The stunning truth about healthcare pricing

[FourScore]

Sun May 27, 2012 at 11:18 AM PDT
The stunning truth about healthcare pricing
by Deep Harm

A story in today's LA Times describes in rare detail why US healthcare is insanely expensive. It's not due to malpractice lawsuits, patients who expect too much, high-tech medicine or burdensome regulations. No, it's the result of insurance industry bureaucracy and greed. While many consumers have long suspected that, hard evidence has been elusive. Now, an investigation by the Los Angeles Times has turned up that hard evidence.

Evidence shows that healthcare costs are arbitrary and capricious.

The LA Times article, "Healthcare's High Cost: Many hospitals, doctors offer cash discount for medical bills," [link:]http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-medical-prices-20120527,0,4627745.story provides data showing that healthcare costs are neither realistic nor consistent. Americans purchase insurance with the expectation of getting reduced out-of-pocket healthcare costs, but instead pay more than they would if they just paid cash--sometimes, much, much more. Example:

Los Alamitos Medical Center, for instance, lists a CT scan of the abdomen on a state website for $4,423. Blue Shield says its negotiated rate at the hospital is about $2,400.

When The Times called for a cash price, the hospital said it was $250. (LATimes)

Similar cost disparities exist at other hospitals, according to the Los Angeles Times and Dr. David Belk, MD, and insurance companies pocket the difference.

Healthcare reforms passed in the Obama administration require hospitals to disclose their standard charges, i.e., list prices. But, only a sucker pays the list price. The real cost of medical procedures remains hidden to most consumers.

The insurance industry can make exorbitant demands because it has full control of healthcare...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/27/1095159/-The-stunning-truth-about-healthcare-pricing

[Edweird]

1. Yep.

[cynatnite]

2. A lot of medical institutions have cash payer rates...

My son's pediatrician had a system in place as well. Between two visits we paid a total of $19. We had no insurance coverage for him.

These are usually for those cash payers who do not have insurance. Many times these folks just can't afford the insurance so they get completely different rates.

The insurance companies and the government are involved with setting rates for medical services. Cash payer rates that are considerably lower are rarely high enough to cover the costs to provide care. If everyone were to get the cash payer rates, the expense could not get covered.

These rates are specifically designed for low income folks who don't have insurance. That is if a facility has a system such as this in place. Some flat out don't have it.

More people should know about this, but it's not something that's advertised for obvious reasons. You have to ask about cash payer rates.

[HiPointDem]

17. I don't have insurance & I've always had great difficulty in getting healthcare facilities to tell

me the prices upfront. In a lot of cases, they've refused.

I have the savings to pay for some things, but I don't want to get surprise bills, so I want to know the cost beforehand. I've never heard of special rates for people without insurance, myself.

[dotymed]

54. Nor have I.

In my experience it has been just the opposite. I have had pretty good insurance (expensive) and I have been disgusted reading the bills. The Dr. and hospital have had (it may have recently changed) agreements that the insurance company would be charged a fraction of what the original charges are (pre-arranged discounts for insurance companies). I was often upset because since I had insurance, the procedure(s) were less expensive for the insurance companies and myself. I know people who do not have insurance and could not afford the same procedure because they did not get the (often enormous) discounts that the insurance company got. Of course, I had to pay my deductible and co-pay, but it was always discounted because of my PPO.
The last year or so, I have noticed that the insurance discounts have not been as high.
If "they" are now charging uninsured people less money, I am all for it. Let the insurance companies pay a larger percentage of the inflated prices! I know my costs will increase accordingly (and I cannot afford it) but if indigent people are getting discounted treatment, I am all for it.

[truedelphi]

61. All throughout the nineties,

I went back and forth between being insured and uninsured. It all depended on which nursing agency I worked for. And in certain cases, I would go from one state of being insured to the other (or vice versa) due to the agencies getting bought and sold by other entities.

I always found that when I was uninsured, the receptionists at the doctor offices would be outright hostile. And demand the sixty to seventy dollar doctor visit up front. (Which I always politely complied with.)

Then I came to find out that those with the two most popular forms of health insurance were only paying $ 20 to $ 25 buck a visit. That was the rate that the Big Health Insurers had negotiated with the doctor's medical practices. "We will send you plenty of patients if you only bill us $ 25 !&quot

So why the rude treatment I don't know. When I was uninsured, I was actually worth two or three times what the other insured people were paying per visit.

[Kolesar]

69. I am sorry they treated you that way.

What you described is the experience that my uninsured brothers have had.

