Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

[initforme]

Because if you’re low-income you aren‘t entitled to the same level of services as affluent people who can afford to pay for them. Our grandparents understood that, and that’s why they wanted their children to succeed and earn decent money.

If low-income people get subsidized up to the same lifestyle as educated professionals, where’s the incentive to better oneself and earn more money?

I'm not asking for people to be subsidized up to the same lifestyle. I'm just wanting all citizens to have access to quality care. If that can't happen in a nation awash with money then we aren't so great.

 

[Lisa558]

Im sure you know this but medicine (not to mention the health of the population) has changed dramatically since the 1930s and a model from 100 years ago doesn’t work.

The main driver of health costs is management of chronic conditions (which affect poor people to a greater extent than anyone else), not people who need stitches.

They still don’t need expensive care for that. They could get insulin and instructions from a clinic.

 

[Lisa558]

I'm not asking for people to be subsidized up to the same lifestyle. I'm just wanting all citizens to have access to quality care. If that can't happen in a nation awash with money then we aren't so great.

We aren’t awash in money. We are $33t in debt.

Where is all this money going to come from?

 

[Marener]

They still don’t need expensive care for that. They could get insulin and instructions from a clinic.

Substandard care for substandard people.

That’s your model.

 

[initforme]

I guess it all comes down to $. That's it. Class division is alive and well.

 

[Lisa558]

Substandard care for substandard people.

That’s your model.

Basic care for people who don’t earn enough to buy top-level care.

Clinics can provide basic care. I’ve gone to them myself when I had Obamacare and couldn’t afford a private practice.

 

[Marener]

Basic care for people who don’t earn enough to buy top-level care.

Clinics can provide basic care. I’ve gone to them myself when I had Obamacare and couldn’t afford a private practice.

Substandard care results in substandard outcomes. It’s more expensive in the long run.

You said you’re healthy, so your personal experience is irrelevant. This isn’t about healthy people. If everyone were healthy, we wouldn’t be having this problem.

 

[JoeB131]

We aren’t awash in money. We are $33t in debt.

Where is all this money going to come from?

Same place it comes from now, just directed differently.

We spend more per capita than any other country on earth, and we get the worst results in the industrialized world.

You eliminate private insurance, you get rid of the three employees in every doctor's office who just do insurance processing, you get rid of all the overhead of things like nine-figure salaries for insurance executives.

Easy-peasy.

 

[dblack]

Because we aren’t a third world country.

That's not an answer. Its a presumption.

 

[Marener]

That's not an answer. Its a presumption.

We don’t want to live in a society where it’s every man for themselves.

If you do, I invite you to find one that suits you better.

 

[dblack]

We don’t want to live in a society where it’s every man for themselves.

If you do, I invite you to find one that suits you better.

I'll extend a similar invitation to you - if you want a government tasked with taking care of you, find another.

Health care isn't a "system", any more than car care is a system. In fact, the biggest problem with have with health care is the persistent efforts of those who want it to be a system, and not a free market.

 

[Greenbeard]

Why does there need to be a "system"?

Because in any given year, the slice of the population that actually needs health care 1) incurs more costs than any individual household could ever reasonably finance, and 2) needs services from a variety of provider types across a variety of care settings, requiring significant coordination across the care team.

 

[dblack]

Because in any given year, the slice of the population that actually needs health care 1) incurs more costs than any individual household could ever reasonably finance, ...

And that's exactly because of all the morons like you trying to use government to impose a "system" on something that should be up to individuals, not the state.

 

[Greenbeard]

And that's exactly because of all the morons like you trying to use government to impose a "system" on something that should be up to individuals, not the state.

No, it's not because of "government," it's because the 10% of the population that gets sick in a given year gets really sick. In any given year, half the population incurs virtually no health care costs at all, whereas ten percent of the population incurs two-thirds of all health care costs.

Health care needs/service use/costs are not evenly distributed across the population.

 

[dblack]

No, it's not because of "government," it's because the 10% of the population that gets sick in a given year gets really sick.

