• 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!

Patients Pay Before Seeing Doctor as Deductibles Spread

Because the trial lawyers in Nevada paid for the privilege. ;)

Thanks, Superfly. I learned something. I was shocked to see your $4,000 estimate for Minnesota; but further investigation shows you're correct. Wow.

I was shocked at the difference, to be honest. Florida is the highest, even higher than Nevada. Scary. But not surprising. I've whined about this before, but along the same vein, my car insurance is so much higher living in Georgia. When I lived in Alabama, I paid $50 a month full coverage, for one car. When I moved to Georgia, that literally doubled to $100. Then I bought another new car and now I am paying $223 a month for car insurance, and I haven't had a wreck or ticket in 20 years. When I complained about it, I was told it's because of the drivers in Georgia, and the fact that people here wreck more often than other places.
 
That's the greedy ass doctor's fault. If he can take one patient for $115, he can take 20 patients at $115.

No, he's got bills to pay too and when it costs a lot of doctors $100k a year for malpractice insurance, do you think they can tell their insurance company they're only willing to pay $50k? It doesn't work that way.
 
So employers shouldn't be able to expense employee insurance? WTF.

No. There should not be tax benefits for corporations to provide insurance.

Until ACA Insurance coverage had no requirements.

Could you be more wrong? Who's talking out of their ass?

What shall we let people die in the streets? Walk around with infections and illnesses to infect the rest of us?

Ace Ventua.jpg

The only medical malpractice regs have been in favor of lower pricing in that the only regs are to limit the ability of patients to sue and those are at the state level not federal.
Doctors want medical billing companies, not the gov't, not regulated or required.

You think doctors hire medical billing companies because they want to? Or is it because the medical billing process is a pain in the ass?

Doctors and patients want lawyers, not a regulation
A person in a position is not a regulation

People don't want to hire lawyers.

Medicare and medicaid actually keep prices down a bit, but I gather you're ignorant about that.
Obamacare is yet to be determined but should help cut costs.

Medicare and medicaid have contributed to the rising costs of health care.

As I said, talking out your ass. Everything you mention is either something wanted by docs, or simply makes sense (employer expensing expenses, there's not extra tax consideration, and not having poor people sick and dying in the streets)


Ace Ventua.jpg
 
Regulations--Tax incentives for employer-based insurance, insurance coverage requirements, free treatment requirements at the ER, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare

Layers--Medical malpractice, insurance companies, medical billing companies, lawyers, the secretary of health & human services, IPAB, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare.

All of these are fairly obvious. Yeah, you can still go to a doctor and pay cash, but the damage has been done. The few who still do that aren't enough to control costs.

People who are paying cash are paying more for their treatment than the insurance companies would reimburse. I guess you don't pay for your medical care in cash. I've done it, and unless I ran it through my insurance company? I was paying double.
 
People who are paying cash are paying more for their treatment than the insurance companies would reimburse. I guess you don't pay for your medical care in cash. I've done it, and unless I ran it through my insurance company? I was paying double.

I've done both. Mine was within 10 or 15% of what the insurance company rate was. Nowhere near enough to cover my premium + deductible.

Either way, the point is that most people don't shop for health care. If they did, prices would not be trending the way they are.
 
Last edited:
I've done both. Mine was within 10 or 15% of what the insurance company rate was. Nowhere near enough to cover my premium + deductible.

You beat the odds. Insurance is for the times you don't. And you have no idea what the insurance company rate was. So please don't pretend you do.
 
You beat the odds. Insurance is for the times you don't. And you have no idea what the insurance company rate was. So please don't pretend you do.

I do know exactly what the insurance company rate was. If you ever care to know what yours are, the admin at your doctor's office will be able to look it up and tell you. It's not something you need a super-secret decoder ring to find out. Most people just can't be bothered to give a **** as long as they're able to get somebody else to pay their bill...
 
I do know exactly what the insurance company rate was. If you ever care to know what yours are, the admin at your doctor's office will be able to look it up and tell you. It's not something you need a super-secret decoder ring to find out. Most people just can't be bothered to give a **** as long as they're able to get somebody else to pay their bill...

The insurance company sends a Explanation of Medical Benefits form that gives the amount billed, the amount written off (usually at least 2/3) and the amount the patient still owes. Most people probably just look at what they still owe, but the amount billed is quite revealing. If you're paying cash, I wonder if you're liable for the entire amount?
 
The insurance company sends a Explanation of Medical Benefits form that gives the amount billed, the amount written off (usually at least 2/3) and the amount the patient still owes. Most people probably just look at what they still owe, but the amount billed is quite revealing. If you're paying cash, I wonder if you're liable for the entire amount?

