about what I have to pay, this is about people WITHOUT INSURANCE, not ME.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> That's a fact. The previous owner of my house was in bad financial shape. They lived without a furnace or AC for at least 2 years. They used portable electric space heaters in the winter and nothing but fans in the summer.
> 
> I can only afford to install a proper furnace & AC system because I have a homestead to sell. I couldn't imagine a summer in Las Vegas with no AC.


Were they in bad shape b/c they paid $4000/yr on ins for the house?
We were poor enuf one summer to not have ac. Wasn't that '60 days over 100' summer tho. Only about 40.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

poppy said:


> How do you cook them? The ones I killed had a lot of fat on them.


"HUNDREDS" are too fat. They'll have a gov't program for that unless we can get some conservatives in 11/10.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Well, Shygal, sighing and all.

If even after reading this thread for days, and your point is not being relayed to most on it that are trying to communicate with you

There must be a communication failure on both sides.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> *Please explain to me what the heck you are even talking about, because it certainly is not this thread subject*.





Shygal said:


> Sigh...........
> 
> This thread is not about how much I had to pay. I have repeatedly said it was the insurance statement. The statement they send you to show you what THEY PAID.
> 
> ...


Do you even re-read or remember what you typed in your previous posts? A breakdown of your bill of what THEY PAID isn't the subject of this thread?

Here ya go, another free referral......I suggest you take me up on this offer......http://nyspi.org/

I promise I won't send you a bill for my referral and I'm pretty sure you would qualify under your insurance. Heck I might even pay the copay to get you the professional help...lol


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

I got what she was saying perfectly the first time- _If everything in the medical realm is so expensive, it must be very hard for people without any insurance to pay the bills. _ And I know many, many hard-working people who work in jobs that don't offer insurance who would love to be part of a group insurance plan.


----------



## Chuck (Oct 27, 2003)

Medical costs are unnaturally high because of tort law, medicare and the insurance industry. Mostly tort law.

You don't have to go back 170 years to find a health care system that works. Panama has a life expectancy comparable to ours, yet almost nobody has insurance, and there isn't the tort system like we have in the states.

Your procedure in Panama, done by well-qualified doctors and with modern equipment would have probably cost about $25. Total. 

Strip away the politics - medicare, etc. kick the lawyers out of the process, and you have affordable health care. 

That said, you don't have a right to health care. It's a privilege. The only way it could be an "inalienable" right is if it did not require sacrifice on someone else's part.


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

I am good friends with a woman who is a doctor and she said that literally half of her expenses are related directly to dealing with the insurance companies. 

While I don't think health-care is specifically a right, I think most doctors want to help people and are willing to do a certain amount of free care. I would hate to see someone who is really sick or hurt and not able to be treated. 

Everyone always wants to twist everything around to politics and money, to me it is about empathy, compassion, kindness, consideration. When we operate our lives and our country like money is the only thing that matters we become a nation of self-centered, holier-than-thou, mean people. Wonder what Jesus would say? Because as a Christian that is what I always have to go back to in the end... 

I don't know all the answers, I just know that if people are hurting or suffering, or in pain and we have the means to help them and we don't, then we take away from our humanity. I doubt if anyone who posted on this thread would leave someone dying on their doorstep. When we talk about healthcare, there are real, live people behind the numbers. Think about it...


----------



## Chuck (Oct 27, 2003)

You hit the nail on the head, Melissa. Health care is not a right, but compassion is a duty. But compassion cannot be forced - if the government forces you to give to charity, it isn't charity, it's tyranny. 

Charity, by its very nature, has to be voluntary. Most hospitals in this country 100 years ago were run on charitable contributions. And people who needed care, for the most part, got it.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Chuck said:


> You hit the nail on the head, Melissa. Health care is not a right, but compassion is a duty. But compassion cannot be forced - if the government forces you to give to charity, it isn't charity, it's tyranny.
> 
> Charity, by its very nature, has to be voluntary. Most hospitals in this country 100 years ago were run on charitable contributions. And people who needed care, for the most part, got it.


And they still can. Non profit hospitals have low income assistance. All hospitals should be non profit or at least have one everywhere.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> Do you even re-read or remember what you typed in your previous posts? A breakdown of your bill of what THEY PAID isn't the subject of this thread?


NO, Its NOT what the subject is about. I have said that repeatedly.

And you can stop with the personal attack.


----------



## MushCreek (Jan 7, 2008)

Chuck said:


> Medical costs are unnaturally high because of tort law, medicare and the insurance industry. Mostly tort law.
> 
> You don't have to go back 170 years to find a health care system that works. Panama has a life expectancy comparable to ours, yet almost nobody has insurance, and there isn't the tort system like we have in the states.
> 
> ...


Now we're getting somewhere. Doctors (with some exceptions) don't make all that much money, especially considering the years of schooling and abilities they have to have. Follow the money- it's the ambulance chasing LAWYERS that make the big bucks. My wife works in the lab of a local hospital. Her malpractice insurance (paid by the hospital) is far, FAR more than her salary- and she doesn't even deal directly with patients! One of the biggest bills on a surgery is for the anesthegiologist. Do they make billions? No. It's a high -risk occupation, so the malpractice insurance is sky-high. I wish they would deal with tort reform FIRST, then try to fix the rest of it.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> NO, Its NOT what the subject is about. I have said that repeatedly.


Ok, well so if I came on here and said I went to a Dr's Appt. and walked out with a $150k bill wouldn't you be questioning things? See things can go both ways. 


Oh, I forgot to mention it was $125 to see the Dr. and $149,875 for the heart surgery.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Do you understand that its not going to be ONE visit for most people? That there are follow ups, referrals to specialists, tests, etc?


Do YOU understand that it doesn't MATTER?

People either have money or they don't.
Most have it, and waste it on big TV's and highspeed internet, and fancy cars, then whine if they have to pay for unexpected expenses.

