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.

 

Nearly half of US medical care comes from emergency rooms

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: SRPrime

Once you show that Blue Cross card, the greed impulse kicks in with a lot of medical providers. You are put into the system and the insurance company is milked good.. and you as well if you have a high deductible.


Did you ever stop to think how that works both ways?

My mom worked all her career in a hospital, spent a good part of it in overnight billing and used to talk about the people on Medicaid who used to come into the ER with just any little thing and flash their card and claim they could have it done for free because of their "Medical Card".




posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Insurers are moving into systems where it doesn't benefit the patient to have superfluous costs.

Something im seeing more and more of, as well, as "Health Savings Plans". This is an interesting idea, where you can set aside some of your paycheck into a health savings account. The deduction is not taxed, but is tax deductible. Most HSA accounts will have a set of reports that help keep you IRS compliant when it comes to reporting requirements.

If that concept grows, it could move people into a system where they can save cash, tax free, that would be theres. They could draw down the cash, paying income tax on it while you do it. But the money is always yours. If its expanded for veterinary bills, it would be a bigger benefit to people.



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: SRPrime

You are not factoring in his cost of doing business, including his cost to insure himself against malpractice.

Someone my husband went to high school with is a practicing doc through a hospital and the hospital easily pays insurance premiums approaching 6 digits/year in malpractice insurance just for him alone.


What? You're not factoring in what his business generates. If you're a doctor EMPLOYED by a practice or a hospital, the practice or the hospital pays for insurance for the practice or the hospital, which covers you, since you're in their employ. If you're the doctor that owns the practice -- look at the business account -- it's earning 5 mill a year, easy, probably more like 10-15 if you run it right. He may be paying himself 200k a year [cuz you pay yourself as an employee] but he's earning WAY more than that, it just stays in the business account -- like every single business on the face of the planet. If you decided to sell the practice and retire -- guess what hoss, you get to keep the money in that account unless it's publicly traded. Even if it's publicly traded, you probably sold it for 50 million or more, so you can leave that money in the account and walk away with an even higher pay check anyway.

Jesus. My bosses little small time window washing business earns more than that doing jobs for 16.05$ with less than a thousand customers. You know how much he makes? 85k. If he decided to close the business, he gets to keep what's in the business account, since the business is in his name. That's called equity son.

And yeah -- the HOSPITAL pays that 6 digit premium -- if they have to pay that for each and every doctor that is employed at the hospital [they don't] -- what does that say about what the hospital earns in a year? It's a multiple hundred million-a billion a year gross.

Also, the longer you go without having successful malpractice suits against your practice, the cheaper the rates get -- and I dunno if you know, but it's incredibly difficult to prove malpractice, unless the doctor is a drunk or a total moron. Even when a doctor makes a mistake, it's not considered malpractice, a slip of the wrist in surgery doesn't qualify -- the Doctor has to basically order a procedure that's totally the wrong kind. I.E. Amputating the wrong limb, et, al.
edit on 23-10-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 04:02 PM
link   
We have insurance through my husband's employer. I didn't have insurance prior. I was amazed at the difference in cash vs insurance billing! I showed my husband an old receipt. To see my practioner was $75 cash day of service or if making payments $125. With insurance, they bill the insurance company $180!

My daughter went to ER with no insurance had xrays, tetanus shot and stitches done. She had sliced her hand on a rusty can. The hospital reduced her cash payable balance to $300. They had their 3 level tiers of payments based on what they did.

My husband cut his thumb deeply with a brand new knife. Luckily we had our first aid kit backpacking. It took us 3 days to get to civilization and ER. Concern was infection and needing stitches. They removed his bandages and were amazed how well it was healing. Ripped open the wound again to make sure too. No stitches, not tetanus shot and no X-ray. They rewrapped his thumb the same as he had arrived. His bill was a higher level tier over $1000! We argued this with the administration. It was rediculous! Even with their own documents, he did not meet the requirement for the level billed. They had all the excuses.

It is obvious, if you have insurance, you are the one being billed for those who do not have insurance already! It seems to be a double dipping scam on tax payers and insurance holders.



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts

Do you get the bills that always show you some ungodly high amount along with "Do Not Pay This Amount" on them? We always get those. Then we wait forever until someone settles something somewhere along the line and we get a real bill.

The OT office has been trying to bill us an arm and leg for the work done on our son forever, and we finally got the final settlement bill from insurance ... after about a year! It was much more in line with what we had calculated they'd told us it should be.

