• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

60 doctor-owned hospitals canceled due to new health law

So you said most, not all.

Are there some people who get subsidies who you don't consider freeloaders? Who, and why?

Still waiting for an answer.
 
We pay one way or the other, so what difference does it make??

We likely pay more under the old system, as there is no oversight to follow costs and show how much is actually appropriate mark up. Paying less matters.

Actually, our share is much less than $4,000., just over $1,000. Our share should be zero for someone making that much money.

Helping is not the same as a free ride, and while I'm sure many agree with your opinion of 0, I just want us clear on what we're actually doing. No free ride, just some help.

You mean the uninsured can get care now ??? I thought it was impossible for the uninsured to get healthcare and thousands died because of it????

I guess the Dems were lying all that time.

I do like good sarcasm, but people actually get late care, and not the type of preventive care that would be more cost effective and perhaps save lives. Right now we encourage treatment over health, and too many wait until they are real sick or injured, we treat them and pay for their care. Very ad hoc and not too cost effective or particularly beneficial for those receiving care.
 
We likely pay more under the old system, as there is no oversight to follow costs and show how much is actually appropriate mark up. Paying less matters.



Helping is not the same as a free ride, and while I'm sure many agree with your opinion of 0, I just want us clear on what we're actually doing. No free ride, just some help.



I do like good sarcasm, but people actually get late care, and not the type of preventive care that would be more cost effective and perhaps save lives. Right now we encourage treatment over health, and too many wait until they are real sick or injured, we treat them and pay for their care. Very ad hoc and not too cost effective or particularly beneficial for those receiving care.

All of the above sounds more like opinion than facts.
 
All of the above sounds more like opinion than facts.

All argument has a certain amount of opinion, but there is support for everything I've said. Who monitors how much hospitals charge for say a bandaid? The hospital here reports that one bandaid costs $16.04. When I asked them why, they said to make up for those who don't pay. it's just one example, but I see no one looking to see if it accurately reflects the cost, or if the hospital is making more money then they need to cover the costs. Can you show me anyone who monitors this?

And can you really argue that this has effected those who pay? Hasn't effected premiums? That you haven't been paying all along in one way or another? And that this ad hoc way has to be more cost effective?
 
All argument has a certain amount of opinion, but there is support for everything I've said. Who monitors how much hospitals charge for say a bandaid? The hospital here reports that one bandaid costs $16.04. When I asked them why, they said to make up for those who don't pay. it's just one example, but I see no one looking to see if it accurately reflects the cost, or if the hospital is making more money then they need to cover the costs. Can you show me anyone who monitors this?

And can you really argue that this has effected those who pay? Hasn't effected premiums? That you haven't been paying all along in one way or another? And that this ad hoc way has to be more cost effective?

Who monitors how much a gallon of milk costs?

Who monitors how much apartment rent is?

Who monitors how much a new Ford Focus costs?

Who monitors how much a plumber charges you to unclog your sink?

Why do you think anyone needs to monitor the price of anything in the U.S. ?? This is not China or the old USSR where everything is strictly controlled. Price controls have never and will never work.

Here in the U.S., we monitor our own purchases. I agree that hospital charges should be more transparent so that consumers (patients) can make better informed choices, but no one should monitor hospital charges other than their customers.
 
Who said anything about price controls?

Do you ever read posts, or just throw something out to up your post count ??? :roll:

Boo Radley said:
it's just one example, but I see no one looking to see if it accurately reflects the cost, or if the hospital is making more money then they need to cover the costs. Can you show me anyone who monitors this?

Why monitor charges to determine if they accurately reflect the hospital's costs or attempt to determine if the hospital is making more money than they should if price control is not the goal ?????
 
Do you ever read posts,

I read it, and I didn't see anyone advocating price controls. Either I missed it, or you're confused.
 
You missed it and you're confused.

Could you kindly point to the message number where someone advocates price controls?
 
Could you kindly point to the message number where someone advocates price controls?


Why do you insist on obfuscation in every post you make ???

Read post 182 very slowly and carefully.

Why monitor costs and charges if control is not the intent ?????????????
 
Why monitor charges to determine if they accurately reflect the hospital's costs or attempt to determine if the hospital is making more money than they should if price control is not the goal ?????

I think you misunderstand. No reasonable person would consider $16.04 the proper charge for a bandaid when you can buy an entire box foe less than $2.00. So, if the hospital claims they are doing so to make up for the cost of treating those who can't pay, meaning they are passing the cost on to you, and the rest of us, with no mechanism to measure and monitor this, how can we know they are telling the truth? And how do you or the rest of us know which would cost more, the present ad hoc method, or paying through taxes? We pay either way, but certainly one has to be more cost effective than the other?
 
I think you misunderstand. No reasonable person would consider $16.04 the proper charge for a bandaid when you can buy an entire box foe less than $2.00. So, if the hospital claims they are doing so to make up for the cost of treating those who can't pay, meaning they are passing the cost on to you, and the rest of us, with no mechanism to measure and monitor this, how can we know they are telling the truth? And how do you or the rest of us know which would cost more, the present ad hoc method, or paying through taxes? We pay either way, but certainly one has to be more cost effective than the other?

So... you think we should monitor the hospitals' cost of doing business, but do nothing about problems ???

Why does one method have to be more cost effective than the other ??

Will the cost of band aids go down under health care reform ???
 
Why do you insist on obfuscation in every post you make ???

Read post 182 very slowly and carefully.

Why monitor costs and charges if control is not the intent ?????????????

Why do you have to be a jerk about this?

I don't see this as a call for cost controls. Not even close. There are many reasons for wanting to monitor prices - so that private citizens, or insurance companies, can make decisions based on them, for instance. And Boo has set you straight. Thanks for admitting that nobody has explicitly called for price controls, which was my point in the first place. Don't be such an irrascible putz next time.
 
Last edited:
So... you think we should monitor the hospitals' cost of doing business, but do nothing about problems ???

Who said do nothing?

Giving consumers knowledge about prices is doing something.
 
So... you think we should monitor the hospitals' cost of doing business, but do nothing about problems ???

Why does one method have to be more cost effective than the other ??

Will the cost of band aids go down under health care reform ???

How the hospital does business has a lot to do with the problem. Again, they are passing the costs on to you, right now. That is part of the problem.

And two approaches to anything includes a comparison, and often one is better than the other. All actions are not equal. Both may fail, or both may do the job, but one will be better than the other in some way. This doesn't seem controversial or hard to accept to me.

As for the bandaids? I can't say for sure yet. We may not have done enough. But it should at least slow the increase. In the late 1980's and early 1990's, that bandaid cost $5. in a couple of decades it has tripled in cost. Reform very well could slow it down. And with more reform, it could decrease the cost. There would certainly be less reason for it.
 
Back
Top Bottom