Medical bills could be cheaper if we went back to the days of few tests and fewer effective treatements.

People want the latest technology, but don't want to pay for it

If you can buy a house or a car, you can pay a medical bill


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Do YOU understand that it doesn't MATTER?
> 
> People either have money of they don't.
> Most have it, and waste it on big TV's and highspeed internet, and fancy cars, then whine if they have to pay for unexpected expenses.
> ...


How does it "not matter"? It matters if you are the one without insurance and coming down with some problem that you cant afford to pay for. And no, most dont have it and waste it. I dont know where you live, but around here most people live paycheck to paycheck and do not have fancy cars and big tvs, etc.

One little thing can put you so far in debt you will NEVER get out of it.

I can get a car for 1000 dollars. You can buy a house for less than 100k. You can have a catastrophic illness and end up owing half a million dollars or more. How can you even equate those?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Common Tator said:


> I'll be leaving this discussion until Shygal quits insulting everybody who disagrees with her.


I guess you won't be back then


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> And you can stop with the personal attack


.

LOL
Youre the one who accused all of us of having "persecution complexes", and yet you complain about "attacks" more than anyone.

It gets boring when it's always the same


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> .
> 
> LOL
> Youre the one who accused all of us of having "persecution complexes", and yet you complain about "attacks" more than anyone.
> ...



And they say I sidetrack discussions? 

Do you have anything to add to the topic rather than the usual picking apart of my posts in a thread?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I can get a car for 1000 dollars. You can buy a house for less than 100k. You can have a catastrophic illness and end up owing half a million dollars or more. How can you even equate those?


It's only money
You *could *live a long and healthy life and never see a Dr
No one should be FORCED to buy insurance
No one is PROMISED everything they want.

If you can't afford the service, don't get it. If you get it, don't whine about having to pay for it. See how simple that is?

You could take herbs for your heart, and change your diet.
Exercise more. 
Get off the computer to lower your stress levels
You don't "need" blood work and heart monitors



> And they say I sidetrack discussions?


You do, which is why "they" say it.



> Do you have anything to add to the topic rather *than the usual picking apart of my posts in a thread?*


I'm sorry you *think* you're persecuted.


----------



## mountainlaurel (Mar 5, 2010)

I can tell you how we without insurance pay our medical bills. We make payments. 
Two years ago, dh went to the hospital emergencyroom after 3 days of not eating, drinking or sleeping because a piece of chicken was stuck in his throat. By the 3rd day, he had age 20 years because of dehydration. They put him to sleep and removed the chicken.

The hospital told us they couldn't force us to pay the bill. They sent us one bill. I made up a payment plan that I could afford monthly and in a year I had it payed off.

The dr. who did the procedure wanted dh to come in so he could run more tests to find out why he gets food stuck in his throat sometimes. The fee for that was several thousands of dollars. 

But a few years earlier, when dh was getting tested so he could donate his kidney to his B-I-L , JOhns Hopkins tested his swallowing reflex and found no reason. We told this dr. who was affiliated with Johns Hopkins that but he still sent us notices that he wanted to run the tests. 

AFter dealing with my B-I-L's kidney transplant I know I could never afford that. So I guess I would have to do without if I wasn't in a church that had what we call a deacon's fund. Mennonite churches and Amish churches from arounnd the world would take up offerings to help pay my medical bills. 

I know most churches don't do this and I wonder why now. We believe it's part of the scripture, "Be ye one another's burderns'. Most churches have let the government bear their memebers burden's and this is the result.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

mountainlaurel said:


> I can tell you how we without insurance pay our medical bills. We make payments.
> Two years ago, dh went to the hospital emergencyroom after 3 days of not eating, drinking or sleeping because a piece of chicken was stuck in his throat. By the 3rd day, he had age 20 years because of dehydration. They put him to sleep and removed the chicken.
> 
> The hospital told us they couldn't force us to pay the bill. They sent us one bill. I made up a payment plan that I could afford monthly and in a year I had it payed off.
> ...


Actually I believe all or most Catholic hospitals are ran non profit and have a very generous low income assistance and payment plans. Not sure if any other religions run their own but the Catholic ones will take any religion. http://www.health-partners.org You maybe able to call them to find one in your area.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Shygal said:


> And they say I sidetrack discussions?
> 
> Do you have anything to add to the topic rather than the usual picking apart of my posts in a thread?


Good grief. Which is the sidetrack??? Which is the topic? Which is the picking?

Not sure now, but thought I knew what this is all about-high cost of med care.?
IF folks cannot afford to set aside some $$$ for med care, what is it their $$$ goes to? Housing? Food? Clothes?

Back in the dark ages whe DH & I were living in a basement apt w/DD & he was in college, ins was out of the question. An office visit to a pediatrician was $5, we had a hard time coming up w/that. Groceries were nearly $8/wk. Rent was $50/mo. We had paid off our 8 y/old car-had been $25/mo.

Being teenagers, (19) we didn't think of 'catastrophic' illness but we sure didn't have ANY new clothes/shoes/TVs/or even 1 phone. We made sure we had money to pay for her birth, shots, dr. visits, etc. DH walked to school-gets really cold in the middle of KS in winter. But gas $$ was a luxury.

My point is that we are doing much the same NOW!! (Different DH tho  )
DH has NO ins. Passed 2 tiny kidney stones last week. Didn't even know they were 'forthcoming'. Now I don't expect others to do this-I've taken care of many kidney stone patients & shot them up w/morphine-often. I'm not sure HOW he can do this w/o even an advil...
But you do what you have to do. $$$ is hidden away in some acc't somewhere if he were to HAVE to have lithotripsy. We will not spend that. Could have used it on 1000K per mo health ins & not had any $$ left by now. Previous years, I had health ins thru work & even then it was expensive. 

