Rep Leonard Lance want to keep Medicaid expansion

But under ACA, insurance companies must pay out 80% or 85% of money taken in.

The rest is used for company expenses and profits.

Apparently that part of ACA has failed ?

There's a big conflict with market prices and price controls.

How is the government supposed to fix that without cutting worker and professional wages ?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: xuenchen

Single payer would be better, the ACA is paving the way to that.

Being taken advantage of by insurance companies will hopefully be an awful memory of the past.

So what will "single payer" do to avoid service shortages when the price controls go against market conditions ?

They'll probably do the same thing they do in every other industrialized nation that has universal healthcare.

Where by the way, they beat the U.S. in almost every single measurable healthcare related statistic, from infant mortality to average lifespan.

I wouldn't be so hopeful. After watching the roll out of Obamacare, it is likely that many GOP led legislatures will purposely break it then point to how Single Payer is failing in their district/state as a reason to get rid of it. After all, that is what they did with the Medicaid expansion. They refuse to accept it then whine that health care prices have skyrocketed in their state.

Yeah, I know you're right about that and I'm not sure how to fix that part of the problem.

They refused Medicaid expansion, thereby denying coverage to the poor, at the same time that their hospital's indigent care subsidies were cut because they weren't supposed to need it once the poor had coverage. This led to higher premiums for those with coverage in order to prop up their hospital's bottom line and keep their doors open.

I call it the circle-jerk of unadulterated ignorance brought on by the tribal mentality of politics.

Maybe we should devote more money towards finding a cure for republicanism.

originally posted by: xuenchen
But under ACA, insurance companies must pay out 80% or 85% of money taken in.

The rest is used for company expenses and profits.

Apparently that part of ACA has failed ?

There's a big conflict with market prices and price controls.

How is the government supposed to fix that without cutting worker and professional wages ?

If I'm not mistaken, Medicare's administrative cost is under 3%.

That's a far cry from 15% to 20%.

When you couple that with the fact that part of that 80% to 85% that insurance companies must pay out is going to pay for employees at doctor's offices and hospitals whose only job is to deal with insurance companies..... well, we're back to the circle-jerk I referred to earlier.

a reply to: Flatfish

It would be interesting to see the actual dollar numbers.

Difficult because the government and private business might have "administrative" costs in different columns.

a reply to: Flatfish

I just wish we could go back to a day where "compromise" wasn't considered a dirty word.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Flatfish

It would be interesting to see the actual dollar numbers.

Difficult because the government and private business might have "administrative" costs in different columns.

If you just look at what other industrialized nations spend per person on not-for-profit, universal healthcare and then look at how their medical outcomes beat ours in almost every category, it's a no-brainer.

The only people who are better off under our system are the profiteers running our private healthcare insurance companies.

Well, them and the politicians they lobby and fund to keep in office.

a reply to: Flatfish

Could be.

But what are the medical related salaries in the "other industrialized nations" ?

If we are to somehow reduce "costs" of medical treatment here, we might need to do some major salary adjustments.

That might be a problem for the Unions that represent workers in the public medical sector.

And remember, the government uses private contractors to administrate Medicare and Medicaid.

Very difficult to figure all of it out.

a reply to: xuenchen

I have had in indepth converstation about this with a trump supporter...

There should be no issue with giving primary care doctors a good wage set by the govt. (bc they would be govt employees) and if the doctors wanted to specialize in a care field...such as podiatry, pediatrics, gynocology...they can go to dr. school longer yet get paid more.

This was just an idea that we could both agree on.

What that wage would be tho...that is the question.

Also no more charging $11 for a Q-tip...we could both agree on that.

a reply to: xuenchen

I've listened to several EU doctors interviewed on this very subject and according to them, they do quite well.

On another note, what private contractors does the government utilize to administer Medicaid & Medicare and for what?

My family doctor sees primarily Medicare patients, he's not a private contractor and I'm not Medicare eligible yet. So in other words, he does both.

It's my understanding that the choice about whether or not to take Medicaid and/or Medicare patients is up to the physician.

The same way the physician is the one who decides whether or not he will accept your insurance.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: rickymouse
Doctors do run test to see if what you have is a bacteria or virus. Antibiotics can not do anything for viral infections so after the tests, basically all you can do is go home and do Nettie pots.

