Health care law's unpopularity reaches new highs

Mycroft said:

It is simple economics. Demand increases...supply decreases or stays the same...what happens to price? It goes up.

Click to expand...

Why do you think supply would decrease? We're going to run out of healthcares?

Are you telling me the magical, benevolent hand of the hallowed free market wont react to an increase in price with an increase in supply?

MaggieD said:

That approval rating is going to go up as soon as people understand how it's going to effect them. Our government has done a piss-poor job of bringin' it on home.

Click to expand...

I believe the **** is going to hit the fan when people have to actually hire someone to explain to them how they can stay compliant with the law.

Deuce said:

Why do you think supply would decrease? We're going to run out of healthcares?

Are you telling me the magical, benevolent hand of the hallowed free market wont react to an increase in price with an increase in supply?

Click to expand...

You nailed it deuce.

Healthcare isn't a simple issue of supply and demand, especially when you consider how massively inefficient out healthcare delivery system is right now in the US.

We spend much, much more per capita than any other nation in the World and get much less for it. The ACA is the beginning step to solve that issue. If ACOs work the way I think they will (and have been for the last few years), we should see bending of that long term cost curve. And that's one of the whole points of the ACA.

Threegoofs said:

You nailed it deuce.

Healthcare isn't a simple issue of supply and demand, especially when you consider how massively inefficient out healthcare delivery system is right now in the US.

We spend much, much more per capita than any other nation in the World and get much less for it. The ACA is the beginning step to solve that issue. If ACOs work the way I think they will (and have been for the last few years), we should see bending of that long term cost curve. And that's one of the whole points of the ACA.

Click to expand...

Well, I sort of agree with you. But I cannot help but point to Medicare. As a stand-alone program, it is a failure. And while Medicare itself has undoubtedly brought costs down, I'm pretty sure, in the private market, it's had a large hand in driving costs up.

MaggieD said:

Well, I sort of agree with you. But I cannot help but point to Medicare. As a stand-alone program, it is a failure. And while Medicare itself has undoubtedly brought costs down, I'm pretty sure, in the private market, it's had a large hand in driving costs up.

Click to expand...

You're pretty sure, are you? Based on what?

And how come Canada's Medicare system costs even less than ours while pretty much not having a private market at all?

Deuce said:

You're pretty sure, are you? Based on what?

Click to expand...

When I see my mom's Medicare bills, and I see chest x-rays charged at $24 and read for $9 -- and then I see my own private healthcare insurance come through at $150 and $75? I'm pretty sure based on personal observation. Or an established Medicare patient's doctor being reimbursed just $20 for an office visit while my insurance company reimburses at $60? Same thing.

Table I: 2011 National Medicare Fee Schedule | American College of Rheumatology | ACR

MaggieD said:

When I see my mom's Medicare bills, and I see chest x-rays charged at $24 and read for $9 -- and then I see my own private healthcare insurance come through at $150 and $75? I'm pretty sure based on personal observation. Or an established Medicare patient's doctor being reimbursed just $20 for an office visit while my insurance company reimburses at $60? Same thing.

Table I: 2011 National Medicare Fee Schedule | American College of Rheumatology | ACR

Click to expand...

But how do you perceive Medicare being cheaper causing private market prices to increase?

Maybe hospitals are just grossly overcharging in the private market. Like the $1.50 tylenol pill that costs 1.5 cents to manufacture.

Deuce said:

But how do you perceive Medicare being cheaper causing private market prices to increase?

Click to expand...

What?? Do you think that hospitals don't make up those crappy reimbursements in other areas? Do you think you can pay for a X-ray machine at $20 per? Or a doctor at $10 per read? Much less make a profit?

MaggieD said:

When I see my mom's Medicare bills, and I see chest x-rays charged at $24 and read for $9 -- and then I see my own private healthcare insurance come through at $150 and $75? I'm pretty sure based on personal observation. Or an established Medicare patient's doctor being reimbursed just $20 for an office visit while my insurance company reimburses at $60? Same thing.

Table I: 2011 National Medicare Fee Schedule | American College of Rheumatology | ACR

Click to expand...

Not sure why you think your insurer paid that to the provider. Just because its on a bill, its not really the price.

I recall combating a bill on some lab work because of an insurance screwup ( which is in itself tremendously inefficient). The bill to us, and the insurer, was $300. After working out a painstakingly involved negotiation to prove we actually did have insurance, the bill was eventually paid. I required and the payment was somewhere around $25.

But my insurance statement said it was $300.

Threegoofs said:

Not sure why you think your insurer paid that to the provider. Just because its on a bill, its not really the price.

I recall combating a bill on some lab work because of an insurance screwup ( which is in itself tremendously inefficient). The bill to us, and the insurer, was $300. After working out a painstakingly involved negotiation to prove we actually did have insurance, the bill was eventually paid. I required and the payment was somewhere around $25.

But my insurance statement said it was $300.

Click to expand...

My insurance company shows what the hospital billed and what they "allow." Their payments are made based on the smaller amount. Most usually, the bill says, "You are not required to pay anything additional." That's the deal they made with the hospital. Hope I'm making myself clear.

MaggieD said:

That approval rating is going to go up as soon as people understand how it's going to effect them. Our government has done a piss-poor job of bringin' it on home.

Click to expand...

you have it backwards the government and the lap dog media did a good job hiding the truth from America about Obama care

MaggieD said:

My insurance company shows what the hospital billed and what they "allow." Their payments are made based on the smaller amount. Most usually, the bill says, "You are not required to pay anything additional." That's the deal they made with the hospital. Hope I'm making myself clear.