[renate]

37. I wonder whether those cash rates are allowed for people with insurance but a high deductible?

Is it legal to go to the doctor's office and say you don't have insurance when you do? We have insurance but an article I read in the LA Times made it sound like even people with insurance (but with a high deductible) are better off not using their insurance for x-rays and CAT scans (and, I would guess, labwork) because they're charged higher fees than people without insurance are--and whatever the insurance company refuses to pay, you're stuck with paying yourself.

[TheFarseer]

58. I haven't found this to be the case

I've paid cash for medical care before and they seem to think they can rape me hard right in the ass. I guess I didn't ask about cash rates though.

[cynatnite]

59. It seems like it varies from facility to facility...

Maybe it's just not that common of a thing.

[Liberal_in_LA]

82. Amazing. It would be cheaper for me to hide my insurance and pay cash!

[cynatnite]

83. Well, in our situation at the time it was appropriate...

My husband was recovering from an injury and we had very little income. That's why the clinic has the system in place. It's designed for low income folks without the benefit of insurance.

[msongs]

3. thank dog obamacare has saved us from the evil insurance companies lol nt

[uponit7771]

4. Thank dog people are getting obama a progressive congress instead of bitching...

...not

Thx

[BlueCaliDem]

19. Thank you! This needs to be stated every time we

find people whining that the president didn't do enough.

I'm doing my part. Me and my group are casting our vote for Mike Strimling instead of DiFi. I've been waiting a long time to find someone who has the wherewithal to challenge the much too powerful and connect blue dog Senator from California. Besides, I'd rather have Sen. Boxer be the Senior Senator from Ca.

[bvar22]

23. Instead of making excuses, study some political history.

Read Up on "The Johnson Treatment".
http://thejohnsonpost.blogspot.com/2009/08/johnson-treatment.html

"Johnson was the catalyst, the cajoler in chief. History records him as the nation's greatest legislative politician. In a great piece on the Daily Beast website, LBJ aide Tom Johnson, writes about how his old boss would have gotten a health care reform bill through the current congress. It's worth reading to understand the full impact of the "Johnson treatment" and how effective LBJ could be in winning votes for his legislation."

http://thejohnsonpost.blogspot.com/2009/08/johnson-treatment.html

"Strong and successful presidents (meaning those who get what they want - whether that happens to be good for the country or not) do not accept "the best deal on the table". They take out their carpentry tools and the build the goddam piece of furniture themselves. Strong and successful presidents do not get dictated to by the political environment. They reshape the environment into one that is conducive to their political aspirations."

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/17

[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity![/font]

[font size=2 color=green]

[Coyote_Bandit]

28. +1,000,000

Successful presidents have the political capital and the leadership and personal skills to make whatever deal they want.

Those who settle for "the best deal on the table" are not successful IMHO. They are reactive rather than proactive. And that is not the stuff of leaders who forge an agenda and are successful in implementing it.

[Doctor_J]

31. Which Obama had on Jan 20, 2009

he started appeasing on day 1, and once you're backpedaling, it is extremely difficult to ever get a foot hold again.

[Coyote_Bandit]

40. I'm not so sure about that

He may well have had the political capital. But I am not convinced that he ever had the personal leadership and political skills required to use that political capital effectively. Nor am I cpnvinced that he wanted to be a political leader. His bipartisian "leadership" model is the stuff of a mediator not the stuff of a leader. IMHO there is little question that Obama's political skills are considerable below those of LBJ.

[Doctor_J]

43. True. I meant the mandate (political capital)

If he'd declared on day 1, "By the end of my first year, no American will have to worry about going bankrupt or losing a home due to medical bills again, ever.", everyone who voted for him, and their kids, would have been in the street insisting on it. He's really a poor politician.

[cliffordu]

30. Great joke.

every monday morning quarterback needs a logic this pure and simple.

[Ikonoklast]

44. Yeah, 'Ol LBJ was a fantastic guy. A lot like GW in certain ways.

He went to war with fabricated evidence of aggression against a nation who had no beef with us, and filled the national cemeteries with dead war veterans.

I despised that man.

[bvar22]

45. THIS is no joke:

[font size=5]Obama's Army, Jan. 21, 2009[/font]

[font size=5]"Oh, What could have been."[/font]


If he had called,
his ARMY, including myself, would have answered
and gone where ever he directed
to stand WITH him and fight for the things he promised.
YES. WE. CAN!!!

An ARMY left standing in the field without a leader
is an Army wasted.
A MANDATE unused is a mandate wasted.