If you're paying cash, they will give you a discount as well. Ask next time you go to the doctor's office. I'm not real sure what would happen if they billed you the full amount and pressed the case in court. My guess is they would win legally, but I think enough of them have questionable billing practices that they don't want to expose to discovery...
 
If you're paying cash, they will give you a discount as well. Ask next time you go to the doctor's office. I'm not real sure what would happen if they billed you the full amount and pressed the case in court. My guess is they would win legally, but I think enough of them have questionable billing practices that they don't want to expose to discovery...

They may give you a discount. They may not. If they don't have a procedure in place for that discount, you're not likely to see it. At least, that's been my experience. I have a $5,200 deductible policy. Pretty straight forward. I pay the first $5,200 a year -- the insurance pays everything else. At first, I would simply PAY for a doctor visit, not anticipating that I would meet my deductible that year. I asked for a discount and was refused. The office charge was $130.

Then someone told me I should be running EVERYTHING through my insurance company so I wouldn't have to backtrack if I DID meet the deductible. The insurance company discounted the $130 to $50 (or something like that) and said, "We're applying the $50 to your deductible." And that was all I paid the provider.

Insurance companies have contractual arrangements with providers. Doctors don't care if they get the money from YOU or from your insurance company. But if you don't run it through an insurance company, you're not likely to get the benefit of the steep discount they'd give Blue Cross Blue Shield.
 
My mom just told me about this. Her new doctor she was forced to have because of Obama care demands payment upfront.

BS!!!!!!! The ACA does NOT demand payment upfront, the doctor/hospital does. If you are 61 your mother should qualify for medicare/aid. You tell some 'interesting' stories! :roll:
 
BS!!!!!!! The ACA does NOT demand payment upfront, the doctor/hospital does. If you are 61 your mother should qualify for medicare/aid. You tell some 'interesting' stories! :roll:

Medicare starts at 65, not 61.
and ACA does require that you pay the premium.

Edit: Oh, I see it is the son that is 61, so Mom does, indeed qualify for Medicare. Medicare, however, is not free, there is a premium to pay, and it only pays 80% of medical bills.
 
Last edited:
Can we just wait until January 1st until we start screaming that people are being screwed, or employers are dropping employee hours, or doctors are changing this policy or that one.

What a lot of people have not figured out is that a lot of people are just using this law as cover for things they intended to do anyways. Until we see how many people sign up and what its actual long term effects are we will not know.

I don't like Obamacare, especially as a younger male, but I definitely don't like all this fake media crap.
 
Patients Pay Before Seeing Doctor as Deductibles Spread - Bloomberg

wasn't Obama care supposed to keep the uninsured from flocking to the emergency rooms for any little illness?
Now it will be the insured and uninsured doing just that because they cant afford the deductibles and co-pay
so there goes another liberal talking point down the drain

Just more CON games :roll:

The ACA insurance plans have not gone into effect, won't til jan. Next the very poor will be absorbed into medicaid/care so they will be covered. ER rooms do not have to treat 'any little illness'. This is the actions of a few doctors and hospitals as they see more people getting a very quick education and shock on just how much health insurance really costs their employer.

The 'fix' isn't CON mockery but a limit on how much a doctor or hospital can charge for an initial visit. The pay upfront policy was in effect BEFORE the ACA, just now CONs are seizing on it now that the ACA will soon be in effect.

Pure CON nonsense and another CON talking point down the drain.
 
Medicare starts at 65, not 61.and ACA does require that you pay the premium. Edit: Oh, I see it is the son that is 61, so Mom does, indeed qualify for Medicare. Medicare, however, is not free, there is a premium to pay, and it only pays 80% of medical bills.

Sawyer tells some interesting stories about his income and what the ACA will do... I am to the point if he said the sky was blue I'd have to take a peek myself.

You are thinking of the 'Part D' medicare coverage that pays for drugs. Part A medicare is free if you receive or are eligible for SSI or railroad retirement. Part B costs those making a REPORTABLE income of 85K per person or 170K as a couple or under- 104.90 a month. Not a big expense.

The issue some doctors have with medicare is the doctor must agree to only charge what medicare is willing to pay. Some doctors refuse to see medicare patients.
 
Sawyer tells some interesting stories about his income and what the ACA will do... I am to the point if he said the sky was blue I'd have to take a peek myself.

You are thinking of the 'Part D' medicare coverage that pays for drugs. Part A medicare is free if you receive or are eligible for SSI or railroad retirement. Part B costs those making a REPORTABLE income of 85K per person or 170K as a couple or under- 104.90 a month. Not a big expense.

The issue some doctors have with medicare is the doctor must agree to only charge what medicare is willing to pay. Some doctors refuse to see medicare patients.