But if you had to pay for your cardio-wk up, Shygal, I contend that you would have found the $$ & you would have NEGOTIATED and paid it yourself.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Chuck said:


> Medical costs are unnaturally high because of tort law, medicare and the insurance industry. Mostly tort law.
> 
> You don't have to go back 170 years to find a health care system that works. Panama has a life expectancy comparable to ours, yet almost nobody has insurance, and there isn't the tort system like we have in the states.
> 
> ...


Post of the day award.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Tricky Grama said:


> Back in the dark ages whe DH & I were living in a basement apt w/DD & he was in college, ins was out of the question. An office visit to a pediatrician was $5, we had a hard time coming up w/that. Groceries were nearly $8/wk. Rent was $50/mo. We had paid off our 8 y/old car-had been $25/mo.


Were you making half a penny an hr back then?.......lol :nana:

Shygal still don't even know what the subject of this thread is AND SHE STARTED IT. So I have no clue on how she even knows when its getting sidetracked.She's just trying to get people banned that she doesn't like but we're not stupid enough to fall for her trickery.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> Were you making half a penny an hr back then?.......lol :nana:
> 
> Shygal still don't even know what the subject of this thread is AND SHE STARTED IT. So I have no clue on how she even knows when its getting sidetracked.She's just trying to get people banned that she doesn't like but we're not stupid enough to fall for her trickery.


You can continue with the baiting. I think people see that is what is happening here. I'm not playing your game any more, so have fun.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

shanzone2001 said:


> If she is THE Dorothy, can you post the address for Oz...some hostile people here need to find him and get a heart!!!! :bash: I think that if some posters did not come here to argue and insult that they would be amazed with all of their free time!!!


1600 Pennsylvania Ave.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Tricky Grama said:


> But if you had to pay for your cardio-wk up, Shygal, I contend that you would have found the $$ & you would have NEGOTIATED and paid it yourself.


Being an RN yes I could have probably found the money for that visit. My mother, brother and father however, probably could not. And when my one visit stretches into two, three, four , more (I already have 2 more follow up appointments), then I don't believe I could find the money either.

I know a lot of people that couldn't come up with the money for it. And bearfootfarm says I dont NEED those tests and workups, etc, I do if I want to live and be healthy. Some things arent fixed by changing diet, etc. My family has a huge heart history and suppose I don't get it taken care of and die, then the taxpayers will be supporting my two children until they are 18, because their father's mission in life is to see how little as possible someone can actually work and still stay alive. They would be on welfare in an instant.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Melissa said:


> I am good friends with a woman who is a doctor and she said that literally half of her expenses are related directly to dealing with the insurance companies.


So *forcing *people to buy health insurance won't do a thing to lower health care costs? :shrug:


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Shygal said:


> Being an RN yes I could have probably found the money for that visit. My mother, brother and father however, probably could not. And when my one visit stretches into two, three, four , more (I already have 2 more follow up appointments), then I don't believe I could find the money either.
> 
> I know a lot of people that couldn't come up with the money for it. And bearfootfarm says I dont NEED those tests and workups, etc, I do if I want to live and be healthy. Some things arent fixed by changing diet, etc. My family has a huge heart history and suppose I don't get it taken care of and die, then the taxpayers will be supporting my two children until they are 18, because their father's mission in life is to see how little as possible someone can actually work and still stay alive. They would be on welfare in an instant.


Just a few thoughts...

1. As an RN, you are in high demand. You have the medical knowledge to recognize symptoms and warning signs.
2. Knowing you may have problems in the future, I think you would take as many preventable steps as possible. Most of those cost little to nothing.
3. Being an RN means you have a choice of where you work. Seems to me you would pick an employer based not only on monetary compensation, but with a heavy emphasis on affordable benefits.

I work where I work, because my wife's medication runs almost $15K/yr. Yeah, sometimes I get fed up with work stuff, but then I cowboy up and go back to it.

Life is all about choices...


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

blooba said:


> Were you making half a penny an hr back then?.......lol :nana:
> 
> Shygal still don't even know what the subject of this thread is AND SHE STARTED IT. So I have no clue on how she even knows when its getting sidetracked.She's just trying to get people banned that she doesn't like but we're not stupid enough to fall for her trickery.


I can't remember what the going wage was...we both worked a year & saved for DH to go to college & only employment was part-time for him at a gro store. But it was early 60's & & you pretty much can add a '0' to my figures due to inflation & get what would be spent today.
$.25/gal for gas. $.39 for 1/2 gal of ice cream. $50/mo basement apt rent-$500 now. BUT-remember when an ice cream cone was $.05? Not just $.50 now.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Tricky Grama said:


> BUT-remember when an ice cream cone was $.05? Not just $.50 now.


50Â¢ ice cream cones? what dream world you live in? Some places are getting close to $5 ice cream cones.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Chuck said:


> Medical costs are unnaturally high because of tort law, medicare and the insurance industry. Mostly tort law.


Health care costs are high because of the nature of catastrophic illness. Unlike dental health, which can be managed out of pocket with a dental discount plan, major medical health can turn without warning. The result is that sudden illnesses routinely cost in excess of $250,000 to deal with. Some illnesses can even cost $1 million or more. That's not the kind of thing most people can do out of pocket.

Tort reform isn't going to help. We have tort reform in Nevada already in place. I'm confident that you will find medical costs on Las Vegas in line with the rest of the country.

I'll tell you what will help though, and that's medical insurance which includes medical tourism. Yes, that's right, outsource our major medical procedures overseas. We could take away their $250K heart attacks and send them overseas to be done for $10K. Maybe that will spur some innovation.


----------



## Jenn (Nov 9, 2004)

I haven't gotten on my soap box for a few months so here goes. Medical costs are high for many reasons. As Chuck says I think it probably started with post WW2 wage price fixing and work connected insurance inflating prices because we don;t have to count the cost. Malpractice and fear of it add some but some estimates are under 5% for direct costs- indirect is harder to measure. Insurance is the biggest added cost- 30% or so. I have heard as fact that Canadian hospital billing departments have a handful of staff- 1-3 for filing Canadian system bills and more than that for the handful of American tourists whose insurance paperwork is as much as that of dozens of Canadians.