Basically, they bill high and then there is some weird bargaining process that takes place. The thing is that the insurance company has much deeper pockets than you do which is why they bill them so much more. The same happens with a government insurer like Medicaid or Medicare. This whole crooked process of bargaining is part of the problem for all of us.
edit on 23-10-2017 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 04:14 PM
link   
I had Blue Cross through my job. It took them 3 years to figure out how to let me login to my account. Hours on end with supervisors, tech support, etc.... They just didnt care. I could literally not access my account because they made a mistake on their end and couldnt figure it out. When they figured it out after the 3 years, I had lost my job and insurance coverage.

On a different note, I have to wait a month and a half to see a dermatologist, and have to schedule my PCP a month in advance. This is wrong on so many levels. I had a flu, couldnt keep fluids down for over 3 days, couldnt see my PCP, went to urgent care. They charged me for seeing a doctor who told me that they are closing and that I should go get fluids at the ER. At the ER had to wait 3 hours to get seen as they are swamped with med seekers (opioids), and before any care is given I have to repeat myself 4 times to Accepting nurse, Triage nurse, ER nurse, then a doctor who sees you all of 3 minutes. I wouldnt pay for any insurance, because I get no care. Just like you wont go back to a hotel that does not have good service or amenities. We are paying an arm and a leg for insurance that makes our care no better. I saw someone come in bleeding profusely and before anything was asked " What insurance he had and how he was going to pay."

Thats my rant of the day, I had that all bottled up since I used to work in healthcare.
edit on 23-10-2017 by HanSolo31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: CynConcepts
My daughter went to ER with no insurance had xrays, tetanus shot and stitches done. She had sliced her hand on a rusty can. The hospital reduced her cash payable balance to $300. They had their 3 level tiers of payments based on what they did.

My husband cut his thumb deeply with a brand new knife. Luckily we had our first aid kit backpacking. It took us 3 days to get to civilization and ER. Concern was infection and needing stitches. They removed his bandages and were amazed how well it was healing. Ripped open the wound again to make sure too. No stitches, not tetanus shot and no X-ray. They rewrapped his thumb the same as he had arrived. His bill was a higher level tier over $1000! We argued this with the administration. It was rediculous! Even with their own documents, he did not meet the requirement for the level billed. They had all the excuses.

It is obvious, if you have insurance, you are the one being billed for those who do not have insurance already!


I said this a few posts back -- insurance raises the rates of medical services. It has nothing to do with you paying for the people without insurance -- it has to do solely with you having insurance.

Follow the logic;

Your deductible is 1400$. Insurance will cover anything OVER the 1400$. It's in the hospitals best interest to generate a bill as high as justifiably possible. If they can get the bill to be 36,000$, the cost to you is still only 1400$. Without insurance -- you get the proper rate. With insurance, you get the insurance bilked rate.

I mean, they bilk you even without insurance, but it still costs you less. For instance -- I just had to have a procedure in the E.R. I KNEW I didn't need surgery, because I could do the procedure myself with the right tools, no cutting required. Yet -- the Nurse said I needed surgery, booked me for surgery, did all the surgery prep before even telling me what the surgery was -- ordered a chest x-ray to check my lungs to clear me for surgery, took the x-ray, all before the surgeon even found out I was booked for surgery. He checked my initial X-Ray and then came and talked to me -- he said "Look -- you have a choice, surgery, or no surgery -- no surgery will hurt like hell -- surgery, you'll be put under anesthesia and it'll put you at all kinds of additional risks, most people will opt for the surgery" I cut him off right then and there and said, nope -- lets go, I'm not paying for that. Guess what though?

I get billed for all the surgery prep, when I didn't even need surgery. STILL cost less than if I had insurance though, because they would have ran the same tactic if I had insurance, only -- they would have done every test imaginable just to get the bill up.

The fact that we have this dependency and this indoctrination to believe insurance is a good thing, Dr's raise the rates to get the most money out of the insurance companies. They will do it to a lesser extent even if you don't have insurance, because as I detailed in my previous post -- if you don't pay, they send the bill to the feds and get it paid at the end of the year.

You have to be extremely aware of your condition, and not let the hospital try to force any unnecessary procedure. Just say no to everything, and then all of a sudden they'll tell you what you really need without all the additional optional useless stuff. Most people just do what nurses/doctors say without questioning it -- that's never in your best interest unless you have a saint of a doctor. In my case -- the surgeon was actually really honest, once he saw the initial X-ray he was like, I can do this without cutting into this guy -- I'm not gonna risk his safety unless he insists that's what he wants.

Still though -- it's definitely a violation of the Hippocratic oath. Do no harm. If they can 100% fix the problem better without surgery than with surgery, than surgery is always wrong.

Oh and, having insurance means you're getting triple dipped, not double dipped. Without insurance, you get a bill -- if you don't pay it by the end of the year, the federal government pays it. The hospital still says you owe it, and tries to get you to pay it too, which is double dipping. With insurance, now you have the deductible, the annual, the insurance company takes the place of the government, but you get milked on your taxes the same amount as if you didn't have insurance.

