Healthcare Projected To Cost Near $50 Trillion Over Next Ten Years

[Brain357]

I would be more concerned about abuses by doctors and health care providers than I would be about patients abusing the system. Yes, you can have people going to the doctor for every sniffle, free of charge. In a system where everyone has equal right to access, patients don't abuse the system. But doctors and clinics can and do.

People don't go to the doctor for every sniffle because it's too much trouble to do so. Making the appointment, taking time off work, sitting around the office with a bunch of sick people. Yes we have shortages of caregivers here, but please remember that the the Medicial Industrial Complex controls the number of people entering medical school, and keeps the number of new doctors artificially low to keep prices high.

Costs will go down. Substantially. I read an article a few years ago written by a doctor who had worked in both Canada and the US and he said that the made more money in the US, but he got to keep more of the money he made in Canada. That was because the government controls reimbursement rates for all procedures in Canada. Reimbursement rates are control by the Provinces, so they're adjusted based on local costs. This doctor said he spent more time with patients and was able to see more patients in Canada, and focus on their care, not on getting pre-approvals with insurance companies. He also didn't need a third party billing company to collect co-pays and bill insurance companies. His receptionist billed the province.

We have no co-pays on doctor visits or hospital care. You can buy a private or semi-private room in hospital, as well as cable TV and computer access, but our program only covers prescriptions for children seniors, and doesn't cover dental, so we have supplemental insurance with co-pays there, through employers.

A agree that abuse from doctors and clinics and pharma are also big concerns. Regarding your other point, do you think Canada has better medical care than the US?

People who I know with experience with both prefer Canada.

Until they are on a waiting list for 3 years.... Free is always preferable, until you find out the difference in quality.

By the way, do they also prefer the taxes?

Nobody goes on 3 year waiting lists, that’s a myth. Yes some things may take a few months. But here people don’t even go to doctor for a few months cause of $$.

Oh bull crap.

Timely Medical | Timely Surgery at Affordable Prices

You are telling me that this for profit company, that has been in operation for 15 years, whose entire business plan is helping people in Canada escape multi-year long waiting lists.... is operating in a country that has no waiting lists? Bull crap.

And by the way, the Canadian government itself disagrees with you.

Management of MRI Wait Lists in Canada

"Our results document that most MRI facilities in Canada have a substantial wait list problem, with some centres reporting wait times of up to one month for urgent scans and up to several years for non-urgent scans."

"The wait times for the most elective category varied from 28 days to three years, with one centre stating that they were simply unable to scan cases prioritized as elective."

So the government of Canada itself, is admitting this problem.

You people know absolutely nothing, and spout off like you have a clue. The facts prove your opinion wrong.

Right I just know people who have used both.

 

[Brain357]

So you have no solution.

Let me describe this argument to you with something OTHER than healthcare, because for some reason, you go fucking retarded on this topic.

Mechanic: "You need transmission rebuild. It's gonna cost you $20,000."
Car Owner: "I can't pay that. That's almost as much as the car is worth."
Mechanic: "Tough shit. You could try that guy down the street. He's much cheaper. Only $3500."
Car Owner: "But, surely he will end up completely destroying my car if that is all he is charging. So, I will go with you. Here's my credit card."

That is what you are telling me that I must accept and subsidize.

Well, FUCK YOU!!!

I have no solution because you can't fix stupid. Stupid people deserve the consequences of their stupidity.

.

Right, you have no solution.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I suspect people would be limping even with successful surgery if it means a discount. That wouldn’t decrease the cost of surgery...

So, a mechanic who fails to fix your car is allow to charge you AGAIN for his second attempt?

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Right, you have no solution.

It's not my problem.

If you want to be a dumbass, that should not affect me.

.

 

[Brain357]

I suspect people would be limping even with successful surgery if it means a discount. That wouldn’t decrease the cost of surgery...

So, a mechanic who fails to fix your car is allow to charge you AGAIN for his second attempt?

.

A car doesn’t limp. If there is an issue still needing fixing it’s clear. If a patient says there is still an issue and isn’t paying, well only that person can say if it’s true. And this certainly won’t lower the cost of surgery.

 

[Brain357]

Right, you have no solution.

It's not my problem.

If you want to be a dumbass, that should not affect me.

.

So no solution.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

A car doesn’t limp. If there is an issue still needing fixing it’s clear. If a patient says there is still an issue and isn’t paying, well only that person can say if it’s true. And this certainly won’t lower the cost of surgery.

