COMMENTS:
wow, that's surprising.
by mojo on Mon Apr 07, 08 6:01am
[+]
How is a middle income to poor person going to pay for this without universal health care? The ballot statement doesn't make any sense regarding the actual question you ask.
^^ Makes complete sense to me. 
If we had competitive pricing, people with low income could afford such a major surgery.
To answer his other question with a question: so why should anyone pay more for this procedure? How else are the insurance companies going to make record profits?
my point is if the public is charged the same price as what they charge the government (actually we should be charged way less, since us cash customers don't require the amount of paperwork the government require), then we would not have people going bankrupt because of medical bills, and those who can't afford couple of thousands can be subsidized by the public assistance programs without adding another costly layer of government bureaucracy.
by the way, that figure is what the surgeon is paid. it does not include (i assume) incidental costs, such as hospital administrators(fire them), medicines (get them from canada), and other hospital staffs (volunteers - candy stripers)
by LCD on Mon Apr 07, 08 10:20am
[+]
"since us cash customers" There aren't a lot of people who can put out cash along the lines of this cost for surgery.
2nd, have a couple of procedures added to that surgery cost and it rapidly becomes something a "cash customer" can't afford.
BTW, you quote a single cost for what is really a very complex procedure. There are lab tests, critical intensive care costs, medication and numerous other costs that aren't included. This easily pushes the cost several thousand dollars higher.
3rd, public assistance programs for health care still do not cover necessary expenses. Most doctors won't take Medicaid and Medicare's drug coverage doesn't do shit for someone who NEEDS medications that are expensive for which there is no generic available. We're talking 5 grand out of pocket after you reach the donut hole until you get covered again. Even a person making 50k can't afford that. Plus, public health programs often require co-pays which the poor can't afford either.
Seems to me that covering everyone with good universal health coverage while lowering costs is the way to go. Isn't it simple? Provide the health care people need. Its what civilized and compassionate people/countries should do. Without any question or debate either.
Sorry LCD, this would have been a good quiz but to try to tie it to a point about universal health care vs competitive pricing is weak at best.
Surprises me, too. Moreso, one of the docs who yanked mine out is using it for medical research, which is fairly certain to garner him a dime or two more.
^ yeah, shocked me when I read it.
there is a complete list of medicare payout table for various procedures available on the net.
fflsd, I see it like this. Most of us pay (or our companies pay) thousands per year for us to have insurance. If there was a wide open competitive market for diagnosis and treatment, suddenly most of the procedures would become surprisingly affordable.
Sure most of us don't have couple of thousands lying around. But it would be a lot easier to obtain, and would have lot less long term impact than a $50k demand for payment that goes into default and creditors hounding you.
by LCD on Mon Apr 07, 08 3:32pm
[+]
|