So having insurance you pay for medical in your taxes, then on your annual, then on your deductible. That's triple billed, and having insurance pretty much incentives the hospital to make the bill greater than your deductible -- which they can see from your insurance card, when they call it in to the insurer. Again, this has nothing to do with paying for people who do not have insurance, this has solely to do with the fact that having an insurance card gives them cart blanche to a much bigger check than if you don't have one. The rates you get with insurance is always 300% or higher than what it really cost the hospital with a profit margin already included.

The problem with the medical industry in the united states, is that it too -- is for profit. They'll save you no matter what, but at the end of the day, they are going to attempt to collect the maximum they can collect, and having insurance is a free ticket for them to collect a much higher maximum. The problem with a not-for profit health industry, is that it's still for profit. Nobody can pay for 8 years of schooling, and spend that amount of time to not have a big ROI. So even in countries with social medical services, they still do all of that, and bilk the bill as high as possible, except now everyone is paying for it with a much higher tax on their income.

So it's actually best to not have a socialized health care system, and to not have insurance. Close the insurance companies and watch the medical rates drop. The problem with this is, the university system is still 100% for profit. So the cost to become a doctor is ridiculously high because of the cost for schooling, when the teachers at university shouldn't be making 6 figure salaries. The hospitals kind of have to bilk somewhat until they absolve the debt from the education. Except, the bilking never stops. You need to eliminate the bilking -- how do you do that? By cutting out government scholarships and federal tuition aid.

It's the same thing with schools. The fact that the government has scholarship and grant programs is what raises the tuition cost. Grants are so easy to get, that a majority of students get them, because they are middle or low class, because the majority of citizens are middle or low class, that the universities charge a high amount because the government aids people.

All of these government bailout are raising the costs of services they are helping you obtain. You wouldn't need the help to obtain them, if their help wasn't available. I.E. In a free market, the prices would be reasonable, or their seats would be empty. When the government is subsidizing these costs, it's not a free market, their subsidy dictates the average price, rather than what the average person could afford. This requires most people to NEED to subsidy, hence -- the high cost. This just screws the people who don't qualify for the subsidy, but aren't flush enough to afford it on their own. This is liberal policy 101.
edit on 23-10-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: SRPrime

You can raise a family, pay for the kids education and afford to retire on an annual income of $24,000 a year? More power to you.

You must be very young.



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: SRPrime

You can raise a family, pay for the kids education and afford to retire on an annual income of $24,000 a year? More power to you.

You must be very young.


What? I didn't say an annual of 24k wage, but interestingly enough, that's exactly what I made. I'm just saying, living expenses aren't that high if you have a partner, and if you have a doctors salary, you definitely don't even need a partner, you just need to not live like a millionaire until you are one.

Don't raise a family and have kids before you're financially responsible and stable. I.E. Stop having kids at 18-28. Get married, THEN have kids. If you're married, and you both work, and you both had 24k annual jobs -- your annual income is 58k. With 58k, and 24k a year living expenses, you can bank 24k a year. So if you got married at 20, and held down a 24k a year job each for 10 years, you'd have banked no less than 240,000$ by the time you're 30. With that 240k, you don't even need a college degree, you can straight buy a house in cash money, pay it off at the closing, and rent it out for more than what the mortgage would be, in 5 years -- you could sell it for a 100k profit, and then quit your jobs and just become a real-estate mogul. That's just one example. Another would be to take part of that 240k and put it up as collateral against a loan for a business and work for yourself. Another example, would be to day trade with that 240k and parlay it into a cool couple mill off commodities and futures. Have kids once you have money and credit -- it's really stupid simple.

The message here is, have financial responsibility and make good choices and you won't be poor. Have kids when you're young, out of wedlock and basically destroy your own financial future and then turn to social services for bailouts for your failures and cost all of the people who were responsible for your mistakes? That's your suggestion?

I'm 31, I own my own business -- I did not graduate from a university or college -- I found a lady I loved and we worked together as partners. No excuses for poor decision making. Kids ruin lives if you have them before you can afford them. This is why the familial structure is so important and why "Single moms" and "dead beat dads" are ruining the country.

And uh -- yeah. My living expenses are less than 24k a year. I live in a two story town house with 2 beds and 2 baths, have two cars -- one being a new Prius [that fuel economy though] and have every amenity you can have, from 100mb internet, to the fanciest new phone and two very high end computers, and an apple mac book and iPad, a wonderful cat. I have flat screen UHD TV's throughout my house and a 750 beacon score, which was 480 just 5 years ago.

