If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   More and more twenty-somethings are entering the workforce and eschewing health insurance entirely because it's too expensive   (money.cnn.com) divider line 281
    More: Scary, Commonwealth Fund, doctor's visit, credit card debts, debts, health care  
•       •       •

8280 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jun 2012 at 3:42 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



281 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-09 08:56:34 AM

NickelP: badhatharry: Day_Old_Dutchie: From outside of the US the problems with you healthcare system boils down to this:

Too many greedy middle-men looking to make obscene profits
Too much greed on the part of goddamn stockholders
Too many really really stupid people conned by propaganda about FREEDOM! (USA FARK YEAH!)
Too many corrupt politicians in the pocket of lobbyists

Too many people not paying for their healthcare.
Lawyers successfully suing for excessive amounts.
Hospitals and doctors having to find some way to cover the costs.
Hospitals overcharging customers with insurance.

As a little followup to my own post, I think a lot of the problem is no clear competition among providers due to the inability of consumers to shop around in regards to price. Those that have insurance go where it is accepted, and those that don't really have no idea who is cheapest. Have you ever seen a comparison of providers based on cost? I havn't......


There is not much competition. Employers can choose from a handful of providers. Individuals are pretty much stuck with whatever their company chooses. If buying health insurance was like buying any other kind of insurance it might lower the cost a little. It would still be very expensive. People would get bigger paychecks but would have some serious sticker shock when they paid their health insurance bill.
 
2012-06-09 09:03:46 AM
I WORK for a major healthcare company and even my rates blow. How bad is that that your employer can't even give you a good rate. And an ugly trend seems to be that most companies are going toward deductible based systems. Sure that's awesome for people with chronic or expensive treatments but for twenty somethings in good health it is insanity. Why would we want to pay $80+ a month for the ability to still have to pay deductibles of like $50-70 per doctors visit?

Here's another CSB. I have mild depression that is worsening due to stress. I spent two hours and at least 30 calls to my local vendors looking for a psychiatrist to help prescribe something. I'm a stubborn guy, so I waited until it got its worst before admitting I had a problem. Trouble is, every single place I called either wasn't accepting new patients or didn't have an opening until freaking NOVEMBER. Yes, as in six months from today, NOVEMBER. It's not like I live in a rural area, I'm nearby to three major hospitals in a city with it's own pro football team. We're a pretty big place. I shudder to think how bad this situation is in less populated areas. So yea, the system is screwed. I can't see anyone, even as preventative for a degenerating condition. They'd rather I let it fester, and grow, and worsen, to the point of no return.

/CSB
 
2012-06-09 09:04:36 AM

Darth_Lukecash: Grand_Moff_Joseph: How much do you want to bet that after SCOTUS follows their rightward tilt and strikes down HCA, that bankruptcy rules will be quietly changed so that medical debt joins student loans as "unable to discharge" in bankruptcy?

You realize Debtors prisons have started...

If corporations could get away with it, they would pay people very, very little.


When you figure out that as its budget mushrooms, the government becomes the biggest corporation, not the peoples instrument, you will begin to see the problem.

When people are arrested for contempt of court because of unpaid debts, its just one corporation acting on behalf of another.

Which is why a city took peoples houses on behalf of Pfizer in Kelo v. New London.

And why a hotel where drug arrests were made is being seized and sold, with some of the proceeds going to feds.

Govt, when it is given such powers, will act no differently from a corporation in fighting for its own interests.
 
2012-06-09 09:09:24 AM
My girlfriend broke her elbow, I drove her to hospital, she was seen immediately, had an operation, stayed in overnight and is currently undergoing physiotherapy, all on the NHS. How much would that have cost under the US system if she were underinsured or uninsured? What price do you put on peace of mind? Then again, we are dirty, evil socialists.
 
2012-06-09 09:12:11 AM

badhatharry: NickelP: badhatharry: Day_Old_Dutchie: From outside of the US the problems with you healthcare system boils down to this:

Too many greedy middle-men looking to make obscene profits
Too much greed on the part of goddamn stockholders
Too many really really stupid people conned by propaganda about FREEDOM! (USA FARK YEAH!)
Too many corrupt politicians in the pocket of lobbyists

Too many people not paying for their healthcare.
Lawyers successfully suing for excessive amounts.
Hospitals and doctors having to find some way to cover the costs.
Hospitals overcharging customers with insurance.

