The real tragedy of healthcare

[Politically_Incorrect12]

The real tragedy is to see people who are paying for healthcare push themselves to get out of the hospital sooner, who push off taking pain medication for as long as they can, and try to do with the minimum necessary because they know they will get the bill for everything. OTOH, there are those who know they won't get the bill and want the max of everything because in the end, they aren't the ones making the payments. I am by no means advocating a one payer system or government controlled healthcare, since I believe it will only worsen the problem. I just find something odd about a situation where the people who are trying to save the system and themselves money don't get the same level of helthcare as those who don't get the same bills.

[zipity]

A hidden problem here is that people without insurance also push off seeing the doctor when they do have an issue. By the time they show up at the emergency room to see a doctor, the problem is no longer in the "early" stages and typically requires a lot more expense to correct, assuming it can be corrected.

[floridayankee]

Dec 21, 2010 22:53:38 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

OTOH, there are those who know they won't get the bill and want the max of everything because in the end, they aren't the ones making the payments.

I have insurance and I avoid Dr's at all costs...where does that put me?

Nothing is for free. While you are not paying the bill directly for your health care, you are paying your premiums...which priced based on projected payouts.

Whether it's health, auto, home, life, etc...insurance is one of them things that I'm actually glad to be on the losing end.

[ugonow]

Dec 22, 2010 10:04:29 GMT -5 floridayankee said:

Dec 21, 2010 22:53:38 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

OTOH, there are those who know they won't get the bill and want the max of everything because in the end, they aren't the ones making the payments.

I have insurance and I avoid Dr's at all costs...where does that put me?

Nothing is for free. While you are not paying the bill directly for your health care, you are paying your premiums...which priced based on projected payouts.

Whether it's health, auto, home, life, etc...insurance is one of them things that I'm actually glad to be on the losing end.

The sustem depends on it

[ChiTownVenture]

Dec 22, 2010 10:04:29 GMT -5 floridayankee said:

Dec 21, 2010 22:53:38 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

OTOH, there are those who know they won't get the bill and want the max of everything because in the end, they aren't the ones making the payments.

I have insurance and I avoid Dr's at all costs...

I do the same because I know that a single employee can drive up an employer's rates above the average increase. I've worked for companies that have had employees get cancer (or other terminal disease), go through a long drawn out battle and ultimately die. The insurance renewals skyrocket because of the prior years insurer's costs.

[deziloooooo]

"A hidden problem here is that people without insurance also push off seeing the doctor when they do have an issue. By the time they show up at the emergency room to see a doctor, the problem is no longer in the "early" stages and typically requires a lot more expense to correct, assuming it can be corrected"
Interesting post as I just came back from my Doctor. Was there a few weeks ago, have a condition, nothing seriouse , but could lead to something , so new med two weeks ago, went back to see results, still not what is wanted, another med, will see in three weeks, see how I'm doing.
Point is, I have good Insurence, medicare, suppliment, see Doctors regularly, things able to be picked up, am a senior. The condition COULD become a problem, a major one , yet feel fine, no feeling of being sick, so one wouldn't think of seeing a doctor, and if something happened , not found, to late, or very, very expensive to treat if treatable or might be left in not so good condition with permanent damage.
With out Insurence so many would be in that situation, not being seen. Am I so special and entitled, that I should have the better care then some of my fellow citizens or shouldn't we all have that chance for pre care , finding out if all is ok or not.
I'm for the , all have the right to. Under the health initive , while not all, so many more now, have or will have the same availability to good health care as I do and to me that's the way it should be.. Naturally if you feel "no it's what one can afford"..government has no right to mandate fair , good care for the many , nothing personal, but I disagree with you there.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Nothing is for free. While you are not paying the bill directly for your health care, you are paying your premiums...which priced based on projected payouts.

Whether it's health, auto, home, life, etc...insurance is one of them things that I'm actually glad to be on the losing end.

I understand that you are paying the premiums, it has been my experience that people who are paying for insurance still try to watch what they spend, unless they have met their yearly deductible. I don't really have any issue with people who buy their own coverage and have met their deductible. I don't even have an issue with people who fall below the wage that makes them qualify for government sponsored health insurance (I'd rather make a better wage and be able to afford coverage). I just feel that it's unfortunate that those who buy their own coverage often seem to be the ones (there are exceptions of course) who are more cost aware of their hospital stay because they are actually paying something. I don't really have an answer to the issue, just find it to be sad situation with no really good answer.