And 5 years ago, I literally had nothing to my name, poor, actually below poverty and completely destroyed credit. So, I don't wanna hear it can't be done -- I did it just fine and it was actually very easy, and I didn't get help from anybody, not even the government. I did it all on a job that paid 24k a year, Monday through Friday with hours from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. Had booku free time to not be a miserable hateful person and actually do things that I like to do. Just don't like -- eat out every night and go on 3 cruises a year, or buy 250$ sneakers. It's really not that hard.

Smart choices man. You must have not made them.

Literally the only criteria for upward mobility in the united states is the following;

1.) Don't have kids out of wedlock and before you can afford them.
2.) Graduate high school or get a G.E.D. [I got the G.E.D.]
3.) Hold down any job. Any single one. Doesn't matter how good or bad it is.

Break one of these three basic rules, and you basically destroy your financial future. Fortunately, only one of the three basic rules is unfixable. At any point in time you can acquire a G.E.D. or decide to hold down a job. You can't undo a child.

I just can't stop loling at your post. It's absolutely 100% the problem with people who think it's hard raise out of poverty. It's not normal to have kids before you're married. It's not normal to have kids before you're financially stable. It's not good for anyone in that family. It's not good for mom, it's not good for dad -- and it damn sure isn't good for the kid. Imagine if you had financial security before you had that kid. The difference is tremendous. A.) You could be there for your kid. B.) He wouldn't have to want for anything. C.) He could have great life experiences because you have flexibility to take a vacation without sacrificing if he's gonna get new clothes for the new school year. D.) He'll have his own private space, these are all super important things to have for a child. If you have a child who lives in a troubled environment, what do you think the probability is that he'll grow to become that troubled environment?

Most of the juveniles who become career criminals are brought up in poverty without parental supervision. Both parents have to work and often times he's left alone in the home before he should be, or he's left with an untrustworthy baby sitter. He'll now have less interaction with his parents, which means less supervision and structure -- automatically have more trouble with authority and responsibility, and always be the kid who has less than everyone else, which will make him a target socially for bullies and leave him with less potential to develop the crucial skills he'll need as he becomes an adult, which then will probably result with him having a kid outside of wedlock and repeating the exact same mistakes you made.

This isn't always the case, but it damn sure is a tremendously increased risk. That's exactly why just 5 years ago my credit score was in the 400's and I was poor. My outlook on life was terrible because my entire life was just surrounded by frustrated people who were always arguing over finances. I was always being picked on in school for having hand me down clothes that didn't fit, which didn't exactly teach me how to be social.

I was lucky enough to be smart enough to come to the realization of why everything was so wrong in my family -- and so I distanced myself from them. I was kept poor by my parents, I didn't graduate college because my grant check was cashed for rent and I couldn't pay the tuition. My credit was destroyed from setting up phone lines/cable services in my name only to then be abandoned once the bill became outstanding. I kept saying, I'm supposed to do for my family, so I kept doing for my family and kept ending up negative for it. I decided to basically cut my family out of my life, come up with a fiscal plan to become financially sovereign, and now that I am -- I can actually help without being offset into the red. Needless to say, my entire family has had an upswing -- I can be the proud person who can valiantly say -- I DID THAT FOR MY FAMILY.

But I must be young though. Cool.
edit on 23-10-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 05:21 PM
link   
I can identify with the cost of health insurance increasing by 20% or more each year, before the ACA went into effect.

When I became unemployed and lost my work-provided medical insurance, my family and I had problems acquiring health insurance because we all had preexisting conditions. When we could get an estimate, the cost was so high that it was well out of our reach.

Even now my daughter does not have healthcare. Her income is not high enough to qualify for ACA tax credits, and my state did not extend Medicaid coverage beyond the basics of covering children and pregnant mothers. So, when she has some health issue, it's either off to the Emergency Room, or more likely to the Hospital's Outpatient clinic.

While I feel for those whose insurance premiums increased, I believe that if the ACA had been implemented without all of the partisan bickering and political grandstanding, the program could have worked well.

With respect to having problems getting a doctor's appointment, I have experienced this with specialists. However, I had the same problem before the ACA ever became law. With my family doctor however, I can usually get a scheduled appointment within a couple of weeks. If there is a need, I can call my doctor's office before 9:00AM and get a same day appointment due to other patient's cancellations.

Because my insurance has high deductibles, I usually have to pay for my visits. But $70.00 is my average cost, unless I piss him off by adding something else to the visit that I didn't tell the nurse about beforehand.

I don't doubt anyone else's experience with the healthcare-industrial complex. I'm just adding my own experience to this discussion.

-dex



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: DexterRiley
I can identify with the cost of health insurance increasing by 20% or more each year, before the ACA went into effect.