There would certainly be a physical manifestation of the patient's condition, right? You could look and see if that knee is fixed.

And, that patient could fake it, regardless of how much the surgery costs.

Lowering the cost of surgery involves people refusing to pay unreasonable fees for a service. We are not required to accept the notion that surgery must be 100x the cost of other services or we will all die. That is complete bullshit.

You don't want a solution.

You just want me to pay for your shit and you want that shit to be covered in lace and gold plated.

.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The largest tax break in America is for employers to pay for insurance. If there's no tax incentive they aren't gonna pay or give anyone a raise because their competitors can undercut their product prices by cutting costs if the tax break is gone. So, it's beyond naïve to say patients should just pay.

And if someone is having a stroke or just had their 4 wheeler flip and landed on their head, trying to argue consumer choice is either a willful refusal to face facts or an outright lie.

BUT, if there's a financial advantage to shopping for who prescribes your bloodpressure meds or statins and does your cancer screening, I don't think anyone disagrees that prices would at least be contained.

Dude, the consumer choice comes in the plans and provisions you make PRIOR to having a catastrophe. To suddenly play obtuse and pretend anyone's talking about, "Oh, you have a stroke and THEN you shop around for healthcare" accomplishes nothing but to make you look both pathetically stupid and disingenuous.

 

[Brain357]

A car doesn’t limp. If there is an issue still needing fixing it’s clear. If a patient says there is still an issue and isn’t paying, well only that person can say if it’s true. And this certainly won’t lower the cost of surgery.

There would certainly be a physical manifestation of the patient's condition, right? You could look and see if that knee is fixed.

And, that patient could fake it, regardless of how much the surgery costs.

Lowering the cost of surgery involves people refusing to pay unreasonable fees for a service. We are not required to accept the notion that surgery must be 100x the cost of other services or we will all die. That is complete bullshit.

You don't want a solution.

You just want me to pay for your shit and you want that shit to be covered in lace and gold plated.

.

And if people refuse to pay the cost goes up.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

And if people refuse to pay the cost goes up.

No. They get no services.

But, doctor gets no patients.

Have you ever negotiated a single time in your entire life?

Jesus.

.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I would be more concerned about abuses by doctors and health care providers than I would be about patients abusing the system. Yes, you can have people going to the doctor for every sniffle, free of charge. In a system where everyone has equal right to access, patients don't abuse the system. But doctors and clinics can and do.

People don't go to the doctor for every sniffle because it's too much trouble to do so. Making the appointment, taking time off work, sitting around the office with a bunch of sick people. Yes we have shortages of caregivers here, but please remember that the the Medicial Industrial Complex controls the number of people entering medical school, and keeps the number of new doctors artificially low to keep prices high.

Costs will go down. Substantially. I read an article a few years ago written by a doctor who had worked in both Canada and the US and he said that the made more money in the US, but he got to keep more of the money he made in Canada. That was because the government controls reimbursement rates for all procedures in Canada. Reimbursement rates are control by the Provinces, so they're adjusted based on local costs. This doctor said he spent more time with patients and was able to see more patients in Canada, and focus on their care, not on getting pre-approvals with insurance companies. He also didn't need a third party billing company to collect co-pays and bill insurance companies. His receptionist billed the province.

We have no co-pays on doctor visits or hospital care. You can buy a private or semi-private room in hospital, as well as cable TV and computer access, but our program only covers prescriptions for children seniors, and doesn't cover dental, so we have supplemental insurance with co-pays there, through employers.

A agree that abuse from doctors and clinics and pharma are also big concerns. Regarding your other point, do you think Canada has better medical care than the US?

People who I know with experience with both prefer Canada.

Until they are on a waiting list for 3 years.... Free is always preferable, until you find out the difference in quality.

By the way, do they also prefer the taxes?

Nobody goes on 3 year waiting lists, that’s a myth. Yes some things may take a few months. But here people don’t even go to doctor for a few months cause of $$.

Oh bull crap.

Timely Medical | Timely Surgery at Affordable Prices

You are telling me that this for profit company, that has been in operation for 15 years, whose entire business plan is helping people in Canada escape multi-year long waiting lists.... is operating in a country that has no waiting lists? Bull crap.

And by the way, the Canadian government itself disagrees with you.

Management of MRI Wait Lists in Canada

"Our results document that most MRI facilities in Canada have a substantial wait list problem, with some centres reporting wait times of up to one month for urgent scans and up to several years for non-urgent scans."