Yes, I'm aware that he likes to tell stories.

Here's another story that just happens to be true: I'm on Medicare, don't make 85K individually, my wife and I together don't make 170K. We pay a little over $100 a month each for Medicare part B. It's not a huge burden, no, but neither is it free. The cost also goes up as the patient's age goes up.

Yet another: Medicare pays only 80%. Doctors don't charge just what Medicare will pay, but that plus the patient's 20%. That's why seniors still need a supplement. If the doctor's visit is $100, and Medicare pays $80, that's not a big deal, but if the cancer cure costs $200,000 and Medicare pays $160,000, most of us will need some help.
 
Yes, I'm aware that he likes to tell stories.Here's another story that just happens to be true: I'm on Medicare, don't make 85K individually, my wife and I together don't make 170K. We pay a little over $100 a month each for Medicare part B. It's not a huge burden, no, but neither is it free. The cost also goes up as the patient's age goes up. Yet another: Medicare pays only 80%. Doctors don't charge just what Medicare will pay, but that plus the patient's 20%. That's why seniors still need a supplement. If the doctor's visit is $100, and Medicare pays $80, that's not a big deal, but if the cancer cure costs $200,000 and Medicare pays $160,000, most of us will need some help.

Perhaps I didn't type very well.... you have to make OVER the 85/170K in taxable income to pay more than 104.90 a month for Part B. here in Oklahoma a doctor may not charge more than what Medicare pays. We have doctors who refuse to take Medicare patients because of that restriction.

Given my wife and I once had an insurance policy with a 5K deductible with no AFLAC type riders and an 70/30 copay that cost us about 550 a month I am not going to bemoan the Medicare plans like our Dear Sawyer....
 
Perhaps I didn't type very well.... you have to make OVER the 85/170K in taxable income to pay more than 104.90 a month for Part B. here in Oklahoma a doctor may not charge more than what Medicare pays. We have doctors who refuse to take Medicare patients because of that restriction.

Given my wife and I once had an insurance policy with a 5K deductible with no AFLAC type riders and an 70/30 copay that cost us about 550 a month I am not going to bemoan the Medicare plans like our Dear Sawyer....

Medicare is a good deal for seniors, no question.
I wasn't aware of your Oklahoma laws. Here in California, Medicare patients have no problems finding doctors, at least my parents never did and I don't either.

I have a friend who is 60, not old enough for Medicare, and who had the temerity to actually start a small business of his own. He pays 2 grand a month for a policy that kicks in after the first $25,000. Now, that's the sort of thing that needs to be addressed, as it discourages people from leaving the corporate world and striking out on their own.

The root of the problem with health care is cost, and the dependence on employer paid insurance. Obamacare just treats the symptoms, not the cause. It is neither panacea nor a disaster. All it does is make it possible for more people to have medical insurance.
 
They may give you a discount. They may not. If they don't have a procedure in place for that discount, you're not likely to see it. At least, that's been my experience. I have a $5,200 deductible policy. Pretty straight forward. I pay the first $5,200 a year -- the insurance pays everything else. At first, I would simply PAY for a doctor visit, not anticipating that I would meet my deductible that year. I asked for a discount and was refused. The office charge was $130.

Then someone told me I should be running EVERYTHING through my insurance company so I wouldn't have to backtrack if I DID meet the deductible. The insurance company discounted the $130 to $50 (or something like that) and said, "We're applying the $50 to your deductible." And that was all I paid the provider.

Insurance companies have contractual arrangements with providers. Doctors don't care if they get the money from YOU or from your insurance company. But if you don't run it through an insurance company, you're not likely to get the benefit of the steep discount they'd give Blue Cross Blue Shield.

It's true that doctors don't care where the money comes from, but they do care when it comes and how many people they have to pay to collect it. That's why they have discounts for cash patients. My dermatologist will not even take insurance payments...
 
My sister just found out she has to pay a co-pay of $290 for her medicaid once ACA is launched. You have to make less than $500 a month to be exempt from paying it. People are going to be pissed.
 
If the mother goes to the ER, she's still going to pay her deductible. But instead of a $30 co-pay at her doctor? She's on the hook for the $1,500 the ER charges until she's satisfied her deductible.

??

I mean, really. If you don't have a $30 co-pay for the doctor visit? You shouldn't be having kids. Right?

What I do not get is that you will get more out of a trip to your primary MD that knows you than spending hours of your time for a non emergency visit to a high priced ER.

Find a good Primary MD and stick with him.
 
My sister just found out she has to pay a co-pay of $290 for her medicaid once ACA is launched. You have to make less than $500 a month to be exempt from paying it. People are going to be pissed.

Can you post a link to this information?

What state is she in?
 
Back
Top Bottom