Aside from having extra staff to do insurance paperwork doctors (like me when last I worked) waste lots of time doing extra forms making phone calls changing prescriptions to adjust things so the service medicine or procedure will be paid for by that specific insurance company. Just having the same coverage and paperwork would save countless hours and dollars. I could say 'well get this done' and know it's covered or 'this might be the best thign but you'd have to pay for it yourself so come back when you have $15,000 to try it'

There are plenty of rich people on HT Melissa says- or at least we claim to be- but no matter how rich you are you can not save up for catastrophes> Such as in my family DD17 having a premature baby that stayed in hospital for a year or so (and that wouldn't be on our tricare unless the baby daddy was a soldier) along with ICU stays for a few of the rest of us if we had no insurance. That specifically is why we have insurance, so that we know we can go ahead and get what seems best medically without counting the cost. I will probably carry insurance on my kids if they don't have it under law or somehow else so that I don't go broke doing what most parents will do if they need money for care someday. Many folks (not all of us on HT) have so little and have a homestead law so if they have a huge hospital bill they can declare bankruptcy and drive on in the same house just with ruined credit and depleted savings. I happen to feel that is an awful thign to happen to anyone especially when they are ill, that folks who have to do that cost ME and all the rest of us taxpayers and insurance buyers extra money, and that the hospital and doctors give worse care to those whose bills will not be paid. Sure when you have your heart attack they'll admit you and care for you right then but they won't have done the best by you- help you PREVENT the heart attack and then continue helping you get better and prevent a second attack. Until you get disability or old age medicare you'll be getting substandard care if your plan now is to pay out of pocket and the pockets are emptied.

Hey, why do you think we have medicare? Because even we Americans decided that it was obscene for old people to die or languish sickening because of poor planning on their own part. Those of you who think any government intervention in medical care for folks is bad, please work hard to overturn medicare for all, certainly for yourselves. 

And as for me? I think it's obscene that YOUNG people and folks not yet 65 who aren't as smart or rich or lucky as I have been _so far_ get substandard care, that a friend of mine (and many patients of mine are) is in pain or otehrwise not properly treated because the free medicine from a drug company is two months late coming (free? free? it took two hours of paperwork by the doctor and his staff let alone all the phone calls and paperwork by the sick person's family and friends)....

OK I'll hush up for another few months.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Jenn said:


> Hey, why do you think we have medicare? Because even we Americans decided that it was obscene for old people to die or languish sickening because of poor planning on their own part. Those of you who think any government intervention in medical care for folks is bad, please work hard to overturn medicare for all, certainly for yourselves.
> 
> And as for me? I think it's obscene that YOUNG people and folks not yet 65 who aren't as smart or rich or lucky as I have been _so far_ get substandard care, that a friend of mine (and many patients of mine are) is in pain or otehrwise not properly treated because the free medicine from a drug company is two months late coming (free? free? it took two hours of paperwork by the doctor and his staff let alone all the phone calls and paperwork by the sick person's family and friends)....


Part of the conservative strategy is to deny that the lack of adequate medical care you describe is even possible. I don't know that the denial does them any good politically, but maybe it just satisfies their conscience.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

blooba said:


> 50Â¢ ice cream cones? what dream world you live in? Some places are getting close to $5 ice cream cones.


That's what I was trying to say-you can add a '0' to about anything to get what it was worth then & now, EXCEPT an ice cream cone. They were a nickel so SHOULD be 4 bits...but they are more like what-$5?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> no matter how rich you are you can not save up for catastrophes


That's why people set up PAYMENT plans.
And the VAST majority never have a "catastrophic" illness.



> Those of you who think any government intervention in medical care for folks is bad, please work hard to overturn medicare for all, certainly for yourselves


Medicare has NOTHING to do with Obamacare.
It's just the argument it's supporters use when logic fails them.

Many have said it would have been much better just to extend Medicare to everyone rather than pass the monstrosity of a bill that the Left wanted.

After all the rhetoric, it STILL remains that life isn't fair, and not everyone is going to get everything they want for free.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's why people set up PAYMENT plans.
> And the VAST majority never have a "catastrophic" illness.


The vast majority of us don't have our houses burn down either, but we still carry fire insurance.


----------



## Junkman (Dec 17, 2005)

This is a bit of a subject change, but my car insurance went up $154.40 per year. When we inquired we were told it was for under-insured motorists and un-insured motorists. BUT, in WV you are not to have drivers license if you are un-insured. So does that mean we are paying for people driving around illegally with NO insurance or inadequate coverage? I guess so.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Junkman said:


> So does that mean we are paying for people driving around illegally with NO insurance or inadequate coverage? I guess so.


But..But..But,,,But how is that it's mandated for every driver?


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Part of the conservative strategy is to deny that the lack of adequate medical care you describe is even possible. I don't know that the denial does them any good politically, but maybe it just satisfies their conscience.


NO, and NO again. We say to FIX what is in place, expand the boundaries of it. This ridiculous bill had NOTHING to do with FIXING anything and everything to do with razzle dazzling the public with stardust and candy canes while benefitting everyone BUT the sick and needy!!!:viking:


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Jolly said:


> Just a few thoughts...
> 
> 1. As an RN, you are in high demand. You have the medical knowledge to recognize symptoms and warning signs.
> 2. Knowing you may have problems in the future, I think you would take as many preventable steps as possible. Most of those cost little to nothing.


I already DO that. But sometimes things are just not preventable by diet and exercise and lifestyle, especially hereditary or genetic disorders.



Jolly said:


> 3. Being an RN means you have a choice of where you work. Seems to me you would pick an employer based not only on monetary compensation, but with a heavy emphasis on affordable benefits.
> 
> 
> Life is all about choices...