As a little followup to my own post, I think a lot of the problem is no clear competition among providers due to the inability of consumers to shop around in regards to price. Those that have insurance go where it is accepted, and those that don't really have no idea who is cheapest. Have you ever seen a comparison of providers based on cost? I havn't......

There is not much competition. Employers can choose from a handful of providers. Individuals are pretty much stuck with whatever their company chooses. If buying health insurance was like buying any other kind of insurance it might lower the cost a little. It would still be very expensive. People would get bigger paychecks but would have some serious sticker shock when they paid their health insurance bill.


Depends on your insurance. More expensive insurance gives you more choice. HMOs don't.

Obamacare is going to give you progressively less choice over time as the 'Cadillac' plans get taxed and become out of reach for most families.
 
2012-06-09 09:13:22 AM
More and more twenty-somethings are entering the workforce and eschewing health insurance entirely because it's too expensive

Being a bit nit-picky here, but am I the only one who noticed that there is nothing in TFA giving historical numbers as a comparison to justify the 'more and more' part of the headline?
 
2012-06-09 09:15:27 AM

farkityfarker: As a Canadian who recently broke his wrist and had it fixed for free as opposed to the $20K I would have paid as an American, I'm getting a kick out of this...


Catastrophic injuries always get priority in social health care, what needs to be fixed are pricing methods. When other nations have price limits in what pharmaceutical companies can charge it makes it worse when they charge us to make up the difference.

The industry needs fixing and the HCA would fix nothing
 
2012-06-09 09:18:03 AM

strangeluck: /American healthcare sucks.
//Trying to find that better job with better insurance.


It really seems odd to me that more big corporations ( like the one I work with ) haven't jumped aboard the "single-payer" train. All of them would save a farkton of money not having to pay the middle-men ( eg. insurance companies)
 
2012-06-09 09:18:09 AM
Whoever is paying the bill gets to call the shots. It's really as simple as that, unfortunately. When you hand over your hard-earned money to someone who says, "trust me, kid, I'll take good care of this," you had better understand what that entity is saying. Insurance companies exist to make money for the shareholders, and the only way they make money is to take premium money and delay or deny payment of claims for as long as possible. And the policies they offer always benefit them not the purchaser.

I have not carried health or disability insurance since 1996, for a variety of reasons. Some doctors don't like me, because I delay treatment until I can afford it, or look for cheaper alternatives like diet and exercise before surgery. Other doctors like me, because when I have treatment, I pay, with no third-party hassles.

But, the majority of doctors don't like being compared to tradesmen, which is how I have come to view them. Yes, they have many years of education and this is my life they want to treat, but I get second and third opinions about car repairs and maintenance before committing money. If a plumber, electrician, or mechanic can give me some parameters and options on costs and repairs, why do doctors think they get an exemption? Failure on my part with any plumbing, electrical or vehicular issue can cost me my life, so give me the info I need, let me make the decision, and don't take it personally when I don't follow you unquestioningly. Your title is MD, not GOD.

/sorry for the rant
 
2012-06-09 09:19:20 AM

RoosterCogburn: I WORK for a major healthcare company and even my rates blow. How bad is that that your employer can't even give you a good rate. And an ugly trend seems to be that most companies are going toward deductible based systems. Sure that's awesome for people with chronic or expensive treatments but for twenty somethings in good health it is insanity. Why would we want to pay $80+ a month for the ability to still have to pay deductibles of like $50-70 per doctors visit?

Here's another CSB. I have mild depression that is worsening due to stress. I spent two hours and at least 30 calls to my local vendors looking for a psychiatrist to help prescribe something. I'm a stubborn guy, so I waited until it got its worst before admitting I had a problem. Trouble is, every single place I called either wasn't accepting new patients or didn't have an opening until freaking NOVEMBER. Yes, as in six months from today, NOVEMBER. It's not like I live in a rural area, I'm nearby to three major hospitals in a city with it's own pro football team. We're a pretty big place. I shudder to think how bad this situation is in less populated areas. So yea, the system is screwed. I can't see anyone, even as preventative for a degenerating condition. They'd rather I let it fester, and grow, and worsen, to the point of no return.