When I became unemployed and lost my work-provided medical insurance, my family and I had problems acquiring health insurance because we all had preexisting conditions. When we could get an estimate, the cost was so high that it was well out of our reach.

Even now my daughter does not have healthcare. Her income is not high enough to qualify for ACA tax credits, and my state did not extend Medicaid coverage beyond the basics of covering children and pregnant mothers. So, when she has some health issue, it's either off to the Emergency Room, or more likely to the Hospital's Outpatient clinic.

While I feel for those whose insurance premiums increased, I believe that if the ACA had been implemented without all of the partisan bickering and political grandstanding, the program could have worked well.

With respect to having problems getting a doctor's appointment, I have experienced this with specialists. However, I had the same problem before the ACA ever became law. With my family doctor however, I can usually get a scheduled appointment within a couple of weeks. If there is a need, I can call my doctor's office before 9:00AM and get a same day appointment due to other patient's cancellations.

Because my insurance has high deductibles, I usually have to pay for my visits. But $70.00 is my average cost, unless I piss him off by adding something else to the visit that I didn't tell the nurse about beforehand.

I don't doubt anyone else's experience with the healthcare-industrial complex. I'm just adding my own experience to this discussion.

-dex


That's because every year more and more people let their insurance lapse, because insurance is just a waste of funds that increases the cost of medical visits. The average healthy person needs to visit a doctor once every 5-10 years or so. So piss that money away for 5-10 years to use it once for a visit that's less than your deductible -- how does that make any sense? You could afford to see a doctor once a year for a basic checkup and once a year if you're actually sick and need medicine, for a total of twice a year for tremendously less than one year of insurance coverage. Keep in mind, if the doctor visits are less than your deductible, than you're now paying for both the doctor visits and the insurance that you couldn't even use. In the event that you're billed above your deductible, chances are the bill was that high because you had insurance, and they bilked the bill passed the deductible, because any expense above that deductible is free money for the hospital or medical practice. This means without insurance -- your bill would have probably been less than your deductible, so now having insurance hurt you twice.

It's really not financially sound. The less people who purchase insurance, the higher the rates and deductibles. Hence the 20% upward trend to your rates. This is why when ACA went into effect, they tried to make it mandatory under the threat of a tax penalty.

It's definitely cheaper to use the E.R. than it is to carry insurance, and the care you get is identical.

The entire reason ACA was drafted was because the indoctrination to the idea that insurance coverage is a useful and good thing exists, and the trend was more and more people were uninsured -- and so the democrats saw this as a problem and did what they always do -- tried to boon it with regulation. That regulation didn't do anything good for anybody, because the solution is to abolish insurance coverage completely. It's not necessary. They have plenty of financial programs for people who don't have insurance to reduce the payable bill. Think of how much better those programs would be if insurance didn't exist -- because without insurance, the medical rates would be tremendously smaller, so the assistance needed on average would decrease, which means you could afford to then apply those programs to people in higher income brackets. This would cover people who had ongoing/long term medical needs. I.E. Insurance is totally unnecessary and is the entire problem.

If everybody just stopped purchasing insurance, medical bills would decrease by over 300% on the lowside, and upwards of 3,000-10,000% on the high side.

Have you ever seen what a hospital charges a person with coverage for Tylenol? Yep -- over 300$. Ever see what they bill a person with no coverage for the same Tylenol? About 9$.

In terms of getting an appointment at a doctors office -- you ever try to get one as self pay? It's incredibly easy and every doctor that takes self pay patients will set you up immediately. The only time it becomes difficult is when you use an insurance provider that they don't accept. With less and less people carrying insurance, more and more insurance providers aren't accepted. This is why it's incredibly difficult to set an appointment with ACA coverage. Because many doctors don't accept ACA coverage -- so now you have to shop around to a provider that does accept it, and now their office is completely booked because everyone with ACA coverage has been driven to that doctors office. As a self pay, you can go pretty much everywhere except for the most greedy practices. There are practices that won't see anyone without insurance, they won't accept self pay. Why does this exist? Because if you have insurance, they have a free markup, if your visit approaches the deductible, they will push it well and beyond the deductible, because it's no different to you, but it can make them tens of thousands more at no additional expense to the patient.

I.E.

They push you to your deductible when the visit shouldn't have even reached the deductible. So for instance, lets say your deductible is 1400$. Lets say the actual cost of your visit is 850. They could charge you $2,200 KNOWING that they are costing you an additional 450$, but knowing that they'll get an additional 800$ from your insurance provider. Now scale this to a major surgery, like a brain surgery, that's well away and above your deductible -- what they charge could be 540,000$ when the actual cost of the surgery is around 30k. The insurance company will fight some of the charges, but they will settle for like 320,000k. This made the hospital an additional 290,000$ just because you had insurance, not because the surgery actually cost $320,000. It's just 290,000 in pure free profit.
edit on 23-10-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: rickymouse

That's an issue with a lack of doctors. There should be no reason we are discouraging preventative care.