This is not Monday Morning Quarterbacking.
Leaders have known this for centuries.




[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[boppers]

67. And it will be there we he wins, again.

That must really piss off the moaners and kvetchers.

[Egalitarian Thug]

47. What about all those that were telling him this on Sunday? n/t

[99th_Monkey]

46. Love those pics of LBJ

I never liked the guy much, as I suspect he knew something about
JFK's assassination prior to it happening, and could never get over
that one... not to mention his insane obsession with amping up the
Viet Nam War ... BUT he did do some good stuff too, with civil rights
in particular, and I had to respect his ability to lead when he was
bucking the tide.

But those pics really capture that aspect of him. Thanks for sharing
them.

[bvar22]

56. I hatede LBJ with a Purple Passion for The WAR.

Never, EVER did I think that I would look back at him and realize that he was the most Liberal Democratic president of the last half CENTURY.

There were some BIG problems with LBJ,
but the great thing about that time is that
We were headed in the right direction!
We were moving The Ball in the right direction,
and after LBJ,s Administration,
we had achieved great Democratic Party accomplishments with Medicare, the Civil Rights Act,
and the Great Society.

Now....not so much.
We are slipping farther and farther to The Right.




[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity![/font]

[AynRandCollectedSS]

50. Apples and oranges...

While I agree that Johnson was a badass, the GOP has changed quite a bit since then. They have openly stated that making sure Obama didn't get a second term has been their main goal. In order for the Johnson strategy to work, you have to be dealing with people that are at least somewhat rational!

That being said, Obama was wet behind the ears and that hurt him. I personally can't fault him for believing that legislators would at least be reasonable though. A truly reasonable person has trouble understanding why/how other people aren't. I support Obama 100%, but honestly, for the very reasons you stated was pulling for Hilary because she would have understood and played the game more skillfully and with more of the Johnson-esque force necessary to get things done.

[truedelphi]

62. Unfortunately for us "real" people, Obama was far

Too busy listening to those who represented the "unreal" people - the Big Health Insurers.

People like Rahm convinced Obama to sell us out. And he willingly did so. (I know you know this, but I get so steamed up about the health insurance issue.)

Anyway just yesterday a friend sent a link to "help" me with the new situation since ObamaCare. Apparently here in California, until Dec 31 2013, I have the "right" to sign up for the state of California general insurance fund (PCPP or PIIP, or some such acronym)

I go off to the web page. It would be perfect for someone like me, with pre-existing conditions, as it promises that as long as you have not been uninsured for six months (I haven't been insured for fourteen months) all you need to do is show proof of rejection from two big insurers ( a process that will take maybe two to six weeks,) a willingness and ability to pay the insurance premium (some 800 dollars a month plus) and then a willingness to be screwed -

The insurance policy pays nothing until you meet a $ 2,500 deductible. Then there are co-pays along with what the insurer would pay. and they have to offer you this health insurance.

So in other words, if I commit an amount of money that equals some 35% of what I make after taxes, I can be insured. Easey peasey and all hail to our great and wonderful Democratic President!

[SammyWinstonJack]

78. Obama the bi-partisan president. Which only serves to screw over the majority of Americans.

[progressoid]

34. Excellent job pointing the finger at Congress rather than the guy that pushed it and signed it.

Besides, there's nothing worse than people on a political chat board bitching about a problem.

<insert 'gimmeafuckinbreak' smiley here>

[AynRandCollectedSS]

51. Right...

Because shifting some of the blame to the 535 people sworn to serve the interest of their constituents instead of just ONE guy is completely irrational. He did what he could and if you don't understand that, you don't understand the first fucking thing about politics or Washington. It's a team sport. Even Vetos can be overridden.

<------ I'll just settle for this one

[progressoid]

55. So you agree he deserves some of the blame.

Last edited Mon May 28, 2012, 10:19 PM - Edit history (1)

"Because shifting some of the blame to the 535 people..."

That implies that there was a 536th person who deserves some of the blame too. I can't argue with that. I would just add that there are a few thousand corporate lobbyists that deserve the blame too.

"He did what he could and if you don't understand that, you don't understand the first fucking thing about politics or Washington."

I do understand it. And I understand that he didn't just do what he could, he did what he wanted. Don't pretend that this was some sort of compromise. If he didn't like the bill, he could have vetoed it to voice his opposition to it, but he didn't. He signed it to cheers and applause. In fact it was "a big fucking deal". The White House and the Democratic Party thinks that this Republican health care "reform" was a win.