/CSB


You should go to your regular doctor. He can probably help you get an appointment.
 
2012-06-09 09:26:44 AM

david_gaithersburg: How can I afford healthcare when I've got a cell phone, iPad, cable TV, and a TV bigger than my car to take care of.


The funny thing is, those things you listed dont even come close to the cost of health care.
 
2012-06-09 09:33:08 AM

Forbidden Doughnut: strangeluck: /American healthcare sucks.
//Trying to find that better job with better insurance.

It really seems odd to me that more big corporations ( like the one I work with ) haven't jumped aboard the "single-payer" train. All of them would save a farkton of money not having to pay the middle-men ( eg. insurance companies)


They don't want to lose their slaves. If people didn't need them for health insurance benefits they might leave.
 
2012-06-09 09:40:44 AM
Socialized medicine! Where does the government get off trying to force people to have medical insurance? It's anti-capitalist! Ayn Rand is turning over in her grave!

mysite.verizon.net
 
2012-06-09 09:42:26 AM

farkityfarker: Too bad the public option was killed by the Republicans.


As if. Obama was ready to proceed with public option until aheadcount showed he didn't have enough Democrats to pass it either.

/you probably knew that. +1
 
2012-06-09 09:43:27 AM

NickelP: I really wish health care got separated from people's jobs. I think we'd have a lot more options and people would realize how farked up this stuff is.


I hear you. There's no real free market in health care insurance if you get it through your employer.

My choices are: a) Choose from the precious-metal/base-metal plans offered by my employer. b) change jobs or c) forego my employer's contribution to my healthcare plan and enter the unaffordable outside market.
 
2012-06-09 09:47:18 AM

Day_Old_Dutchie: From outside of the US the problems with you healthcare system boils down to this:

Too many greedy middle-men looking to make obscene profits
Too much greed on the part of goddamn stockholders
Too many really really stupid people conned by propaganda about FREEDOM! (USA FARK YEAH!)
Too many corrupt politicians in the pocket of lobbyists


It looks like that from the inside the U.S. too.
 
2012-06-09 09:53:20 AM
Every time there is a discussion about health care, it is posited, as received wisdom, that health care is a right. What the U.S. has lost sight of is that, in a free country, no rights exist without assuming concomitant responsibility. We have the right to life only so long as we respect the rights of others to live. Should we deprive someone of that right, we lose our own right to live. We have the right to live wherever we want, so long as we assume the responsibility of paying for that domicile. With health care, we want the right without the responsibility.

The problem we will certainly run into is that abrogation of responsibility will lead to loss of the right. If I expect someone else to assume the responsibility of paying for my housing, whoever does so will eventually assume the right to tell me where I may live. Consider, if you are a renter, the landlord retains the right to insist that you maintain the house in good order or they will terminate your lease even if you are paying the rent. Your mortgage holder can call the loan if you do not maintain your property in such a manner that the house has sufficient resale value to cover their loan. Likewise with health insurance - if you insist that someone else pay for it, then you will ultimately get whatever it is they think you should have. Here's a real stickler - if you expect your employer to pay for your health insurance, they get to dictate what kind of health insurance you will have. But, in order for them to be able to pay for that insurance, you need to produce enough profit for the company that they can afford to employ you. So you're doing the work and a large chunk of your value to the company is being confiscated and spent in a manner that may not be in your best interest.

Expecting government or employers to assume responsibility may sit easier with European countries than with many in the U.S. because they grew up in feudalism. That was the system where the serfs had no rights but they also had few responsibilities - the landed classes provided. It's why they were called subjects. Or look at slavery - a system we fortunately overthrew. The slaves had no freedoms, no rights. But they didn't have to worry about where to live - that was provided. They didn't have to worry about shopping for clothes - those were provided. They didn't have to decide which crops to plant - that was dictated. They didn't have to find a spouse, whether or not they were allowed to breed was dictated. Marriages were routinely ignored by slaveholders. In other words, the slaveowner had assumed the right to own them and with that ownership came the responsibility to care and provide for them. Some slaveholders were fairly benificent, others were genuinely evil and treated their slaves reprehensibly. But either way, the slave was dependent on the generosity of the owner because they did not have the right, or the responsibility, to provide for themselves.

