It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Free Market Healthcare

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 07:15 PM
link   
One of the reasons that healthcare costs so much is that the free market has been smothered by over burdensome government regulations and bureaucracies. When markets have healthy competition, prices naturally go down.

The other huge issue with healthcare is that the consumer is detached from choosing provides so there is no price discovery. When people are spending their own money, they tend to scrutinize each penny. However, when a person is led to believe that the cost is free/covered, they are far more liberal with their spending decisions (willing to pay more as they are not responsible for the bill). A good example of this is expense accounts. If you are on an expense account, you think nothing about paying for inflated room service at a hotel. However, if you are staying at same hotel on your own dime, you are more likely to question the expense or look for cheaper alternatives.

Anyway, I saw an article today in Crain's Chicago which illustrates how free markets lower healthcare costs. The article is about standalone MRI centers that are popping up to do nothing but MRI scanning. Apparently, the average MRI at a hospital costs about $2600 in the article. However, these centers never charge more than $600.00.

Coming to a Strip Mall Near You: MRI Centers



More and more medical procedures are moving to the strip mall, thanks to high-deductible insurance plans that are turning patients into penny-pinchers.


One of the reasons for their popularity is high deductible plans are causing the insured to be more diligent about what services costs. In other words, because the consumer is responsible for the costs due to their high deductibles, they have skin in the game and are shopping around for cheaper alternatives.

Free markets work.




posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated
Some how I think there is a little bit more to the issue of "free" market health care costs than you covered. Like the hospitals taking full advantage of the insurance situation.

Canada's plan is 1/2 of the US's in cost and better in health outcomes.


www.yesmagazine.org...


.
edit on 21-8-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Edumakated
Some how I think there is a little bit more to the issue of "free" market health care costs than you covered. Like the hospitals taking full advantage of the insurance situation.

Canada's plan is 1/2 of the US's in cost and better in health outcomes.


www.yesmagazine.org...


.


Don't be telling our citizens how poor and expensive our health care is compared to Canada's system. Our people are obsessed with watching the sun moon us at the time. The amount of people traveling and spending moocho bucks to go to see it indicates we have a lot of crazy people here. They will pay the high cost, and will benefit from the extra mental health coverage.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:43 PM
link   
The health care system is rigged, and any regs that are there were lobbied for.


Hospitals charge too much and insurance pays the hospitals and take 20% for profits and keeping the lights on.

It is as simple as the costs are high. To the north (Canada) they do it better for 1/2 the cost. Any one who can't see this simple fact does not want to.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   
There is no such thing as a free market and healthcare costs are high because there is a profit motive for the insurance companies.

They have to make a buck first and they work to deny any claim they can in order to maximize profit.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

ACA limits the insurance companies take to 20%. Now I am not sure if that is a good or bad. But the more health care costs, the more the insurance companies charge. In turn their share (20%) grows due to the higher premiums.

We need to go single payer or no insurance at all.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

If you eliminated the government mandate that forces hospitals to charge a specific amount (determined by government)in order to be reimbursed by Medicare/Medicaid, then you'd also see a drop in charges.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Edumakated

If you eliminated the government mandate that forces hospitals to charge a specific amount (determined by government)in order to be reimbursed by Medicare/Medicaid, then you'd also see a drop in charges.


I don't see how the medicare/aid system charges for tonsillectomy being eliminated would lessen my private insurance's charges from the same hospital. Maybe a small discount for non insured.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: introvert

ACA limits the insurance companies take to 20%. Now I am not sure if that is a good or bad. But the more health care costs, the more the insurance companies charge. In turn their share (20%) grows due to the higher premiums.

We need to go single payer or no insurance at all.


Single payer is the first step. UHC is the ultimate goal.

The ACA is junk and allowed the insurance companies to drive prices up to make the 20% really count.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Edumakated

If you eliminated the government mandate that forces hospitals to charge a specific amount (determined by government)in order to be reimbursed by Medicare/Medicaid, then you'd also see a drop in charges.


I don't see how the medicare/aid system charges for tonsillectomy being eliminated would lessen my private insurance's charges from the same hospital. Maybe a small discount for non insured.


There is a very distinct price difference if you pay in cash or use insurance.

Just ask at your local healthcare complex.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I do pay for my health care, and the huge discount is 5% in my neck of the woods. Want to know why it is no longer 20%.

Cause almost everyone has a $2500 deductible and everyone is bum rushing the hospitals with the legendary discount question for the cash payment.

They are there to make big bucks. I don't think your claims are true any more.


.
edit on 21-8-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: seasonal

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Edumakated

If you eliminated the government mandate that forces hospitals to charge a specific amount (determined by government)in order to be reimbursed by Medicare/Medicaid, then you'd also see a drop in charges.


I don't see how the medicare/aid system charges for tonsillectomy being eliminated would lessen my private insurance's charges from the same hospital. Maybe a small discount for non insured.


There is a very distinct price difference if you pay in cash or use insurance.

Just ask at your local healthcare complex.


Many healthcare complexes are not equipped to accept cash.

I tried to pay cash for a visit not just 2 months ago and they refused. Said I had to wait for the bill.

Got the bill and called to negotiate a cash price and they said I had to go through an insurance company to negotiate payment.