[progressoid]

35. Oh, c'mon. It was a big fucking deal remember?

[kenny blankenship]

41. A bargain. The $ that the Insurance Mafia paid to buy Baucus Lieberman and Obama

was the biggest bang for the smallest bucks ever spent.

[truedelphi]

75. Like "military intelligence,"

The expression you use regarding healthcare is an oxymoron.

[freshwest]

5. +1

[yellerpup]

6. We don't need health insurance.

We need health care. Insurance companies stand between us and what we need.

[hobbit709]

7. +1,000,000

[GObamaGO]

10. You are spot on!

[Lugnut]

11. Insurance companies are parasites.

They add no value to the health care process. Subscribers are paying outrageous premiums to support big salaries and bonuses to executives whose major focus is on denying coverage for health care costs to as many subscribers as they can.

[kenny blankenship]

18. Health "insurance" must die.

You insure against things that are unlikely to happen, but ill health eventually happens to us all. A completely different model is called for. The financial swindle called Health Insurance or Affordable Health Insurance is a parasite that eventually kills its host, guaranteed.
It's them or us.

[Old Codger]

8. I have Medicare

I had a "supplement" to go with it, I paid 175.00 extra a month for that, I dropped it and went straight medicare, after a year without the supplement we compared the costs of normal everyday Dr. office visits and my 6 month checkups with the supplement to straight medicare, almost twice as much out of pocket when I had the supplement as with straight medicare, total ripoff.

[Egalitarian Thug]

48. Thank you for posting this and saving me the effort.

The whole supplemental insurance scam is nothing but a gift of billions of senior's dollars straight into the pockets of the insurance companies.

[madrchsod]

71. yup!

[eridani]

9. In the Netherlands in 1996, my husband had an emergency root canal

It cost 100 guilders, or about $25 American. Of course the government also kept the prices of his inputs as low as possible, and also paid for his education through dental school.

[BlueCaliDem]

20. I lived in Holland and I had a root canal, but I paid nothing

and this was back in January 1991. Why did he have to pay? Dental insurance in Holland covers root canal.

[eridani]

21. Because you were a legal resident

We were just tourists.

[BlueCaliDem]

39. My bad. I thought you meant you lived there.

Yes, health care costs are lower there because doctors aren't multimillionaires as they are here. Sure, after many, many years in practice, they carve out a nice living in private practice, but nothing like the doctors here.

I hope you enjoyed my second home land.

[eridani]

73. Doctors here have to go heavily in debt for their professional educations

Also, there are no cost controls on any of the things they need to practice. And malpractice insurance is far more espensive. (That's because universal health care eliminates the major motivation to sue after an unfavorable outcome--vastly higher lifetime medical costs.)

At a single payer convention in the early 90s, a doctor who moved back to Canada after trying to make more money by relocating to the US explained that though his gross was far higher here, the net wasn't all that much better. He finally got disgusted by seeing more diabetic leg amputations in 5 years in Idaho than he had seen his entire life in Canada.

[GObamaGO]

12. We need to stop allowing accountants and actuaries to practice medicine

And in turn the doctors who are charged with being the gatekeepers can get out of practicing accounting.

[Hissyspit]

13. "Evidence shows that healthcare costs are arbitrary and capricious."

No fucking duh.

[Blecht]

14. Water is wet!

Film at 11.

[subterranean]

15. The lack of price transparency is a problem.

Medical care is the only service I can think of where you only find out the cost after receiving the service.

[spinbaby]

24. That was always the problem with health savings accounts

The argument for health savings accounts was always that if consumers pay out of pocket for services, then they'll shop more carefully for the best price. Which would be an okay argument if you could find out what the price was.

Another problem that I have with our so-called health care system is that I often spend far more time arguing about the insurance company about a bill than I spent with the actual doctor.

[proReality]

16. "Evidence shows that healthcare costs are arbitrary and capricious."

Yes, they are! My husbands monthly injection of Sandostatin LAR costs well over $7,600 at the cancer center he goes to out of state, and $3,826 locally. Only one company produces the treatment, so there is no good reason for the incredible difference in price.

[Scuba]

22. Using our precious healthcare dollars to fatten the wallets of for-profit investors....

... in London, Tokyo and Hong Kong isn't just bad fiscal policy. It's immoral.