When we put more and more responsibility on the government, the government will assume more and more of our rights. Take the birth control debate. If insurance carriers are required to cover contraception, at some point (when things get tight), they will dictate the kind of contraception you are allowed to use. When we demand that the government fund college education, even if it is only the underwriting of student loans, at some point in the not too distant future, there will be a government advisory board that will decide who gets to go to which colleges and universities and what their majors will be. Because they're not going to fund an art history degree when there's a better than average chance you won't pay them back. They're not going to fund everyone going to an Ivy league school when the tuition at the trade school is only 15% of that and there are openings for left-handed wire solderers.

The abrogation of responsibility by an ever-increasing chunk of the population is what will kill the middle class. The more responsibility for your care and keeping the government assumes, the larger chunk of your productivity it will assume. When the government takes that much of your paycheck (often without you even realizing it), your ability set a little aside and get ahead is reduced to zero. The rich, of course, can pay all of those fees and taxes in stride and still accumulate wealth. A few clever folks (like Drew or Zuckerman) will rise "above their station." Some of the rich will fall. But, by and large, the divide between the classes get bigger the more the government takes over our lives.

Some of us would rather avoid that.
 
2012-06-09 09:58:13 AM

zzrhardy: Why does the USA tie health insurance to employment? I just don't see why they should be linked. Health insurance should just be between the individual and the insurer.

Your system sounds... anti-competitive, and it seems that you are not the customer that the insurer needs to keep, instead your boss is. Wouldn't that promote kickbacks?


Stop it dude, yer making sense.

/Hate the failures of the USA
//plan to leave when I retire
///only way I will be able to afford to live
 
2012-06-09 10:00:03 AM

frozenhotchocolate: I got a bill for three grand today for a stay in the ER last month which consisted mostly of IV fluids (super wasted in public, police made me go). That's some bullshiat, send that to collections, I can't pay that. I am twenty six and have donated my -O cmv negative premature baby blood every two months since I was seventeen, the red cross makes money on it, then the hospital makes money on it and I get a bill for three grand for some suger water. Its a good thing I dont see much promise for the rest of my life or otherwise I might be concerned about getting a bill I cannot pay. But I dont, so im not sweating it too much. I figure I am just not deemed productive enough by society to have rational heathcare available to me.


You sound emo.

/did you get your lawn a lawnmower so it could cut itself?
 
2012-06-09 10:00:14 AM

cherryl taggart: Whoever is paying the bill gets to call the shots. It's really as simple as that, unfortunately. When you hand over your hard-earned money to someone who says, "trust me, kid, I'll take good care of this," you had better understand what that entity is saying. Insurance companies exist to make money for the shareholders, and the only way they make money is to take premium money and delay or deny payment of claims for as long as possible. And the policies they offer always benefit them not the purchaser.

I have not carried health or disability insurance since 1996, for a variety of reasons. Some doctors don't like me, because I delay treatment until I can afford it, or look for cheaper alternatives like diet and exercise before surgery. Other doctors like me, because when I have treatment, I pay, with no third-party hassles.

But, the majority of doctors don't like being compared to tradesmen, which is how I have come to view them. Yes, they have many years of education and this is my life they want to treat, but I get second and third opinions about car repairs and maintenance before committing money. If a plumber, electrician, or mechanic can give me some parameters and options on costs and repairs, why do doctors think they get an exemption? Failure on my part with any plumbing, electrical or vehicular issue can cost me my life, so give me the info I need, let me make the decision, and don't take it personally when I don't follow you unquestioningly. Your title is MD, not GOD.

/sorry for the rant


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(and that's not a rant. that's truth.)
 
2012-06-09 10:06:45 AM

Bigjohn3592: farkityfarker: Too bad the public option was killed by the Republicans.

As if. Obama was ready to proceed with public option until aheadcount showed he didn't have enough Democrats to pass it either.

/you probably knew that. +1


The democrats could not have passed it without republican support. They didnt/dont have that kind of majority.