I already did that.


----------



## Jenn (Nov 9, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's why people set up PAYMENT plans.
> And the VAST majority never have a "catastrophic" illness.
> 
> Medicare has NOTHING to do with Obamacare.
> ...


Payment plans have to do when you choose to try to pay off your hospital bill after an emergency. No specialist or hospital is required to give you a payment plan to pay for 'needed' but not emergency treatments like bypass surgery or the few thousand$ involved in properly evaluating and treating a near heart attack or diabetes. (Of course an upper middle class person like myself thinks it should be possible to budget a few thousand $ for stuff like that...)

The vast majority of us do not have a 'catastrophic' illness (guess that means more than you can settle with a payment plan) before we reach medicare age. Almost all of us incur large hospital costs when we die and many of us, luckily, several times and many years BEFORE we die, but more often in our 60s and 70s when medicare pays for it. Of course those of us who have illnesses or injuries which OUGHT to incur such hospital costs, but who have no insurance, are more likely to not get care or to die.

There is no such thing as Obamacare. If there WERE a socialized, government run medicine coverage for all plan (as Fox viewers were threatened that passage of the health care bill would lead to) it would be EXACTLY like medicare. A better name would be Medicare for All.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

beccachow said:


> NO, and NO again. We say to FIX what is in place, expand the boundaries of it.


Really? Give me a link where any conservative or republican politician proposed that in the past 16 years before Obamacare was proposed. No, that's just a line used to try to get the democrats to drop the bill. That's exactly what they did with Clinton's health care bill, then we heard crickets for 16 years.

I'm calling you on this one. Either provide a link or take it back.


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

'K, here is the proposal that was given to the Obama administration last year, the one that was ignored and who's very existence was questioned. Here is a link to read more: 
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ny-says-gop-health-plan-would-lower-premiums/

But here in particular is the drive to expand coverage and fix the system in place:

&#8226; Favoring consumer choice over a guaranteed safety net and minimum benefits. The Republican plan would try to expand coverage and reduce costs voluntarily, primarily by increasing consumer options, rather than the Democratic method of using government leverage (such as mandates, penalties and subsidies) to corral more uninsured Americans into obtaining coverage. The Republican bill would allow Americans to buy health insurance across state lines, something that is currently not allowed, and would allow small businesses to pool insurance coverage through trade associations, an option only allowed for larger companies and labor unions today. The bill would also expand the use of health savings accounts, which allow people to use pre-tax dollars to pay medical expenses. None of these programs would be mandatory.


***There was a pretty extensive proposal from the Republicans, well thought out and SHORT, to the point...that Obama denied ever existed:

Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., one of the House Republican delegates to the summit and a physician himself, used a portion of his time to tout his party's plan.

"We put forth a plan earlier in the year, during the debate, that actually the Congressional Budget Office showed that it brings down the cost of premiums up to about 10 percent," he said to fellow summit participants. "And, actually, for individuals [and] families seeking insurance in the individual market, those cost savings could even be higher."

Before we analyze Boustany's comment, let's take a look at the House Republican proposal, which, due to the Republican minority's lack of institutional power in the House, has garnered much less attention than its Democratic counterpart. A Democratic bill narrowly passed the chamber last fall.

As we originally outlined in November, the Republicans produced a much smaller bill (219 pages vs. roughly 2,000 for the Democrats) and one with a more limited scope. It relies on GOP principles of consumer choice, no tax hikes, limited government involvement and caps on lawsuits.
<snip>

***Savings? Maybe, under the proposed non-existent plan:

The CBO projected that the cost of health insurance premiums would fall under the Republican plan, partly because of the medical malpractice reforms. In the market for individually purchased insurance policies -- "the individual market" -- premiums would fall by 5 percent to 8 percent by 2016. For the small-group pool, consisting of smaller businesses, premiums would fall by 7 percent to 10 percent. And in the large group market, for larger employers, they would fall by up to 3 percent.

***So nanner nanner boo boo, I ain't taking it back.  The Republican's nonexistent bill covered things like the High Risk Pool:


&#8226; High-risk pools. The Republican bill would offer aid to states to establish "high-risk pools," groups of sicker (and thus more expensive) patients who typically have trouble finding insurance today because of restrictions on pre-existing conditions. It would also boost state-based reinsurance mechanisms that can help insurers that find it too costly to insure such pools. The Democratic bills use these pools, but only as a stopgap on the way to creating a new system.

And was first read in November, 2009: 

The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan arm of Congress that analyzes legislation, took a detailed look at the Republican proposal when it was released. The figures Boustany cited in his Blair House comments come from this Nov. 4, 2009, analysis.

The CBO had a hard time trying to pinpoint how much would be saved, they guesstimated between 8-10% for average consumers, with some saving more,. some a bit less...but that savings WOULD occur, there was no doubt.

Read the link for more, like the malpractice reform and such that would drive HC costs down.

In short, whether LIbs believe it or not, we HAD a counter-plan, and since it didn't fit into this preconceived notion of forcing everyone to buy insurance, it was ignored. Then it's very existence was denied. It surely would have been a great jump off point for true bi-partisan negotiation if Pelosi and company didn't have a 5 year old's all or nothing mentality about it. Interesting, now that you have seen the bare bones of the Republican proposal, how can you excuse Obama claiming that the Republicans didn't try, and excuse the closed door meetings excluding the Republicans?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> The vast majority of us don't have our houses burn down either, but we still carry fire insurance.


Because mortgage holders require it.
If your house is paid for, no one FORCES you to buy it.

Apples and oranges


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> And no, most dont have it and waste it. I dont know where you live, but around here *most people live paycheck to paycheck *and do not have fancy cars and big tvs, etc.


And yet the Govt wants to FORCE them to buy something most of them won't use enough to break even.