[tclambert]

25. My daily medication turns out to cost less if I pay cash.

The insurance company wanted to change the terms of the prescription my doctor wrote so I'd have to refill it every month rather than once every three months. While I was complaining about this to the pharmacist ("Hey, this is not what my doctor ordered!" "The insurance company won't cover it that way.&quot , the pharmacist mentioned that my particular medication is actually really cheap. He could sell me three months' worth for $10, the same as the co-pay the insurance required.

So we could go through the insurance company's red tape, triple the number of trips to the pharmacy--all for no savings at all to me. Or I could pay cash, get what the doctor ordered, save effort--and wonder why the insurance system works so stupidly.

[Alcibiades]

26. "It's made up"

That's what I thought when I saw the title of the OP. Drawn out of thin air, with no relation to "market forces," ability to pay, costs, etc.

[Coyote_Bandit]

27. And there are laws in almost every state

that require all consumers/patients be charged the same price.

Which raises the question of why the hell those charged with enforcing those laws have failed to do so for decades. Since I don't think they are dumb or ignorant that means that I believe their oversight is intentional. Which raises the question of motive. Which I believe is related to their personal desire for position and the personal power and prosperity it often brings.

[Sgent]

29. I certainly don't know of any such law

in general -- coupon's, discount cards, etc. would be illegal.

Some states may have those laws that apply to health care, but I haven't seen any.

[Coyote_Bandit]

38. The Wall Street Journal

did a series of articles on health care a few years back. Even they referenced and documented those laws which in most states are specificallly in reference to health care services.

[truedelphi]

63. No there are not such laws in every state.

Health insurance and medical care have a written rule (forget what segment of Federal Law it is in) but it dictates that they can do whatever the heck they want whenever they want to, to whomever they care to do so.

It is basically anti-trust, and no other businesses in the world can do this, but the health industry has the ability to legally screw us.

[Coyote_Bandit]

72. Ummmm......

Charging different people different prices for the same goods or services is price discrimination.

Price discrimination is made illegal under:
the Sherman Antitrust Act 15 U.S.C. §2
the Clayton Act 15 U.S.C. §13, and
the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§13-13b, 21a.

Many states also have specific statutes that prohibit such price discrimination.



Given that such price discrimination is rampant one has to wonder why the fuck any so-called effort to reform healthcare completely ignored this most basic issue.

If we all have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and if we are all created equal then we should all have equal access to healthcare. One measure of equal access is the price of available care.

Meaningful access to healthcare today is segregated based on socio-economic class in much the same way that public education used to be segregated based on race. Separate but equal is inherently unequal.

I have little respect for the bastards in Washington that want to maintain such segregation. They are not stupid. They simply refuse to implement the concept of equality. Fuck 'em.

Constitutional guarantees trump statutory law. The Federal courts should be flooded with cases challenging the practice of price discrimination in health services. They're not. I suspect that is largely because we live in a nation where the judicial system generally requires considerable $$$ to litigate anything other than the most insignificant matters and where justice can be bought.

[truedelphi]

74. I understand what you are saying. I didn't have those statute

numbers at hand and I thank you for posting them.

But as I was saying, the Big Health Insurers, and Big Medicine and Big Pharma have put together legislation (now enacted) that trumps the statutes you cite:

Price discrimination is made illegal under:
the Sherman Antitrust Act 15 U.S.C. §2
the Clayton Act 15 U.S.C. §13, and
the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§13-13b, 21a.


At one time there was references posted here on DU as to where in our legal code this exemption is enacted, but it exists and because it has been legalized, the Supreme Court would leave it alone. Also it is wise to note that Big Medicine and Big Health Insurance and Pharmaceutical products, devices treatments are the ONLY EXCEPTIONS to the statutes you mention.

In any event, these days, the members of the Supreme Court are most carefully chosen so that they will always stand with and for the Big Corporations. For instance before 1920, the Supreme Court ruled against the mandates forcing vaccinations upon individuals, while now the Supreme Court rules for those mandates.

For instance, The Supreme Court members have voted to stand with Big Industry over private homeowners, and in fact, recently it was two of the Republicans that thought eminent domain should not be used to take someone's home away and put in a golf course or shopping center. Ditto the Supreme Court on medical marijuana - the Republican SCOTUS members have actually been more inclined to not allow the Big Pharma suppression of medical marijuana.

Please understand - I am not saying I am agreeing with this. I am just saying that our nation is now cleverly ruled by the One Supreme Big Money Party, and as George Carlin pointed out many times, you and I are not in that club.

[Doctor_J]

32. 860% profit for BCBS.

and that's at the "negotiated" price. 1800% on the list price.