"The wait times for the most elective category varied from 28 days to three years, with one centre stating that they were simply unable to scan cases prioritized as elective."

So the government of Canada itself, is admitting this problem.

You people know absolutely nothing, and spout off like you have a clue. The facts prove your opinion wrong.

I always love people who stubbornly cling to their debunked talking points LONG after the cat's out of the bag, don't you?

 

[Brain357]

And if people refuse to pay the cost goes up.

No. They get no services.

But, doctor gets no patients.

Have you ever negotiated a single time in your entire life?

Jesus.

.

They already had the surgery and now won’t pay. So the surgeon charges those who will pay more to make up for it.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

They already had the surgery and now won’t pay.

Why?

Sounds like the surgeon is a terrible business person.

So the surgeon charges those who will pay more to make up for it.

And, they don't have to pay either, under both your scenario and mine.
.

 

[Brain357]

They already had the surgery and now won’t pay.

Why?

Sounds like the surgeon is a terrible business person.

So the surgeon charges those who will pay more to make up for it.

And, they don't have to pay either, under both your scenario and mine.
.

So there is no downward pressure on pricing.

 

[Andylusion]

And if people refuse to pay the cost goes up.

No. They get no services.

But, doctor gets no patients.

Have you ever negotiated a single time in your entire life?

Jesus.

.

They already had the surgery and now won’t pay. So the surgeon charges those who will pay more to make up for it.

That's not entirely true.

Sometimes the hospital will eat the cost, and write it off as a tax deduction.

But usually the sell it to a debt collect to recoup the cost.

And other times, the people eventually pay. I went to the hospital without insurance, and I got this nifty thing called "a bill". Then I paid the bill. I paid $50 to $100 a month over 3 years, and paid it all.

But this line of reasoning is always baffling to me.

You are complaining because some people who refuse to pay the bill, end up causing the hospital to charge everyone else more money.
That is the essenses of your complain.

How is that worse than national health care, where now absolutely NO ONE pays the their own bill, and the entire cost is poured out on the tax payers?

Why do you think that in every country with government-health care, that the middle class pays 50% in taxes? They are paying for everyone who doesn't pay their bill.

So which is worse, you paying your own health insurance premiums? Or 50% in taxes?

You really think people are paying $25,000 a year in health insurance premiums? I don't think so. Average health insurance premiums yearly, is just about $3,000 a year.

5% of the median wage is $2,500. Sanders dishonestly proposed a 6% tax increase on the middle class. That wouldn't cover it.

One of the big universal care groups proposed an estimated 12% tax to cover universal health care in the US.
That would be $6,000 a year in taxes, which is double what health insurance currently costs.

But in reality, that wouldn't be enough to cover it either. Again, we know this from Europe. 5-year-survival rates are lower in Europe, and yet they have much higher taxes to cover health care expenses than we do.

That is the reality.

 

[Brain357]

And if people refuse to pay the cost goes up.

No. They get no services.

But, doctor gets no patients.

Have you ever negotiated a single time in your entire life?

Jesus.

.

They already had the surgery and now won’t pay. So the surgeon charges those who will pay more to make up for it.

That's not entirely true.

Sometimes the hospital will eat the cost, and write it off as a tax deduction.

But usually the sell it to a debt collect to recoup the cost.

And other times, the people eventually pay. I went to the hospital without insurance, and I got this nifty thing called "a bill". Then I paid the bill. I paid $50 to $100 a month over 3 years, and paid it all.

But this line of reasoning is always baffling to me.

You are complaining because some people who refuse to pay the bill, end up causing the hospital to charge everyone else more money.
That is the essenses of your complain.

How is that worse than national health care, where now absolutely NO ONE pays the their own bill, and the entire cost is poured out on the tax payers?

Why do you think that in every country with government-health care, that the middle class pays 50% in taxes? They are paying for everyone who doesn't pay their bill.

So which is worse, you paying your own health insurance premiums? Or 50% in taxes?

You really think people are paying $25,000 a year in health insurance premiums? I don't think so. Average health insurance premiums yearly, is just about $3,000 a year.

5% of the median wage is $2,500. Sanders dishonestly proposed a 6% tax increase on the middle class. That wouldn't cover it.

One of the big universal care groups proposed an estimated 12% tax to cover universal health care in the US.
That would be $6,000 a year in taxes, which is double what health insurance currently costs.

