A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The cost of war



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old September 25th 04, 05:31 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default




Whats okay about it? What other business would let their customers

dictate
their prices and then accept only half of the agreed to prices as payment.

Now
even the insurance companies are holding the medical profession to the

same
rules imposed by medicare.



I meant okay, as in we agree.



Um, not so fast. You are being very cras here. The insurance companies

are
doing what makes sense given the system, and I do not see them as evil.
Your jobs example is playing my song though, we need to seperate

healthcare
and jobs.


Evil? No, I wouldn't necessarly impose that description on all of the
Insurance companies but there are many which totally deserve the label.

They
are the tail wagging the dog.


I know that the most frustrating thing is watching the insurance companies
who could be leading the changes just perpetuate the system, but the people
that insurance companies all hire are predisposed to protect the status quo.
Its not evil, its tragic.


So, you could, if you had paid into a policy for your entire life,

have
built up enough reserve for at least one stint of heroic medicine to

extend
your life. This could easily be done for the amount that most workers

pay
into the system now. Also, if you paid more directly, and were more
financially involved in price quality decisions for your care your

health
cost would be much reduced. Instead, you likely have ZERO involvement

even
though you are the best person to police it on the scene.


True to a limited degree but not entirely.


Not entirely, but if you are pooled with others, it will work just fine.

4. State licensing. The licensing system is overly burdensome,

driving
up
costs


You got that one right!

5. Tort. Defensive medicine is used because you cannot be allowed as

a
patient to make decisions based on reasonable outcome expectancies.

Also,
because you have no financial involvement, you just get ALL the tests.
Failure to give a test should not be automatic negligence if its not

called
for the presented systems, unfortunately, juries expect doctors to be
perfect.


Now there is a catch-22 of our current system that has the healthcare

industry
by the preverbial balls. No, you don't just get ALL the tests, in fact

if
tests are run that are NOT indicated by the diagnosis, you are not

going
to get
paid for them and may find yourself going to jail. On the opposite

side,
if
you don't perform the tests that might have caught a treatable

condition,
you
will find yourself facing a malpractice lawsuit.

Doctors are people, their staff consists of people, and people

sometimes
make
mistakes. Nobody, that I know of, is perfect and beyond mistakes. Add

to
our
imperfections, the inability to disassemble the human machine and spec

the
parts to a blueprint, and you are guaranteed that not all diagnosis

will
be
accurate. The medical industry is working hard to try and overcome

these
limitations but it is expensive and will be a long time reaching the

goals.


yep

6. Reverse price competition. Instead of competing on price and

value,
the
present system is a strange maze of over and under payment negotiated
without any of the real customers being involved in the negotiation at

all.


I agree, except on the negotiation part. Too often there is NO

negotiation,
just imposed rules that often can't be understood even by those who

write
them.
I would challenge you to intrepret the rules for CPT coding and

billing.


Only the gov can impose rules. Local providers here started a new

tactic -
throw out the cheapest payor. The patients got letters saying no more

using
this hospital, they called thier company, the company called the payor,

and
the payor blinked and raised its payouts.


Well, yes and no. The bigger insurance companies are taking on many of

the
same rules as the medicare and swing almost as much weight.

7. Inability to refuse care. Emergency rooms cannot turn you away

for
any
reason at all. While inability to pay is likely a good restriction,

how
about we tell you that you are not eligible due to lack of need -

GOODBYE.

That can't be determined without spending time, money, and physician

resources
to determine the "need". Catch-22!


Not always, and less is still better. There are the patients that use

the
system too much. They want service, not just a check out. So, check

them
out, and then tell them they are not an emergency and need to see their
doctor. DO NOT TELL THEM WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEM!

Think about it.


I agree with you but it won't work that way. Some have tried.

Or, when you pester the ER all the time, and never pay, we send you

away
for
consistent REFUSAL to pay.


It does not fit to our liberal mentality.


It will when grandpa is waiting for rationed healthcare.

8. Cost shifting of socialist systems from countries with government
healthcare to the US. These systems will begin to fail the day the US
forces the pharmaceutical companies into the same situation they force

our
doctors into. Namely, you must charge the US government covered

patients
the lowest price you charge anyone, or we throw you in jail. Now,

progress
in healthcare will virtually cease.


Ah, you do show some knowledge of this point. Good.

Sorry Sandy, I am not out in any field on this. I am just unwilling

to
look
at the present system and accept it. It sucks. Really, the system we

have
is outside the stadium and it started with job based health insurance.

I would argue that one with you, I feel it started with the Mediare

program and
state Medicaid has inflicted additional injury to the system. The

advent
of
the HMO's was the final nail in the coffen.

Socialist healthcare will not improve the system in the US for anyone

except
the working poor and stupid. 80% of us will suffer.


It won't improve the system for anyone. PERIOD! The working poor and

stupid
already have better access to healthcare than many of the working

middleclass.


We likely mean the same working people, those who make just enough not to
get aid, but not enough to buy the overpriced non-employer group

coverage.


YEP!


Your question assumes that someone would have no insurance until after

they
found they had cancer. Of course, no one will sell it to you then.

That
would be stupid, and wouldn't work. But wait, that's what we have

now.
Once you spend ALL your money, then you get Uncle Sugar to pay. Thus
rewarding lack of financial responsibility.


On this we both agree and disagree. I have been self-employed for over

25
years. I bought a good health insurance policy but over that period of

time,
the costs and coverages of that policy changed. The coverage had to be
constantly dropped with a higher and higher deductable untili it became

just
major medical only. The costs thought, even with dropping coverage

rose
to
over $1500 per month. Alternatives were not existant, nobody would

consider
coverage for less. I finally had to drop out when they wanted to

increase
premiums to $1800 per month. That was five years ago and I have no

idea
what
they would want to charge today.

And they can do this because you are not a group. Their are groups of

self
employed banding together now, but if you are already undesirable risk it
will be hadr to get in one.


I was in a group when this occured. NASE - National Association for
Self-Employed. It was worthless. I joined another group and after about
eighteen months of paying in, we had a couple of Dr. visits and found out

the
coverage was worthless and the company was under investigation and went

belly
up.



Damn, I was hoping these companies migh work out.


Lastly, your link does not support your statement, and is hardly

conclusive
at all. No findings were made on quality of care. Also, healthcare

is
definitely NOT the largest contributor life expectancy. Sanitation,

life
style, diet, and climate would all beat out health care. Your doctor

can
add a year or two on average. Better living and genes can add

decades.


As far as the quality of the healthcare system in the US, it stands

second
to
none. That can easily be seen if you visit any of the major medical

centers in
the US and check out the patient population for the number of foreign

patients
who come here for treatment. If our life expectancy is lower, it can

be
directly attributed to diet and life style.




agreed


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 September 2nd 04 05:15 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 May 1st 04 07:29 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 2 February 2nd 04 11:41 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 1 January 2nd 04 09:02 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 4 August 7th 03 05:12 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.