You can "what if" forever, but many people DON'T have large medical bills, and many that DO can pay it themselves


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> No specialist or hospital is required to give you a payment plan


I never said they were "required", but most of them WILL do it


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *Give me a link *where any conservative or republican politician proposed that in the past 16 years before Obamacare was proposed.


Give us a link to "yellowcake wasn't really yellowcake"


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> And yet the Govt wants to FORCE them to buy something most of them won't use enough to break even.
> 
> You can "what if" forever, but many people DON'T have large medical bills, and many that DO can pay it themselves


The people that live paycheck to paycheck will get subsidies so they will most likely have NO cost to themselves for their insurance. But a lot of you conveniently forget that part when you complain about the government "forcing" people to do something.

And many people DO have large medical bills and cant pay them. Our hospital writes off a lot of medical bills for people that wont/cant pay, but guess who pays for that? The ones that DO have insurance, and the ones that pay their bills themselves, with increased costs.

You are paying for people without insurance NOW, whether you have insurance or not.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> And many people DO have large medical bills and cant pay them.


Oh no, Our 2001 study in 5 states found that medical problems contributed to at least 46.2% of
all bankruptcies. 

The world's coming to an end.......

The sky is falling............

We're all gonna go bankrupt..............

We're all going to die...............

This has to be passed now.............

For it to take effect four years from now...........

The reality of it is only one third of one percent of the population actually goes bankrupt and only 46% of them have ANY medical debt. So guess there's alot of it being paid.

Whew......thought we were all goners there. :buds: Ok, now that crisis is averted lets repeal the National Health Insurance Mandate!.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> Oh no, Our 2001 study in 5 states found that medical problems contributed to at least 46.2% of
> all bankruptcies.
> 
> The reality of it is only one third of one percent of the population actually goes bankrupt and only 46% of them have ANY medical debt. So guess there's alot of it being paid.
> .



5 states. What 5 states? Who is "our" that did the study? Where is your source for this and for saying 1/3 of 1 percent of the population goes bankrupt?

You don't think that 46% is a SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT? Thats nearly half of the bankruptcies that had medical problems contribute to the bankruptcy. You do realize that not everyone that loses everything, files bankruptcy, either, right?

Just realized you said 2001. This is 2010. This study from 2007 says more than 60 percent of them are related to medical bills. 
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/06/05/bankruptcy.medical.bills/


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> 5 states. What 5 states? Who is "our" that did the study? Where is your source for this aond for saying 1/3 of 1 percent of the population goes bankrupt?
> 
> You dont think that 46% is a SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT? Thats nearly half of the bankruptcies that had medical problems contribute to the bankruptcy. You do realize that not everyone that loses everything, files bankruptcy, either, right?


Sorry for not providing sources. This is a study linked to in many pro-Obamacare sites. http://www.pnhp.org/new_bankruptcy_study/Bankruptcy-2009.pdf

Although other studies show differently. http://www.bankruptcylawfirms.com/interest/bankruptcy-statistics.html <--- they say 12%

And here's how many actually go bankrupt. http://www.bankruptcyaction.com/USbankstats.htm

And no I don't think that even half of one third of one percent is significant.I think that many people get struck by lightening every year.Shall we mandate everyone where a tin foil hat attached to a grounding rod?


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Your second link says one out of 70 people have gone bankrupt. Not sure where you are even seeing 12 percent there anywhere.
I can't open the PDF file, my Adobe keeps giving me an error message lately when I try to open them in a browser.

Your third link says this -
Half have experienced a serious health problem;
Fewer than 9% have not suffered a job loss, medical event or divorce

You realize your half of one third of one percent (which I am not sure of your math there) also includes all the children in the US too? How many percent of working adults file for medical reasons?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Really? Give me a link where any conservative or republican politician proposed that in the past 16 years before Obamacare was proposed. No, that's just a line used to try to get the democrats to drop the bill. That's exactly what they did with Clinton's health care bill, then we heard crickets for 16 years.
> 
> I'm calling you on this one. Either provide a link or take it back.


I gave you examples of that back b/4 this passed- yrs ago the "Rs" proposed reform & dims would not hear of it...b/c it wasn't THEIR proposal. You probably didn't even read it.
Don't give us that tired ol' retoric that just isn't true.


----------



## QuiltingLady2 (Jan 3, 2007)

Shygal said:


> I have been having some heart skipping going on. I went to my doctor last week, they took one tube of blood and did an ekg. I have to go back in 2 weeks.
> 
> I got the statement from my insurance company today. 574$. for one visit, a tube of blood and an ekg. Probably more than that coming next appointment too, since I had to wear a holter monitor for a day.
> 
> ...


Shygal we had something similar happen in our family this year. Son's apendics had to be removed. The emergency visit, tests, and emergency hospital stay was almost 35K. Yes, we've paid into hc insurance for years. Thank goodness we had something and thankgoodness he was still under our insurance. He's 22. If he had been 25 and off our insurance then we would have had to take a second mortgage on the house to pay for his surgery. 
Now he'll have hc even after he's 25. Out of pocket would have been astronomical. I hope not a think comes of this for you. Hope all is well. 
QL2


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> But a lot of you *conveniently forget *that part when you complain about the government "forcing" people to do something.


The Govt IS forcing us, with penalties if we don't comply

Those "subsidies" come from US.
Stop trying to pretend it's somehow "free"



> *You are paying *for people without insurance NOW, whether you have insurance or not


. 

More mindless rhetoric.

I've been to a Dr 3 times in the last 10 years, and haven't paid any "extra" for anyone else.
Under BO's "improvements" , i would have bought 10 years worth of insurance that I didn't use.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

beccachow said:


> 'K, here is the proposal that was given to the Obama administration last year, the one that was ignored and who's very existence was questioned. Here is a link to read more:
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ny-says-gop-health-plan-would-lower-premiums/
> 
> But here in particular is the drive to expand coverage and fix the system in place:
> ...