Click to expand...

Yes, but what was actually paid you will never see. The negotiated rates are actually a secret (proprietary- other insurers make their own private deals with providers), and in certain cases, like medications, there are very substantial rebates involved.

MaggieD said:

What?? Do you think that hospitals don't make up those crappy reimbursements in other areas? Do you think you can pay for a X-ray machine at $20 per? Or a doctor at $10 per read? Much less make a profit?

Click to expand...

Thousands and thousands of hospitals and doctor's offices willingly take Medicare patients. Hell, in some places you have them advertising to attract more Medicare patients.

This is not something you do for customers that you lose money on.

trfjr said:

you have it backwards the government and the lap dog media did a good job hiding the truth from America about Obama care

Click to expand...

You mean like the non-existent death panels? :lamo

Deuce said:

Why do you think supply would decrease? We're going to run out of healthcares?

Are you telling me the magical, benevolent hand of the hallowed free market wont react to an increase in price with an increase in supply?

Click to expand...

In a true free market you would be correct about supply increasing in reaction to increased demand. The problem is government interference. We are already hearing about care providers dropping out because of it.

GottaGo said:

And the numbers will be more like 80/6...... :wink:

Click to expand...

Heading into the midterms ............ hopefully the GOP can finally unseat some of those bed-sores sitting in the Dem seats. Crash this giant hope-and-change turd.

Mycroft said:

In a true free market you would be correct about supply increasing in reaction to increased demand. The problem is government interference. We are already hearing about care providers dropping out because of it.

Click to expand...

And what magical intervention prevents an increase in medical supplies and personnel? An I barred from producing bandages or starting a medical school?

Deuce said:

Why do you think supply would decrease? We're going to run out of healthcares?

Are you telling me the magical, benevolent hand of the hallowed free market wont react to an increase in price with an increase in supply?

Click to expand...

The supply of doctors isn't going to decrease. Who knows, it may increase, but how many years are required to put a new doctor on-line? My daughter began medical school in September, 2007, and she now has two more years of residency [plus a fellowship] ahead of her. Meanwhile, assuming Obamacare works as planned, demand for doctors is about to shoot up.

Who knows, though, maybe the scheme won't work as planned?

Threegoofs said:

You nailed it deuce.

Healthcare isn't a simple issue of supply and demand, especially when you consider how massively inefficient out healthcare delivery system is right now in the US.

We spend much, much more per capita than any other nation in the World and get much less for it. The ACA is the beginning step to solve that issue. If ACOs work the way I think they will (and have been for the last few years), we should see bending of that long term cost curve. And that's one of the whole points of the ACA.

Click to expand...

Right, who needs to think about supply and demand?

MaggieD said:

Well, I sort of agree with you. But I cannot help but point to Medicare. As a stand-alone program, it is a failure. And while Medicare itself has undoubtedly brought costs down, I'm pretty sure, in the private market, it's had a large hand in driving costs up.

Click to expand...

Take a look at a time series of U.S. healthcare spending:



What the hell is the significance of 1965?

wbcoleman said:

Take a look at a time series of U.S. healthcare spending:

What the hell is the significance of 1965?

Click to expand...

I wish I could lay an inflation graph over that...and a GDP graph over that. As a stand-alone, I'm not sure it tells us much. But I could be wrong.

MaggieD said:

I wish I could lay an inflation graph over that...and a GDP graph over that. As a stand-alone, I'm not sure it tells us much. But I could be wrong.

Click to expand...

You don't need an inflation adjustment for a ratio like this one.

Just had a chat Friday with the manager of my main supplier. He was trying to work out how to manage the 16 part time employees he will need to operate. Two of his best guys just quit because they need full time jobs to feed their families. But this store is doing this NOW instead of later. The reason, as this manager was told by corporate, is because they want to establish themselves as the employee's primary job. See, they know that the result of this will be that medium to large companies will do away with most full time employees and a lot of people will instead have 2 part time jobs, no benefits, and will either work more hours or take home less money. They are establishing themselves as the primary employer now so that they don't have to deal with managing the schedules of their employee's other jobs. It will be up to the employees to find someone else who can work around them instead.

The added benefit for employers is that they get the same leash employers have used for decades at a lower cost. In fact, the employer can drop your insurance plan AND pay you less.

See, in the past people thought their employer was paying for their health insurance. They weren't really,it was all part of the cost of employment, but it was a pain to leave your employer's plan and then have to go to the plan your new employer so people will put up with more crap on the job in order to keep their job. For people like me it means I can hire somebody part time and pay him less than he is probably worth because I have a carrot. I can be flexible and work around his other job schedule. So I get to pay part time wages and NOT have to pay for their insurance. You think I'm the only guy who has thought about this?

The supplier is O'Reilly Auto Parts, and this policy is nation wide. Enjoy that new health care, wage slaves.

MaggieD said:

I wish I could lay an inflation graph over that...and a GDP graph over that. As a stand-alone, I'm not sure it tells us much. But I could be wrong.

Click to expand...

I'm thinking there may be a lot of variables in play in that chart. For instance in 1965 people didn't get $250,000 worth of cancer treatment, they went home and died. Aside from that, people in general didn't live as long either.

tech30528 said:

I'm thinking there may be a lot of variables in play in that chart. For instance in 1965 people didn't get $250,000 worth of cancer treatment, they went home and died. Aside from that, people in general didn't live as long either.

Click to expand...

There is a reason that 1965 is the start year. Think about it.