[floridayankee]

Dec 22, 2010 15:40:23 GMT -5 deziloooooo said:

"A hidden problem here is that people without insurance also push off seeing the doctor when they do have an issue. By the time they show up at the emergency room to see a doctor, the problem is no longer in the "early" stages and typically requires a lot more expense to correct, assuming it can be corrected

Arguing the cost of preventative medicine vs "wait 'til you need it" medicine is a losing battle dezi. HMO's were supposed to lower costs by increasing the number of times you see the Dr and thus catching any issues before they become advanced issues. The problem is, they completely failed to decrease overall costs by increasing the number of patients seeing Dr's on a regular basis for absolutely no reason.

Face it....preventative care for millions that don't need to be cared for is just as expensive as the advanced care for the hundreds that actually do.

[deziloooooo]

"Face it....preventative care for millions that don't need to be cared for is just as expensive as the advanced care for the hundreds that actually do."
Possible correct, However , the point is that one of the reasons for the Health Inititive from what I understand is the escalating cost that are being predicted as a definite happening, which I believe, to the point, more and more Companies will join in not offering it or cutting their contributions toward the coverage. Employee will pay more and more as is happening as I type. The argument that they need it , health coverage, to keep workers, be competitive with in their industries, to keep workers, for now and the forceable future, Jobs are everyones concerns and the less they, employers, have to give workers, the better for them, this I believe too. Employees want to keep their jobs, keep their companies on shore so less demand on employers, less unions so less clout. Are there holes in the new inititive? Of course , but there has to be some control, something had to be done. Going after the Doctors are not the way to go, they have no more to give...health inititive, , I think it was necessary, not for me but for the younger generation, absolutly..and still feel the preventive, that I am experincing right now should be available to all..They want to revisit it, tweak it, that's fine b me, get rid of it? Then what? the status quo..my son, exec in the Industry, would love that..lol.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

People want better treatments and medications, but want to pay less for them. It's not really something that works out well when you try to combined the two options.

[floridayankee]

Dec 22, 2010 20:29:31 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

People want better treatments and medications, but want to pay less for them. It's not really something that works out well when you try to combined the two options.

No, it's not. And if the profit incentive is removed and/or restrained, there's no incentive to invest in costly and risky advanced R&D. Over time, that reduces the quality of care for everybody.

But, the left will be happy...at least we'll all be equally miserable.

[ugonow]

Our healthcare system is funny when you think about it.It is set up so that it depends on sick people to survive,but depends on well people to subsidize it.

[floridayankee]

Dec 23, 2010 9:00:36 GMT -5 ugonow said:

It is set up so that it depends on sick people to survive,but depends on well people to subsidize it.

That describes the insurance industry, not the health care industry.

As I said, I'd rather be the subsidizer rather than the benefactor.

[rockon]

Preventative care is a huge factor in our health care costs but it isn't just about seeing a doctor regularly or having insurance. Any true prevention program would have to be primarily focused on diet, exercise, stress, sleep , habits and etc. and this type of a preventative program doesn't cost the the tax payers a trillion dollars. As a matter of fact it doesn't even require any action by the legislature. We can do it ourselves and we could start today.
Insurance could have an effect on how frequently someone visits a doctor but insurance was never intended to be used to pay for normal doctor visits or costs. Insurance can only be affordable when it is used as intended, to cover major or unmanageable costs. The recent health insurance reform bill will make many of these affordable insurance policies illegal.

[floridayankee]

Dec 23, 2010 9:33:09 GMT -5 rockon said:

Preventative care is a huge factor in our health care costs but it isn't just about seeing a doctor regularly or having insurance. Any true prevention program would have to be primarily focused on diet, exercise, stress, sleep , habits and etc. and this type of a preventative program doesn't cost the the tax payers a trillion dollars. As a matter of fact it doesn't even require any action by the legislature. We can do it ourselves and we could start today.

All of which is no gaurantee either.

I went to a service yesterday evening for a 51 year old health nut that had a massive stroke last week and died after 4 days on life support.

[ugonow]

That describes the insurance industry, not the health care industry.



Or the medicare system. The healthy subsidize the unhealthy,but the industry needs the unhealthy to not only strive,but survive.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Dec 21, 2010 22:53:38 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

The real tragedy is to see people who are paying for healthcare push themselves to get out of the hospital sooner, who push off taking pain medication for as long as they can, and try to do with the minimum necessary because they know they will get the bill for everything. OTOH, there are those who know they won't get the bill and want the max of everything because in the end, they aren't the ones making the payments. I am by no means advocating a one payer system or government controlled healthcare, since I believe it will only worsen the problem. I just find something odd about a situation where the people who are trying to save the system and themselves money don't get the same level of helthcare as those who don't get the same bills.