None of that addressed my question. My question was about republican health care proposals after the Clinton plan and before the Obama plan. I don't believe that health care reform was even brought up during that 16 year period; which indicates to me that republicans did not what to fix health care, or even believed that health care reform was necessary.


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

We are going to be paying for people without insurance...this time, under the guise of GETTING them insurance. That is WHY we are facing fines...so that the ones without insurance will skip off without paying for insurance, because WE already have paid it for them. Do you guys not see that, or not care?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Now he'll have hc even after he's 25


No, he won't, because it doesnt take effect until 2014


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I don't believe that health care reform was even brought up during that 16 year period


Then I guess no one wanted it, huh?
It's for certain the majority don't want THIS version


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Shygal said:


> The people that live paycheck to paycheck will get subsidies so they will most likely have NO cost to themselves for their insurance. But a lot of you conveniently forget that part when you complain about the government "forcing" people to do something.
> 
> And many people DO have large medical bills and cant pay them. Our hospital writes off a lot of medical bills for people that wont/cant pay, but guess who pays for that? The ones that DO have insurance, and the ones that pay their bills themselves, with increased costs.
> 
> You are paying for people without insurance NOW, whether you have insurance or not.


But now, the government has far greater access to our lives and more control.
This is not about health care.
It's a scam.
It's just going to make it more expensive and harder to get.
Mark my words.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> > *You are paying *for people without insurance NOW, whether you have insurance or not
> 
> 
> More mindless rhetoric.
> ...


Actually you have paid extra for medical care for others. But you don't pay for it at the Dr's office, you pay for it in extra income tax.

You see, when someone doesn't pay his medical bill the provider turns it over to the IRS as a bad debt. A portion of that bill is paid for in tax credits to the provider. Since there is so much bad medical debt in this country right now, we have to pay a higher tax rate to make up for the huge tax credits it creates.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Nevada said:


> Actually you have paid extra for medical care for others. But you don't pay for it at the Dr's office, you pay for it in extra income tax.
> 
> You see, when someone doesn't pay his medical bill the provider turns it over to the IRS as a bad debt. A portion of that bill is paid for in tax credits to the provider. Since there is so much bad medical debt in this country right now, we have to pay a higher tax rate to make up for the huge tax credits it creates.


When someone steals a piece of bubble gum from 7-11 they lose out on taxes too. Shall we pass a bubble gum mandate now too? 

Everyone must by bubble gum, that will solve the worlds problems.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

blooba said:


> When someone steals a piece of bubble gum from 7-11 they lose out on taxes too. Shall we pass a bubble gum mandate now too?
> 
> Everyone must by bubble gum, that will solve the worlds problems.


So you are saying people should be required to buy bubble gum so they can use it to self medicate bullet wounds?


----------



## Guest (Apr 19, 2010)

QuiltingLady2 said:


> Shygal we had something similar happen in our family this year. Son's apendics had to be removed. The emergency visit, tests, and emergency hospital stay was almost 35K. Yes, we've paid into hc insurance for years. Thank goodness we had something and thankgoodness he was still under our insurance. He's 22. If he had been 25 and off our insurance then we would have had to take a second mortgage on the house to pay for his surgery.
> Now he'll have hc even after he's 25. Out of pocket would have been astronomical. I hope not a think comes of this for you. Hope all is well.
> QL2


Isn't a 22 year old person responsible for their own bills??


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

zong said:


> Isn't a 22 year old person responsible for their own bills??


Not now, with Obamacare you are required to carry insurance until your kids 25 and we will be paying for all the little baby factories running around out there regardless of age.....OH BOY.....


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

blooba said:


> When someone steals a piece of bubble gum from 7-11 they lose out on taxes too. Shall we pass a bubble gum mandate now too?
> 
> Everyone must by bubble gum, that will solve the worlds problems.


My reply only corrected Bearfootfarm's contention that he hasn't contributed to the medical care of others.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

zong said:


> Isn't a 22 year old person responsible for their own bills??


Yes. Unless they still live at home and are a college student. They can remain under their parent's insurance until the age of 23.


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

Melissa said:


> What if NO ONE had health insurance and everyone had to pay out of pocket? I think after an adjustment period the prices would level out to a rational amount. I know doctors go to school a long time etc... but I have seen some office calls of five minutes that are billed for $300-400. When people have insurance they think little of these amounts, if they had to reach into their own pockets and pay the bill, they might think a bit more about it. Insurance has ruined any chance for an honest price structure in the medical arena.



yes indeed and even more so when it is made mandatory! its just a license to steal.

hopeing the best for you shygal


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The Govt IS forcing us, with penalties if we don't comply
> 
> Those "subsidies" come from US.
> Stop trying to pretend it's somehow "free"
> ...


No one is pretending its "free". I said that low income people wont have to put out the thousands of dollars you would like us to believe, due to subsidies. 

And no, its not "mindless rhetoric". You HAVE paid extra for a lot of other people. Nevada is right about the taxes, but you have also paid for it in increased costs. Your bill that may have been 50 dollars, may well have been 35-40 if those increased costs weren't already there. Im not sure why you keep denying that happens. So you only pay 100 dollars for example, what makes you think the real cost of that visit was not 80 dollars but due to having to cover the people that DONT pay, the costs to them are increased? 
I really don't understand why you dont seem to believe that.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> No one is pretending its "free". I said that low income people wont have to put out the thousands of dollars you would like us to believe, due to subsidies.


NO, those low income people are already covered under Medicaid so what was the purpose of Obamacare again?

Oh yea, that 15% of uninsured people that probably 1% of actually owe medical bills and then the 10% of them that actually can't pay.(47,000 out of 300 million people) Man sure glad this is going to be worth $4000/yr for me.