Why become a doctor when you can make more money on Wall Street sooner with less debt from school.



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: avgguy

And part of that is BS charges.

My cousin recently got on Medicare...and you get a free Welcome to Medicare doctor visit.
I sure would not call it a physical!!!!

He said they check his temperature, blood pressure, etc.
Then asked a bunch of questions like could he dress himself and bathe himself.
WTF?
He didn't do any blood work, it would have been extra...and he wasn't' sure it was covered by Medicare without the deductible....and the doctor office couldn't tell him either.

He said the doctor charged $120.00 for about 15 minutes of nothing.



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Poor people can't seek ANYTHING BUT emergency care.
They HAVE to work for better care,that takes up time from going to doctors,CORPORATE will CAN you if you're gone too often,EXCUSE or not.
edit on 23-10-2017 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: SRPrime

On nonACA here.....I had an ER visit a couple of years back.
unACA....the insurance that covers nothing until you coughed up $6250.00.

That visit ran me a THOUSAND dollars....and the hospital comped me a bit fat nothing.



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: rickymouse

That's an issue with a lack of doctors. There should be no reason we are discouraging preventative care.


Why become a doctor when you can make more money on Wall Street sooner with less debt from school.


Why become anything when you can make more money on Wall Street sooner with no debt from school. Wall Street requires nothing but a buy in as an entrance.

I fail to see your point? Or do you think just operating on Wall Street is a sure fire way to get rich? It's not -- it's gambling at a very high level and is ultra risky. The best Wall Street players have all had major losses, and most of the people who work on wall street came from money, which is why they were able to buy back in.

Why do anything that's not the most lucrative? Oh I dunno, because maybe you're actually better at something else, or maybe that just doesn't make you happy. Maybe it's too hard, maybe it's too easy -- maybe it's not for you????

Why do I wash windows? The way I see it, everyone should wash windows -- it's ridiculously low effort, it's super easy, and it's super lucrative. I can make 52,000 a year and only do two 1 hour jobs a day 5 days a week. I can work for 2 hours a day, and make 52k a year. Why be a wall street fat cat even? All that hustle and bustle? All I gotta do is drive to a house and wash their exterior windows, then drive to the next one and do it again, then drive home. If I really wanted to hustle -- I can do 4 a day and make 104,000 a year.

4 hours a day and I could be making Doctor/Lawyer money with essentially zero cost to doing business. I don't need a store front, I don't need employees. I don't need insurance. I don't need a degree or an education.

Making money isn't actually that hard, the best money to be made is by providing a service that costs you nothing, but has a high profit margin. In my case -- 200$ a house, and people do this everyday because they don't wanna walk around with the windex and the paper towels killing their entire day streaking up their windows. I just come in with my mop and squeegee, bang it out and everyone is absolutely impressed, stunned even -- how easy I made it look.

I didn't make it look easy, it is easy. That's why I do it. The only cost to doing business is the gas in my car, the soap for my bucket, and 2 rubber squeegee blades a month. 1 box of 144 blades cost 300$. I only need 24 a year. That's 6 YEARS OF SQUEEGEES PER BOX! I make 200$ a house!

STFU. Why does anyone do anything else.

Because you couldn't go out and get someone to pay you 200$ to clean their windows. I do it everyday. My ability is selling you my service. I've mastered selling my service. You might not be able to master the selling of the service, so you couldn't do what I do. You might have an inclination to be really good at problem solving, which might make you a rock solid diagnostician. You could make 200k a year just solving puzzles and saving peoples lives solving puzzles. I could make 200k a year by pitching a service. To each and their own man, it's not about how much ya make, it's only about making enough and being happy doing it.
edit on 23-10-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 07:10 PM
link   
This seems like an organizational problem to me. Hospitals with emergency rooms need to provide a 24 hour "clinic" and nurses to assess the incoming patients and direct them to the appropriate care.



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe
a reply to: SRPrime

On nonACA here.....I had an ER visit a couple of years back.
unACA....the insurance that covers nothing until you coughed up $6250.00.

That visit ran me a THOUSAND dollars....and the hospital comped me a bit fat nothing.


I'm having trouble understanding what exactly you're saying.

What was your deductible on your non ACA coverage? [a few years ago won't be the same as today, especially since ACA split the pot so all rates and deductibles went up as a result.]

And yeah, a $6,250.00 deductible is essentially uninsured. The deductible is so high it's not coverage since the average hospital visit is 1,000 or less. ACA is terrible. The other dude in this thread said his ACA deductible was $17,000.