There are three main problems with healthcare:

1. Health insurance is a wage supplement, it is NOT "insurance" in any sense of the word, it's subsidized health care. This practice began as a result of government wage and price controls during and after WWII. In order to attract employees, many companies had doctors on the payroll that would make house calls. Later, they paid the doctor bills, and then we got "insurance" as we know it today.

The Fix: Get used to PAYING for healthcare- routine office visits, prescriptions, etc. Then get used to health INSURANCE as insurance- high deductible, for catastrophic events ONLY. Think of your auto policy- you don't make "co-pays" for oil changes and gas-- YOU pay for those things 100%. Minor repairs, and breakdowns are on YOU. If there's a catastrophic accident or event-- you have insurance for those things.

2. Portability. Does your employer 'own' your auto insurance? Why do they own your health insurance? Group plans are fine, but if we're going to have gov't regulation-- then when you leave a job, you don't lose your insurance. If you own actual insurance as described above-- there's no reason YOU aren't the owner of the policy. If your employer wants to kick in, or if they company wants to cut your employer a break-- fine. (however, I really think we need to get away from this "ward of the company" employee mentality anyway-- meaning you own ALL your benefits, work as an independent contractor, take care of YOURSELF! but that's probably a whole 'nother thread)

3. Competition-- you need to be able to buy insurance from the insurer of YOUR choice. State government interferance in an odd perversion of the Commerce clause should NOT interfere with someone in IL buying the policy of their choice from IN, or MO- or NJ for that matter.

I suppose there's also medical liability and other issues-- but the main solution is to reintroduce MARKET FORCES to the provision of healthcare. Consumers who have insurance as it is now constituted currently have NO incentive to economize (as noted in the OP), or if they have no insurance they have an inordinate burden of high prices created by the dysfunctional system.

[dancinmama]

Dec 22, 2010 10:04:29 GMT -5 floridayankee said:

Dec 21, 2010 22:53:38 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

OTOH, there are those who know they won't get the bill and want the max of everything because in the end, they aren't the ones making the payments.

I have insurance and I avoid Dr's at all costs...where does that put me?

Nothing is for free. While you are not paying the bill directly for your health care, you are paying your premiums...which priced based on projected payouts.

Whether it's health, auto, home, life, etc...insurance is one of them things that I'm actually glad to be on the losing end.

We don't avoid doctors at all costs, but we do not go to the doctor unless we need to. For me, it usually the regular mammogram or pap.

DH was diagnosed with Chrone's a year and a half ago, but besides the initial incident (the one that led to the diagnosis), he has been asymptomatic. The dr. insisted on another colonoscopy even though DH has not had any problems whatsoever. The cost to us was $160 and resulted in finding out nothing new - the ulcerations in the small intestine are still present, but are causing no problems at all. The dr. wants to put him on meds. Why? He has done fine without any meds since the initial diagnosis.

We have a telecon appointment in January to discuss it. We will listen to the doc, research the meds, and then make a decision; but it really seems odd to me that the doc wants him to go on meds after a year and a half and when there is no indication of needing them.

I think that people need to use a little common sense when dealing with doctors.

I remember when our insurance premiums were paid 100% by our company AND there were no co-pays for anything. A lot of people would run to the dr. at the drop of a hat because it was free. It used to really tick me off.

I have always been fiscally conservative - both with my own money and with other people's including the insurance company's.

[deziloooooo]

I guess we have a different way of looking at it..I go to the Doc for check ups because I want them to find things wrong before they get seriouse. I had a colonostomy six years ago, it was negative. I was supposed to have one last year, bu tactually wasn't in the mood but after the first of the year i will reschedule, and again, hope they find nothing wrong. To many times when they find out something later , it if not fatal is something that is much more involved, case in point down stairs neighbor, no colonostomy, but they came down bad, had the surgery, the chemo, then a stroke, weakening because of medications, and is now slowly recovering, where as if found earlier, possible minor sugery and no other problems.
Same as the medication, while they might have felt not necessary once, possible blood work is showing a need..be careful in saying no.

[warsaw (banned)]

Amount of care should be left to the doctors and the patient and family, if sane LOL- and that does not mean death panels, dittoheads...