But in reality, that wouldn't be enough to cover it either. Again, we know this from Europe. 5-year-survival rates are lower in Europe, and yet they have much higher taxes to cover health care expenses than we do.

That is the reality.

Every single payer system I have seen is much lower cost than ours.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So there is no downward pressure on pricing.

WHAT THE FUCK????

You keep giving me scenarios where the patient is not required (or refuses) to find the best price, and the surgeon is not required to offer services at a reasonable price or compete with other surgeons for the patient's business.

Then, you summarily declare "there's no downward pressure." "You have no solutions."

If you need surgery, you pay for surgery. If you want to get paid for performing surgery, you get the money up front.

If the surgeon does not fix the problem, he does it again. If he still can't fix it, he gives you your money back and you go elsewhere.

If the surgeon is getting undercut by competitors, he must adjust his pricing or starve.

You keep telling me that patients will make stupid decisions and pay the max. You also keep telling me that they have no recourse when a surgeon fails to perform.

I have had it with this bullshit.

You want single payer because you are a lazy, envious, communist piece of shit. No amount of discussion is going to change that FACT.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Every single payer system I have seen is much lower cost than ours.

Lower cost TO WHOM????

 

[Brain357]

So there is no downward pressure on pricing.

WHAT THE FUCK????

You keep giving me scenarios where the patient is not required (or refuses) to find the best price, and the surgeon is not required to offer services at a reasonable price or compete with other surgeons for the patient's business.

Then, you summarily declare "there's no downward pressure." "You have no solutions."

If you need surgery, you pay for surgery. If you want to get paid for performing surgery, you get the money up front.

If the surgeon does not fix the problem, he does it again. If he still can't fix it, he gives you your money back and you go elsewhere.

If the surgeon is getting undercut by competitors, he must adjust his pricing or starve.

You keep telling me that patients will make stupid decisions and pay the max. You also keep telling me that they have no recourse when a surgeon fails to perform.

I have had it with this bullshit.

You want single payer because you are a lazy, envious, communist piece of shit. No amount of discussion is going to change that FACT.

.

I’ve proven markets don’t work with healthcare.

 

[Andylusion]

And if people refuse to pay the cost goes up.

No. They get no services.

But, doctor gets no patients.

Have you ever negotiated a single time in your entire life?

Jesus.

.

They already had the surgery and now won’t pay. So the surgeon charges those who will pay more to make up for it.

That's not entirely true.

Sometimes the hospital will eat the cost, and write it off as a tax deduction.

But usually the sell it to a debt collect to recoup the cost.

And other times, the people eventually pay. I went to the hospital without insurance, and I got this nifty thing called "a bill". Then I paid the bill. I paid $50 to $100 a month over 3 years, and paid it all.

But this line of reasoning is always baffling to me.

You are complaining because some people who refuse to pay the bill, end up causing the hospital to charge everyone else more money.
That is the essenses of your complain.

How is that worse than national health care, where now absolutely NO ONE pays the their own bill, and the entire cost is poured out on the tax payers?

Why do you think that in every country with government-health care, that the middle class pays 50% in taxes? They are paying for everyone who doesn't pay their bill.

So which is worse, you paying your own health insurance premiums? Or 50% in taxes?

You really think people are paying $25,000 a year in health insurance premiums? I don't think so. Average health insurance premiums yearly, is just about $3,000 a year.

5% of the median wage is $2,500. Sanders dishonestly proposed a 6% tax increase on the middle class. That wouldn't cover it.

One of the big universal care groups proposed an estimated 12% tax to cover universal health care in the US.
That would be $6,000 a year in taxes, which is double what health insurance currently costs.

But in reality, that wouldn't be enough to cover it either. Again, we know this from Europe. 5-year-survival rates are lower in Europe, and yet they have much higher taxes to cover health care expenses than we do.

That is the reality.

Every single payer system I have seen is much lower cost than ours.

So I just gave you the math, and clearly the math... not your opinion.... but math suggests that it will be expensive.

There is no evidence of a single country anywhere on this planet, that had a reduction in health care costs, from moving to a socialized system.

There is plenty of evidence that they reduce the quality of care, to reduce cost. If you are ok with having a lower chance of survival, there are plenty of free-clinics in the US, to choose from. Or you can disappear from a VA waiting list, if you like. That always saves costs.

18 Veterans Died on Secret VA Waiting List

But hey... the VA is cheaper care, yes? That's the goal.