I do find it comforting to know if it is viral or bacterial. I understand there is nothing to help a virus.

Is that what you are talking about? A doctor would not just send you home if it's bacterial.

Over the years, I have been to the doctors and not once did they do a test to check if something is viral or bacterial. Even now, they have the tests yet most people don't get tested the first time they are in. I know a lot of people around here that go to the doctors. We discuss stuff like this.

You've never had a doctor perform a culture swab on you? I go to urgent care centers and they do culture swab tests. If your doctors aren't doing that, then you guys have a serious problem with your healthcare.

Very seldom do they do the culture swab on someone who comes in, at least the first time they come in . It seems most of the doctors do not do that here

a reply to: veracity

*We*?

Who is this *We* you are talking about.

I say if states want to expand their Medicare. Let then, and let them pay for it all on their own.

a reply to: rickymouse

That's unfortunate. I didn't have a choice when my scope point in my knee became infected after coming back from Iraq and they just jammed that swab into my knee... Though my knee was also leaking fluid, so that had something to do with it.

In any case, here in bmore, I just have to suggest I've got an infection and they'll swab me. Happened to me with a sore throat once. One time it truly was strep throat and the next time it was nothing. All I had to do was suggest it and they ordered the test.

a reply to: Flatfish

Medicare Administrative Contractor


Contractor Resources

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Most docs are pretty reasonable about the rapid screen swab especially if you make it clear that you just want to rule strep out or in because you may have been exposed.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Most docs are pretty reasonable about the rapid screen swab especially if you make it clear that you just want to rule strep out or in because you may have been exposed.

I think at the time I also requested a mono culture too though. Which they gave me and then followed up on during the one time it turned out to be just a normal sore throat.

a reply to: xuenchen

Not sure I understand the full scope of these Medicare Administrative Contractors, but it would seem that their services are limited to patients utilizing DMEs or Durable Medical Equipment and/or directing patients to FFS or Fee For Service providers.

Either way, I don't believe they are providing any actual treatment, so I don't see how they would affect what a physician would earn under Medicare or Medicaid.

I could be wrong.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: rickymouse

That's unfortunate. I didn't have a choice when my scope point in my knee became infected after coming back from Iraq and they just jammed that swab into my knee... Though my knee was also leaking fluid, so that had something to do with it.

In any case, here in bmore, I just have to suggest I've got an infection and they'll swab me. Happened to me with a sore throat once. One time it truly was strep throat and the next time it was nothing. All I had to do was suggest it and they ordered the test.

The swabbing for strep throat is done a lot, but only if there is signs of strep throat present when they look.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: rickymouse

That's unfortunate. I didn't have a choice when my scope point in my knee became infected after coming back from Iraq and they just jammed that swab into my knee... Though my knee was also leaking fluid, so that had something to do with it.

In any case, here in bmore, I just have to suggest I've got an infection and they'll swab me. Happened to me with a sore throat once. One time it truly was strep throat and the next time it was nothing. All I had to do was suggest it and they ordered the test.

Jammed swab in knee...ouch!

a reply to: veracity

Lol. Ya. Twice. First in the infected spot, then in the spot that had literally just finished scarring up "just in case it wasn't infected too".

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: rickymouse

That's unfortunate. I didn't have a choice when my scope point in my knee became infected after coming back from Iraq and they just jammed that swab into my knee... Though my knee was also leaking fluid, so that had something to do with it.

In any case, here in bmore, I just have to suggest I've got an infection and they'll swab me. Happened to me with a sore throat once. One time it truly was strep throat and the next time it was nothing. All I had to do was suggest it and they ordered the test.

The swabbing for strep throat is done a lot, but only if there is signs of strep throat present when they look.

Well that's good. I just couldn't see throat cultures going unchecked. Keep in mind that not all bacteria out there are super bugs. Sometimes maintaining good resistance is properly fighting the easy to kill guys too. Even the swabs that determine if you have strep or not are important.

If I had just gone ahead with my assumption that I had strep the second time, I could have done some serious damage to my immunity to it since I'd be taking an antibiotic and not needing it. That's how those superbugs appear that you hear about sometimes in the news.