PS being self employed sucks. My business partner looted my company dry earlier this year, and skipped town. The equipment and things he took severely impacted my ability to generate revenue. Now im poor enough to have my toddler qualify for government assisted health care, but they will only take last years tax filing as proof of income. I made a lot more money last year, it doesnt mean a damn thing about what Im making right now.

You cant buy child health insurance, no such thing. You have to insure yourself, and add them as an accessory.

The most realistic solution at the moment while Im trying to piece my business back together is to purposely take a shiat job that pays nothing, to show stubs which would qualify us as being poor enough for assistance.

What a strange world.
 
2012-06-09 10:14:28 AM

batcookie: uttertosh: batcookie: uttertosh: Here's a real head-scratcha: Whatever happened to the notion that we should all be allowed access to healthcare, regardless of social status? Is that not some anciently established human right in the '1st' world?

It's always been a relatively fringe belief, sadly. Greed and selfishness are much more universal in America

FTFY

Nope. Lack of acknowledgement that the problem is human nature, no matter what the cultural affiliation, is also part of the problem. Our nature is something to be overcome by rationality. Unfortunately, for many humans, globablly speaking, they just don't care to overcome it.


Then why not take the lead of so many other nations that don't make the poorest of people thousands in debt because of another human flaw (sickness)? hmm? gots no real comeback, huh? Sucks to live in a 3rd world coontry, ja?

Your response is the same political rhetoric that the US's "Capitalism is the only honest way forward" has taken for far too long.

Are you so myopic as to deny that socialised healthcare actually works in several nations globally?
 
2012-06-09 10:17:44 AM

batcookie: fark'emfeed'emfish: batcookie: uttertosh: batcookie: uttertosh: Here's a real head-scratcha: Whatever happened to the notion that we should all be allowed access to healthcare, regardless of social status? Is that not some anciently established human right in the '1st' world?

It's always been a relatively fringe belief, sadly. Greed and selfishness are much more universal in America

FTFY

Nope. Lack of acknowledgement that the problem is human corporate nature, no matter what the cultural affiliation, is also part of the problem. Our nature is something to be overcome by rationality. Unfortunately, for many humans, globablly speaking, they just don't care to overcome it.

had to do it

Yes, but corporations are made up of... say it with me now... PEOPLE.


ok, yes, you apparently are that myopic... shoulda guessed. Carry on.
 
2012-06-09 10:20:22 AM
Thankfully, I have Romneycare from when Mittens was here being a commie. Too bad he's running as Mittens the fascist; now I have to vote for Obama the commie.

/commie

//Romneycare FTW

///never had insurance before
 
2012-06-09 10:20:47 AM

batcookie: fark'emfeed'emfish: batcookie: uttertosh: batcookie: uttertosh: Here's a real head-scratcha: Whatever happened to the notion that we should all be allowed access to healthcare, regardless of social status? Is that not some anciently established human right in the '1st' world?

It's always been a relatively fringe belief, sadly. Greed and selfishness are much more universal in America

FTFY

Nope. Lack of acknowledgement that the problem is human corporate nature, no matter what the cultural affiliation, is also part of the problem. Our nature is something to be overcome by rationality. Unfortunately, for many humans, globablly speaking, they just don't care to overcome it.

had to do it

Yes, but corporations Armies of totalitarian regimes are made up of... say it with me now... PEOPLE.


Fixed for clarification of absurdity of comment.
 
2012-06-09 10:29:35 AM

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: If Boomers would start dieing or retiring, I'd be more than happy to get a better job and buy health insurance.


And this is the real problem. You end up sitting in the waiting room until you're 60 because your parents don't die when you're 40 anymore. And they burn all their capital battling lifestyle diseases, dying poor. That's why wealth is draining from the country - we're eating our seed corn.
 
2012-06-09 10:35:27 AM

tiamet4: NickelP: The wife and I are both 26. She works for a small firm and I am self employed so employer health care isn't really on the table. A $2500 deductible plan is around $400-$500 a month last time I looked into it, maybe 2 months ago. A $5000 plan would bankrupt us if we had a serious issue so whats the point.