What I find amazing is that no one has McVeigh'd any of these so-called insurance companies.

[maggiesfarmer]

33. an ~90% cash discount -- this makes me rethink everything

great post. you've given me a lot to think about.

this implies the costs of dealing w/ insurance companies is so outrageous that hospitals markup services by 900%. DAMN. I'd like more data to see how widespread this is.

the next question is, what does the hospital charge Medicare?

[libodem]

36. Great to see a little

Investigative reporting, again. Good on 'em.

[Moostache]

42. The viciousness of the Health Care "Debate" was evidence enough for a lifetime!

The people stealing their living as "middle men" in health care are among the lowest forms of life on the planet. They are tape worms in the intestines of life.

[Thinkingabout]

49. The average CEO is earning $9 mil, the medical personnel does not make this much.

Medical personnel goes to school for a long time and continuing education over the years. Also when the uninsured goes to hospitals, etc and are unable to pay, this gets passed on to the insured and others who pay.

[FarCenter]

52. Health care charges multiple prices just like airlines and hotels

Depending on who you are, how you buy, when you buy, etc., they've got a different price.

"Yield management" is designed to squeeze as much out of the customer as possible.

If you are a "walk up" customer at an imaging center, and they have idle CT machines and staff, you probably can drive a good bargain.

[sendero]

53. As I've said many times here.

... we have a "name your price" health care system. Specialists, device makers, drug makers simply name their price. You have no say in it, there simply ARE NO "market" forces at work here.

But I guess that's better than "socialized medicine"

[truedelphi]

65. Oh and we consumers don't need to worry about our fate when we

Are prescribed the medications, vaccines and devices. Some of them are tested for all of six weeks! (Down from three months.)

[SammyWinstonJack]

79. Well Obama certainly thinks so and has stated as much.

But I guess that's better than socialized medicine



No entitlement Medicare for Everyone when the President thinks that the for profit private health insurance industry can deliver
health care costs much more efficiently than the government every could.

[sendero]

81. I assume you are joking..

... Medicare delivers with a 3% overhead, Obama'/s plan will eventually force insurance cos to deliver care with a 15 percent overhead.

If you are serious you might consider eschewing comment on things you know nothing about.

[VPStoltz]

57. I heard an analysis of the US health care system on NPR this a.m.

One of the doctors interviewed (who was not part of the poll be discussed) said the problems are: lack of communication between patient and doctor and among doctors of the same patient AND the payment system - pay per service.
The doctors, the HMOs, the clinics, and the management of all the above know have control of this and they are knowingly gouging the public.
Anything for a buck - even if it kills your patient.

[oldhippie]

60. I have the feeling that either the question or answer was misunderstood .....

"When The Times called for a cash price, the hospital said it was $250. (LATimes)"

I find this hard to believe. I suspect either the question or answer was misunderstood or misinterpreted.

[SDjack]

64. Open the market to international competition. I want to contract my insurance

with the French social system.

[riverbendviewgal]

66. OMG....my son had a brain tumor

Thankfully we had insurance for the prescriptions. The rest of his treatment was no cost, 3 surgeries, radiation, chemo, intensive care, and palliative care and MORE.

He had temador. I believe it extended his life.. I checked out the KOS link and the doctor mentioned how temador is made for only about 2 dollars a kilo and the first year after it was made the pharma company made one BILLION dollars.., 1999..That was the year my son was getting it.

Thankfully we live in Canada.....

I wonder if Rommey pays cash...and gets charged less. It is so unfair.

[JEB]

68. Health Insurance Companies

Last edited Mon May 28, 2012, 08:53 PM - Edit history (1)

deserve to be fucked in the ass with a wire brush.

edit: tense correction, deserved to deserve.

[madrchsod]

70. the base price is what medicare will pay....

[Brainstormy]

76. Cash No Good

My daughter recently went to a new physician in Florida. On leaving she was told that they could not accept cash in payment. I was incensed. Is that even legal? Can someone refuse the legal tender of the United States in payment of a debt?

[SammyWinstonJack]

77. So of course the solution is to force everyone to purchase insurance from these

blood sucking insurance corps.....right?

[Uncle Joe]

80. Kicked and recommended for highlighting what logic and common sense should tell anyone even

without doing a formalized study.

Furthermore the only thing a mandate; dictating the people to subsidize such an immoral, dysfunctional, greed based system will do is give that system an even tighter grip on the nation's health care, and the people will have to pay a heavy price in both lives and treasure.

Thanks for the thread, FourScore.