You're saying only 10% of the population gets sick in a given year?? That's ridiculous. Most of us get sick and most of the time we don't get "really sick". But when we do, that's what insurance is for. Real insurance, the kind that is reserved for catastrophic circumstances.

But your employers have been working for decades to convince us that the insurance companies should be "middlemen" in every single health care transaction. They've used their lobbying power to regulate us into a situation where health insurance isn't insurance at all, it's a club one joins to get cheap health care. That's what's killing us. That's what's driving the cost for routine health care far above what it should be.

 

[Greenbeard]

You're saying only 10% of the population gets sick in a given year?? That's ridiculous. Most of us get sick and most of the time we don't get "really sick".

I'm not talking about catching a cold. Two-thirds of all health care costs are incurred by ten percent of the population in any given year. And yes, that's exactly why we have insurance. Handwaving about the "free market" without any conception of this basic reality is absurd. Typical, but absurd.

They've used their lobbying power to regulate us into a situation where health insurance isn't insurance at all, it's a club one joins to get cheap health care. That's what's killing us. That's what's driving the cost for routine health care far above what it should be.

Spending on primary care (er, "routine health care") constitutes about 5 cents of the health care dollar. It's not what's killing us. Virtually any expert will tell you that underspending on primary care is more likely to be killing us.

The median American incurs virtually none of the nation's health care costs. Doesn't mean they don't get the sniffles a few times year or see their PCP, maybe even generate a couple insurance claims. All those health care costs amounting, in aggregate, to a rounding error for fully half of the population. It means that our spending is generated by a relatively small segment of the population with very complex and costly chronic or acute medical needs. That's why we have a health care system.

 

[dblack]

I'm not talking about catching a cold. Two-thirds of all health care costs are incurred by ten percent of the population in any given year. And yes, that's exactly why we have insurance.

Catastrophic insurance is fine. It serves its purpose. The problem is trying to use insurance to pay for all of our health care. It's as stupid as trying to use insurance to pay for rent, utilities or groceries. And if we tried the same foolish approach for those other things, the prices would go through the roof as well.

Spending on primary care (er, "routine health care") constitutes about 5 cents of the health care dollar. It's not what's killing us.

You always try to shift the discussion to aggregate health care "spending", rather than prices. Because you don't want to acknowledge that your employers are responsible for the price of health care going through the roof. But the real problem, for most Americans, is that routine health care is unaffordable. Dealing with regular health care should be something the average person can afford. And regulation is THE reason it's not affordable. We've regulated away cheap health care and pushed everyone into low-deductible, employer provided group insurance that destroys the health care market by removing any downward price pressure (ie by removing any incentive for consumers to seek value).

But you'll just ignore that and start bloviating about how much "we" are spending on health care, complete with charts and visual aids supplied by UHC.

 

[Greenbeard]

You always try to shift the discussion to aggregate health care "spending", rather than prices.

Prices are one component of spending. But okay. Prices for physician and clinical services have risen 0.8% per year since the ACA passed in 2010. That's "through the roof"?

Dealing with regular health care should be something the average person can afford. And regulation is THE reason it's not affordable. We've regulated away cheap health care and pushed everyone into low-deductible, employer provided group insurance that destroys the health care market by removing any downward price pressure (ie by removing any incentive for consumers to seek value).

Almost a third of people in employer-based coverage have enrolled in a high-deductible health plan with a savings option. There's a rabid anti-empiricism to your worldview I find fascinating. Just imagine the world is a certain way and never bother to check!

 

[dblack]

Prices are one component of spending. But okay. Prices for physician and clinical services have risen 0.8% per year since the ACA passed in 2010. That's "through the roof"?

Look at the three decades before that. Or just keep driving your denial train. But don't forget the charts and graphs. You're paid extra for the visuals, right?

 

[Greenbeard]

Look at the three decades before that. Or just keep driving your denial train. But don't forget the charts and graphs. You're paid extra for the visuals, right?

No doubt things were much worse before the ACA, that's why was (am) for it. The big slowdown in health care price and cost growth we've experienced since it was passed was the point. Well, that and getting tens of millions more people access to health care. Check and check.