I mean -- that deductible is so high, it'll never get used unless you have a heart or brain surgery -- so how can they force you to purchase it if it's not usable. That's essentially just theft. You're paying in to get no coverage back, that's like a straight tax on the middle class because you're not even purchasing a service.

And yeah, a $1,000 visit seems expensive, but is it really? I mean -- come on. The average Health Insurance Premium is $321 a month for a single person. That's $3,852 annually. You would have had to go to the E.R. 4 times that year just to have a higher cost than the annual premium. That $3,852 annual premium has a $4,358 deductible. So that means that E.R. Visit would have cost you $4,852 because you would have purchased the insurance and couldn't even use it because the bill was smaller than the deductible.

For that premium to ever be money well spent, the E.R. Visit would have had to cost more than $8,210. So if you had coverage, you couldn't even benefit from that coverage unless your visit was over 8.2 grand. You could say, but what if it was 5,000$ it's more than my deductible, right? Yeah, but -- you still paid $3,852 that year just to have that be your deductible, which means if you need to use that deductible, it really cost you $8,210.

So with the average premium of today, you could have went to the E.R. 8 times that year for a $1,000 bill. Oh, and if you use a deductible, they don't comp you anything, the what ever you saved from not using insurance, is also added to the cost of using it, since it wasn't comped.

I'm saying, the E.R. comped my bill 88% on Friday. EIGHTY-EIGHT! Why would I ever use insurance at all, like ever? The full 100% of the bill was under any deductible and then they comped 88% of it. So I only have to pay 12% of the bill. And yo, I make good money too and I didn't lie about my income. They didn't do anything but remove a foreign object and take an x-ray. I was in an out in less than 40 minutes. Didn't need stitches, I told them no pain killers and no prescriptions because I didn't wanna pay for them. The bill is 1k. So I pay 120$ at the Emergency Room. I couldn't have even gone to a GP for cheaper than that, but even if they didn't comp anything -- I'd pay the K happily over paying for insurance coverage, because the average premium still requires the bill to be over $8,200 to save one dollar from the insurance coverage.

The average E.R. bill is much less than $8,200. In the event that it was over, and you had no coverage, even if they comped 60% [which they definitely would do] I'd still be winning by not having insurance at all. Not just ACA, but straight no coverage.

The only way it's worth having coverage, is if you have like a $50k-$100k surgery, but I'm telling you man -- my wife just had brain surgery and it was $160,000, but they only billed us for about $14,000. Again -- why would I ever use insurance. She never needed the E.R. ever in her life, and the one time she needs it was a $160,000 surgery that got compd down to 14k. Would have lost waaaaaaaaaaaay more money holding the coverage over the years she didn't use it.

Why do people pay for insurance at all? I don't even get it, it doesn't save you money at all, ever. I heard the argument that insurance is great for when you need medication daily for the rest of your life -- but no. Discount Med Direct is a company in the united states, you go to discount med direct with your prescription, and they get you the same medications, even the same brand for 80% off by ordering it from out of the country. I asked what countries they order from, they told me basically any country with social healthcare. So they get it for the non-marked up rate, then mark it up so they can make a profit, and it's still 80% cheaper than if you bought it from a U.S. Pharmacy.

Can someone actually give me a real example of insurance saving you money? If you just took your annual premium, and instead of paying it into the insurance company, you put it in a separate savings account, you'd end up tremendously ahead.
edit on 23-10-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: SRPrime
You provide some good examples of how the entire insurance and healthcare industry is rife with corruption and greed.

I will differ with you on a couple of issues:


It's definitely cheaper to use the E.R. than it is to carry insurance, and the care you get is identical.

Doesn't that depend on the reason for the E.R. visit? A serious problem that could have been addressed with a simple doctor's visit could have progressed to a point where significant care is then required. And the cost can quickly escalate.

I've also experienced Emergency Room care. And when I compare it to the care I get in a doctor's office, it pales in comparison. For instance, I don't usually have to wait 3 or 4 hours to see him; like I have with ER visits.



That regulation didn't do anything good for anybody, because the solution is to abolish insurance coverage completely. It's not necessary.

I actually do believe that insurance should not be involved with healthcare. The insurance business is little more than legalized gambling. When someone's car is insured, the insurance company is betting that the driver will exercise proper judgement and avoid accidents. It's likely that most people can avoid using their auto insurance for their entire driving careers. But with medical care, it's almost a certainty that you will need to use it at some point. I'm less comfortable that they are betting on my health, than when they are betting on my driving skill.