[ugonow]

"Amount of care should be left to the doctors and the patient and family, if sane LOL- and that does not mean death panels, dittoheads... " --- The government or insurance company never dictates the amount of care or what treatments a patient can have. They do state what the taxpayers or policy will pay for,however,which is a reality that you will never overcome.

[skweet]

The real tradegy of health care is that people will be dropping off it in the next couple of years forcing a single-payer system. Right now, your employer is looking at a 25%-50% increase in premiums with less service. For instance they may have been buying a policy for $800 a month for you. Now the cost is $1,080. Company plans for additional cost of $50, and was prepared to ask employee to cover $50 above that, but doesn't have a plan to foot the extra $180. So the company looks at getting rid of health insurance and the penalty works out to $250. That makes an easy decision, they will pay the $850 that they planned to pay for insurance, minus the $250 penalty, directly to the employee, so they can go an exchange plan. $600 additional pay to the employee that goes to buy a similar plan through the exchange for...uh-oh $1,200. Employee has to come up with an additional $600 for insurance that they used to get for free. This is the cheapest route for the employer, but the last stats I heard said that 3% of inquiries in the exchange program lead to policies, and the only buyers were sick, now. Basically the new health plan forced the need for single payer.

[deziloooooo]

Thats the one thing they couldn't get through..single pay ..now if some from the other side had come over...different story.

[skweet]

"Thats the one thing they couldn't get through..single pay .."
It was hard to convince the other side, because most people had health coverage. With the new program, most will not have health coverage. Rates will continue to sky-rocket at an ever faster pace. The other side will have to accept single payer, at some point. Can Obama claim victory, if he creates the problem to be solved with his original solution to a problem that did not exist? I assume so.

[skweet]

It is like the fire department really wants to hose down your house, they get tired of waiting for a fire, so they start pouring gas and dropping lit matches. Yay the fire department put out your fire, yaaaaaay......

[ugonow]

Premiums and coverage had been holding steady for the last 7 years until Obama screwed things up.

[Deleted]

Healthcare?? Bah, humbug!! I could not afford it for the 10 years I was driving a cab and raising my kids, now I am out of work, and qualify for no help because I am living with my working children. NONE of us have healthcare, because we cannot afford it, and my little grandbaby is just 2 YO. What is OBAMACARE going to do for us?? Any answers?? At least the creep cannot fine me and put me in jail now that I am unemployed. Wonder what he will do to my kids? One of my son-in-laws is in the flipping army reserves-- goes to training often, can be deployed at ANY time, and his baby has no health insurance, nor does his wife, or him. My youngest daughter has a fast food job, and is 18, saving for college and a car to get her to classes--- what will her fine be?? My OTHER son is supporting his child from a woman that ran off, and can barely pay his rent, since his main concern is supporting his daughter. What will OBAMACARE demand of him?? I live in AZ, thank God. I do not think AZ will allow people to be forced to buy a product they cannot afford to buy. It is unconstitutional. As for me-- MR. POTUS has no concern for people like me. I TRIED, on the advice of others, to get some help from social services. You know, some food stamps, medical, anything... WELL, guess what?? I am living with my children, and that disqualifies me for ANY help..... they say we are fine.... and we can barely keep the bills paid... now I am a burden to my kids.... but that is FINE.....
See, the deal is-- I do not know how to work the system. I don't know the lies people tell, the politics involved, etc. Whatever. I am near the border, and in reasonably good health. Think I will sneak over and walk back in, maybe buy some poor sucker's identity, then get the motherload from the tax payers.
Over my dead body, by the way.

[ugonow]

Look,everyone in America has healthcare.Just go to the emergency room.No one dies in the streets here from lack of healthcare as the libs like to spew. We could solve the whole "uninsured" problem by instead of calling those without insurance uninsured,identify their source of care,whether it be the ER,medicare,medicaid,Kids First, or just the good old fashoned don't pay the bill and let others that do make up for it.

[deziloooooo]

I believe in your case when it comes on line, not there yet , and hopefully your not in the same situation, there will be coverage for you where you don't have it now, Naturally, when working, you will have to pay something for the coverage as most of us do, if your income falls into what ever the parameters will be.

"Just go to the emergency room.No one dies"


That is not health care , don't kid your self.

[fairlycrazy23]

The real 'tragedy' of healthcare is that we have 3rd party payer (insurance or government).
Everybody should just pay for there own health care , and only after reaching the fairly high deductible would insurance kick in, for the 'poor' they would have a debit card provided completely or partially by the state.

Insurance would still probably cover many preventive tests and steps 100%, if the insurance company wanted to.