And no I have no proof of those numbers except the uninsured amount. But they are probably somewhat accurate.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> NO, those low income people are already covered under Medicaid so what was the purpose of Obamacare again?
> 
> Oh yea, that 15% of uninsured people that probably 1% of actually owe medical bills and then the 10% of them that actually can't pay.(47,000 out of 300 million people) Man sure glad this is going to be worth $4000/yr for me.
> 
> ...


No, those low income people are NOT already covered under medicaid. The children perhaps could get medicaid, but not low income adults, at least not in MA and VT. If you are not pregnant, do not have children, are not disabled, have assets (even a car is counted), you have a snowballs chance in hades of getting medicaid.

Here are Massachusetts' requirements. Vermont's are similar. Have you really been thinking that just because you are low income, you automatically are eligible for medicaid???

http://www.massresources.org/pages.cfm?contentID=35&pageID=13&subpages=yes&SecondLeveldynamicID=564&DynamicID=559



> To be eligible for MassHealth, you must live in Massachusetts, have low to medium income, and meet certain general eligibility requirements. Eligibility requirements differ depending on your age, family situation, work history, immigration status, and health care needs.
> 
> To be eligible for one of the coverages offered by MassHealth, you must be in one of these categories:
> 
> ...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> And no, its not "mindless rhetoric". You HAVE paid extra for a lot of other people.


Yes it is and NO I haven't
Repetition doesn't make misconceptions into reality

No matter how much you hype it, it still comes down to STEALING from one group to support another.



> I really don't understand why you dont seem to believe that.


Because it's NOT TRUE, as I stated when I said "mindless rhetoric".
It's still extortion to force people to buy something they don't want


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> No, those low income people are NOT already covered under medicaid. The children perhaps could get medicaid, but not low income adults, at least not in MA and VT. If you are not pregnant, do not have children, are not disabled, have assets (even a car is counted), you have a snowballs chance in hades of getting medicaid.
> 
> Here are Massachusetts' requirements. Vermont's are similar. Have you really been thinking that just because you are low income, you automatically are eligible for medicaid???


Well that's because Massachusetts has already been Obamacared, Man I'll bet their low income residents are glad....lol

I'll bet all the others can't wait till the entire country gets Obamacared. 

But in the rest of the country as of now low income adults and families CAN get Medicaid.


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Yes it is and NO I haven't
> Repetition doesn't make misconceptions into reality
> 
> No matter how much you hype it, it still comes down to STEALING from one group to support another.
> ...


No, its NOT extortion. Who do you think covers the costs for those that come to the ER with no insurance and can't/don't pay? You are really kidding yourself if you think hospitals, doctors, etc do NOT raise costs to cover losses. EVERY business does it. 

Where is your PROOF to back up your claim, that it is not passed on by rising costs? Where is the link , that you are so fond of asking other people to provide?


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> No, its NOT extortion. Who do you think covers the costs for those that come to the ER with no insurance and can't/don't pay? You are really kidding yourself if you think hospitals, doctors, etc do NOT raise costs to cover losses. EVERY business does it.
> 
> Where is your PROOF to back up your claim, that it is not passed on by rising costs? Where is the link , that you are so fond of asking other people to provide?


So you believe that everyone should shell out thousands of dollars a year to pay for the @40,000 people that have unpaid medical bills that have to go bankrupt when over $500 BILLION is being spent on unnecessary medical care. Wonder how high that number will be with everyone on Obamacare.

From http://www.aarpmagazine.org/health/health_care_costs.html


> For example, if you are a Medicare recipient and you have a heart attack in a region where doctors practice less aggressive care, like Salt Lake City, your care will cost Medicare about $23,500 over the course of a year. But if you have your heart attack in a place like Los Angeles, the bill will be closer to $30,000.
> 
> The wide gulf in spending between the two cities is not because of different prices. Sure, everything costs a bit more in Los Angeles, including nurses&#8217; salaries and the laundering of hospital linens, but not enough to account for the extra amount Medicare pays for a heart attack. The reason the same patient&#8217;s care costs more there than in Salt Lake City is that doctors and hospitals in Los Angeles tend to give their patients more tests, procedures, and surgeries, and their patients tend to spend more days in the hospital.
> 
> But here&#8217;s the important part. All that extra care in L.A. doesn&#8217;t lead to better outcomes. *As it turns out, heart attack patients who receive the most care actually die at slightly higher rates than those who receive less care.*


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> Well that's because Massachusetts has already been Obamacared, Man I'll bet their low income residents are glad....lol
> 
> I'll bet all the others can't wait till the entire country gets Obamacared.
> 
> But in the rest of the country as of now low income adults and families CAN get Medicaid.


No, they CANT. Look up the eligibility for the states. Vermont is even MORE STRICT than MA. 

You really believe that low income adults can get medicaid? Some can if they have kids, or are disabled, and under certain asset levels, but you are really talking out of your hat on this one.

Look it up, they are ALL the same in the basic requirements.

http://http://www.cms.gov/medicaideligibility/01_overview.asp?

Here is Vermont's. Im not even listing the income levels needed, because you have to fit in one of these four categories FIRST.



> In addition to the Medicaid rules listed above, individuals must be *both * financially and categorically eligible to secure benefits.
> 
> A. Categorical Eligibility
> 
> ...


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

blooba said:


> So you believe that everyone should shell out thousands of dollars a year to pay for the @40,000 people that have unpaid medical bills that have to go bankrupt when over $500 BILLION is being spent on unnecessary medical care. Wonder how high that number will be with everyone on Obamacare.
> 
> From http://www.aarpmagazine.org/health/health_care_costs.html


Please show me where I said that.


----------



## blooba (Feb 9, 2010)

Shygal said:


> Please show me where I said that.


It is this thread http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/showthread.php?t=349368

You have said we have high healthcare costs because we are paying for people that do not pay. Hence we ALL need health insurance to pay those high costs.

My self education hasn't failed me I am able to add 1+1 in your posts. Lemme guess you had public education and can't add 1+1?


----------