However, some form of system that helps to pay for healthcare and make it more accessible for everyone is necessary. A seemingly minor problem can quickly escalate in severity to the point where it's beyond the ability of most people to be able to pay for the care out of pocket.

-dex



posted on Oct, 23 2017 @ 07:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
Poor people can't seek ANYTHING BUT emergency care.
They HAVE to work for better care,that takes up time from going to doctors,CORPORATE will CAN you if you're gone too often,EXCUSE or not.


I'm not poor, emergency care is just the cheapest and the best. Again -- I took my wife to the highest rated neurologist in Bradenton. A neurologist is a brain specialist. I though my wife had a brain tumor. I told the neurologist. He told me no, it's migraines, she needs a steroid pack. It didn't work, he said sometimes you need two. It didn't work, he said -- we'll inject them straight into the occipital nerve in a procedure we call an occipital nerve block. The nerve block cost $600. The steroid packs were 400 each. My bill is now $1200 over three visits. We went back, he said "There is nothing more I can do for you, go to the E.R. instead."

I said, hey -- you're a neurologist, you specialize in the brain, when we came in here -- I said I think she has a brain tumor, she needs a brain scan -- you're saying there is nothing more you can do, but you can give her a brain scan. He said, she doesn't have a brain tumor, take her to the E.R.

I took her to a GP just because the price of the brain scan was 400 flat there, but the GP didn't wanna give it to her, I said look -- the neurologist wouldn't give her a scan but said to take her to the E.R. -- the E.R. might think it's a migraine, but I know it's not -- just let me purchase the CT scan. GP said, well at worst case it's worth it for the peace of mind -- 3 hours later, the GP called us back and said she had TWO, not one, but TWO brain tumors and she called in preadmittance to the emergency room.

3 days later one of the tumors was out, the other is not dangerous, but is dangerous to remove, neither are cancerous -- 160,000$ bill comped down to 14k and she's back to normal 2 months later.

E.R. doctors are the best doctors because they have the most experience because they have the most active cases. I'm not poor, but I don't have insurance by choice, because it's a rip off and the E.R. always comps bills for those without insurance.

E.R. is the cheapest, not only the cheapest but the best -- unless you have a non-emergency specific thing you need to check, like me getting that first CT scan to catch the tumor. If we would have went to the E.R. -- I'm sure they would have done the scan if I insisted, but they would have done other tests too, which would have raised the bill, but would have been comped anyway, so it probably would have cost around the same.

E.R. is the best, period. Only go to the E.R. I don't think she would have walked out of the E.R. the first time without them catching the tumor, but considering I was already $1200 in the hole from going to the highest rated and top recommended brain specialist who failed completely at his job, I just wanted an immediate answer. My mistake from the onset was going to the neurologist.

Don't ever go to regular doctors, they are less experienced because they are less practiced. The E.R. also has the highest tech and every machine imaginable so they can do everything you can ever need done. Go to a GP, get forwarded to a specialist, find out it's not that, get forwarded to another specialist, then eventually get forwarded to the E.R. anyway. Skip it, just go E.R. All going to "better care" specialist doctors did was cost me money -- the E.R. would have caught it, the E.R. would have gave her the brain scan. I got a brain scan in the E.R. myself per request -- they won't fight you if you need a test done, they'll just do it, and it won't cost you a dollar up front, if you have insurance the bill will be mega high, if you don't it'll get comped, basically meaning they'll give you the real cost rather than the inflated insurance price. Again, I own my own business and didn't lie or with hold my income.

I had a foreign body lodged in my arm the other day, I went to the E.R. to have it removed. Again, I told them my accurate income, which is not really low as I own my own business, the bill was $1,000 for the nurses, 4 blood draws, an xray and the surgeons time -- they then booked be for surgery and I refused, but they prepped me anyway, taking me for a chest x-ray to approve lung function for anesthesia. I refused because I already knew from the first X-ray and from how it felt that he could just basically pull it out carefully. Surgeon comes in, says if we do it surgical, you'll need to be put under, that's a risk that I'm not comfortable with because I can do this without surgery, we can grab some forceps and do it, it'll obviously hurt a lot -- I said, stop, just get it out, lets go! He grabs the forceps on the spot, no local, no pain killers, no stitches, it was deep -- not wide and I didn't wanna pay for local or pain killers, and he just did it like a boss. My payable bill is $120. They comped 88% of it. If I would have went to a GP -- it definitely would have cost more than 120, because just seeing a GP costs more than $120. If I had insurance, it would have been well under the deductible.

My Wife's brain surgery ended up at 14k down from 160, if I had insurance, I would have had to pay for the few years annual before she needed the surgery and the deductible, which would have totaled more than 14k.

Cheaper and BETTER. Don't use insurance, it's a scam.
edit on 23-10-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join