XPost: alt.autos.toyota, rec.autos.driving, alt.society.liberalism
XPost: alt.fan.michael-moore
From: dead@gone.com
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:44:41 -0700, Jeff Strickland wrote:
> "sms88" wrote in message
> news:k095ps$mqb$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> On 8/12/2012 1:08 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>>
>>> "sms88" wrote in message
>>> news:k08prb$d1q$1@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 8/12/2012 10:00 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You went to the county heath clinic. You paid $25, the officed
>>>>> billed the government $400 for the three minutes you were served.
>>>>
>>>> Unlikely. The county clinics are highly subsidized up front. While
>>>> the amount of care received probably cost the government well over
>>>> $400, there was no need to submit any bills since the government
>>>> already paid for the doctors, nurses, laboratory, and support staff.
>>>> It's more efficient than submitting forms for reimbursement for every
>>>> patient.
>>>
>>> That doesn't really change my argument very much. Does the office bill
>>> the government after the service or before? Either way, it costs more
>>> than $25, and taxpayers pick up the shortfall.
>>
>> That's true. And since the person will go to the county clinic only
>> when the problem becomes serious, the costs end up being much higher
>> than if they had preventative care available to them.
>>
>> That's why the U.S. spends the most money per capita on health care but
>> has poorer outcomes than countries that spend far less.
>>
>> We choose to personally spend more money on health care, education,
>> etc.,
>> in exchange for much lower taxes than other countries. The fact that we
>> actually end up spending far more money overall is something that is
>> difficult to make people understand.
>
> America spends more per capita because if the doctor prescribes a
> Bandaid, and the adhesive sticks too hard, the patient will sue. They
> have to test the Bandaid to a ridiculous degree, and they have to test
> the patient to be sure their skin is not gonna have a reaction to the
> glue. If you have a headache, they need a brain scan to be sure that
> Aspirin is gonna take care of you. Aspirin is not expensive, but the
> brain scan costs a bundle. Doctors are sued for stuff they should not be
> sued for, and they test for stuff that has no bearing on the problem
> that you came in for because if they miss it they you will sue them even
> though what did you in had nothing to do with what made you go to the
> doctor in the first place. THIS DRIVES UP THE COST OF HEALTH CARE so
> that America pays more per capita than the entire rest of the universe.
Malpractice lawsuits make up less than 2% of medical costs. Some
providers do overtest to avoid possible claims, but it's hard to
determine how much of that is simple caution, how much of it is
warranted, and how much is just providers milking the system. I've never
heard of a doctor prescribing an EEG in order to administer aspirin, but
most people don't see doctors over simple headaches--they've already
TRIED aspirin, and it didn't work. Any doctor who didn't take a closer
look would be a fool.
>
> But, I submit that the OP did not wait until the illness was at an
> advanced state and the cost to cure was high because of it. I maintain
> that the cost is high just because the cost is high, and lots of
> variables feed into that problem.
>
And then you have the parasitic class skimming 30-40% off the top.
> I once had a horrible razor blade accident that took 9 stiches, the cost
> was well in excess of $600 at the Urgent Care. Not even the emergency
> room, just a lowly urgent care clinic in a strip mall behind Target.
> $600 for 9 stiches. The girl swabbed the job site with some iodine for a
> couple of minutes, the doctor came in with a knitting needle and some
> twine. $600 in less than 20 minutes. I am not one to visit the doctor
> unless I have an acute event of some sort. I have lots of chronic
> problems that simply cannot be fixed, or maybe they can be fixed, but
> they are "just life", and fixing them is simply not worth my time and
> trouble. I'm an Old Guy that hurts everywhere, but unless there is a
> bone sticking out or copious loss of bodily fluids, I just don't care
> enough to have it looked at. I paid the cover charge, and they billed my
> insurance, then billed me for what the insurance didn't cover.
>
What do you think would be a reasonable price for what you had done? I'm
curious.
> The point is, it is a pile of horseshit to say that people sit at home
> and fester, then go to the ER in the final minutes of their life to get
> a cure in the knick of time. Most that go to the ER have a sudden,
> acute, event that they deem to be serious. Yes, some take a paper cut to
> the ER, but the vast majority of paper cut victims do not arrive at the
> ER in the back of a meat wagon. The meat wagon brings in something more
> than 90% of ER patients,
> the paper cuts are walk-ins that frankly the ER should send to the local
> urgent care instead of give up the valuable space and resources to cure.
How is a paper cut that takes nine stitches (yes, it can happen) less
important than a razor cut that takes nine stitches?
>
> I'm sure that TigerCrap, whatever, and his girlfriend did the right
> thing by going to the local clinic as opposed to the ER, and he gets a
> Brownie Point for paying the $25 deductable instead of hitting the ER
> for free service, but the point is that the services he(she) received
> cost far more than $25, and unless he(she) has health insurance for the
> rest, then you and I are paying the tab for him. Do not be fooled, I'm
> sure he pays the same taxes, so he paid into the fund for the services
> he received too, and he also pays into the fund that serves others in
> the community. But, he should be aware that the services cost far more
> than the $25 Cover Charge they hit him at the door with.
Agreed on that. Basically, it's the same as the deductible most people
have on their insurance.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