This isn't the same system is was in the 1950's.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

That's not typical of all establishments, especially in the inner city.

There are quite a few MD's, dentists and eye docs that will take cash at a reduced rate if you claim to not have insurance.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
The health care system is rigged, and any regs that are there were lobbied for.


Hospitals charge too much and insurance pays the hospitals and take 20% for profits and keeping the lights on.

It is as simple as the costs are high. To the north (Canada) they do it better for 1/2 the cost. Any one who can't see this simple fact does not want to.


Here is another major problem. When people are paying for healthcare they want to get a return and actually go to the doctors more. When employers supplied the healthcare, people did not worry about getting their money's worth. Now, people are paying a portion of their healthcare and they want to get their money's worth.

This is a psychological problem. I have healthcare and I haven't been to the doctors in a year and a half, I have medicine coverage and I am not taking any meds, I do not care if they are paid for. Some people will take anything the doctor prescribes without question if the insurance covers it, they consider they are benefitting from it. Fixing your diet will usually help more than medicines, most diseases are caused or contributed to by eating food we are not metabolically tolerant to. If you eat a food that suppresses your immune system and you can not break that chemistry down, then it weakens you and you can get sick easily. There are a lot of food chemistries out there that effect the immune system. Some people need to eat foods that suppress it because it is too strong, others need to boost it's effectiveness.

Our whole healthcare system is screwy. People have been conditioned to use it when it is not needed. There are sick people at the doctors, going there means you are exposed to more microbes in the waiting room.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

I just said this in another thread, but a big part of the problem is that healthcare insurance is a requirement rather than an option, and that needs to change. We've got millions of healthy Americans out there being forced to pay for a service they do not use, or use so little that it is ridiculous for them to be required to pay monthly premiums for such a thing. It drives costs up for everyone else who actually DO need health insurance, like cancer patients or cardiac, renal or neuro patients, to name a few.

It also drives down wages...employers have to pay into the system and when every full-time employee is required to carry health insurance and are not given the option to decline it, the wages they're able to offer are far less than what we should be seeing out there. The entire mess feeds off itself like an ouroboros, and the only ones benefiting are the insurance companies and huge corporations...and, of course, the government.

The forced insurance needs to go the way of the dodo, first and foremost. Go back to multiple coverage builds and optional coverage, and there will be an almost immediate difference for everyone. Less going into the pockets of the insurance companies means more going into the employees' pockets, which allows people to use their money for healthcare when and if they need it, and prices for those who rely heavily on it will balance out to where they don't have to make the choice between getting their treatment or putting food on the table.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: introvert

That's not typical of all establishments, especially in the inner city.

There are quite a few MD's, dentists and eye docs that will take cash at a reduced rate if you claim to not have insurance.


My records were on file and they knew I had insurance.

They refused to take my cash because they knew they could get a higher payout from them than they could a fast cash transaction.

They were not equipped to take cash for a reason.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:24 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Agree and I don't know.

I have not seen any conclusive evidence that let's say a Universal coverage leads to more dr. visits. But there is a proof that maintenance visits with the idea of catching things early leads to better outcomes.

If taxpayer funded, I think initially there would be a huge mountain of sick people because of the pent up demand with bum knees and bad backs (huge expensive operations in the US).



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Where you go, yea, sure. My docs office is the same way. However, there are quite a few places in my area that do take cash. It's not advertised but that option is available.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: introvert

That's not typical of all establishments, especially in the inner city.

There are quite a few MD's, dentists and eye docs that will take cash at a reduced rate if you claim to not have insurance.


My records were on file and they knew I had insurance.

They refused to take my cash because they knew they could get a higher payout from them than they could a fast cash transaction.

They were not equipped to take cash for a reason.


I would definitely question something like that, because it makes zero sense. Healthcare providers prefer cash over insurance, because they get instant payment. Insurance isn't like running a debit card...it's a process that takes several days to complete. All of those claims have to be entered and reviewed, and depending on the type of coverage, certain criteria must be met before they will pay out for the services rendered.

I worked in both hospital and office environments for almost two decades, and did insurance billing as part of my duties for each...and private pay was ALWAYS preferred over any insurance claim. It doesn't necessarily mean a discounted rate, but never have I heard of a care facility of any kind that refuses cash payment. In fact, the idea of that is patently absurd. Physicians despise dealing with insurance providers because they are all a giant pain in the ass.

If a facility refused cash payment for services in lieu of processing insurance claims, that should definitely raise a red flag for anyone seeking care at their establishment. The only time that continuity of care should ever be an issue is if the patient requires emergent medical care outside the scope of practice of a private facility...and that really wouldn't matter about the money anyway, simply referring the patient to an emergency facility or calling EMS to transport them to one. Whatever is going on there, it sounds very sketchy. No physician is going to turn down immediate cash payment unless someone else is forcing them to do so.


edit on 314010America/ChicagoMon, 21 Aug 2017 22:40:42 -050031pm31232America/Chicago by tigertatzen because: Smart phone, my ass



posted on Aug, 22 2017 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Problem is,there is no way to make a profit,many rich liberals promote these ideas,but they never invest in them because they are in buisness of making money,no one wants to do something for nothing,it's human nature



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join