We have both delayed medical care and pay cash when we really need it. The really frustrating thing is you have no idea what anything will cost, ever. I don't understand how you can have almost anything non-medical done, even if it is completely custom, and get a quote relatively quickly. A doctor recommended my wife get a certain procedure done to treat chronic kidney infections, after a $1500 test showed nothing useful. He pretty much said he wasn't sure if it would help or not but it was the next thing he'd 'try'. She called around to a few different places that offered it and was told by almost all that they didn't know what it would cost, you have to talk to billing. So she calls the billing departments they all say they have no idea, they can only process claims after the fact when they have all the 'codes'. The best we wound up getting was a cost estimate of $500-$5000 or so. This is for a common procedure they do all day long. That is pretty damn helpful when you are trying to decide to take a shot at something or not.....

//CSB

I really wish health care got separated from people's jobs. I think we'd have a lot more options and people would realize how farked up this stuff is.

So very true. I'm a vet so I'm pretty much expected to give an estimate for anything I do and justify the expense to the owner. I often have to discuss several different options before I even get started doing anything. It's annoying, but it makes sense.

I had a lot of fun at the dentist this past month when I asked how much the work they were planning to do would cost. I have insurance but it doesn't cover everything so I just wanted an idea of what my ou ...


I'd really be in favor of some law that whenever a medical provider is going to do something that cost more than say $200 they have to notify you of the cost before hand, provided it isn't an emergency situation. For the life of me I can't think of any other industry where folks just do things that cost random amounts ranging from hundreds to thousands without ever telling the customer what it will cost. I feel your pain I've been there too with the "Oh yeah that infection you had that we gave you a $7 antibiotic to fix that worked fine. Well we finally got the lab results back. It is exactly what it always is. Here is your $400 lab bill."
 
2012-06-09 10:41:55 AM
Tricare ftw!
 
2012-06-09 10:49:55 AM

Mr. Right: Every time there is a discussion about health care, it is posited, as received wisdom, that health care is a right. What the U.S. has lost sight of is that, in a free country, no rights exist without assuming concomitant responsibility. We have the right to life only so long as we respect the rights of others to live. Should we deprive someone of that right, we lose our own right to live. We have the right to live wherever we want, so long as we assume the responsibility of paying for that domicile. With health care, we want the right without the responsibility.

The problem we will certainly run into is that abrogation of responsibility will lead to loss of the right. If I expect someone else to assume the responsibility of paying for my housing, whoever does so will eventually assume the right to tell me where I may live. Consider, if you are a renter, the landlord retains the right to insist that you maintain the house in good order or they will terminate your lease even if you are paying the rent. Your mortgage holder can call the loan if you do not maintain your property in such a manner that the house has sufficient resale value to cover their loan. Likewise with health insurance - if you insist that someone else pay for it, then you will ultimately get whatever it is they think you should have. Here's a real stickler - if you expect your employer to pay for your health insurance, they get to dictate what kind of health insurance you will have. But, in order for them to be able to pay for that insurance, you need to produce enough profit for the company that they can afford to employ you. So you're doing the work and a large chunk of your value to the company is being confiscated and spent in a manner that may not be in your best interest.

Expecting government or employers to assume responsibility may sit easier with European countries than with many in the U.S. because they grew up in feudalism. That was the system where the serfs had no rights ...


Quite a rant, but it really shows off your ignorance.

So you're willing to pay twice as much as the rest of the industrialized world, screw over everyone who isn't rich, and risk bankruptcy because "shocalizm?"
 
2012-06-09 11:01:35 AM

Smeggy Smurf: cptjeff: Smeggy Smurf: Mandates are what's making insurance so damned high. My wife absolutely cannot have any more kids yet Idaho has it mandated that she be covered for pregnancy. WTF? $300 a month more for a medical impossibility? Fark you I hope they all get ass cancer in airport bathrooms.

They can't adjust that price for risk like they can in upping the price for a smoker to cover lung cancer?

You're getting hosed, but it's not the fault of the healthcare bill. They're forced to provide the coverage, they don't have to charge extra. If they know it's an impossibility, they don't have to charge anything. Your insurance company is dicking you around.

\Single payer really is the only solution.
\\It's simply an issue of patient motive versus profit motive.

Fark that I want no mandates and the option to purchase across state lines. The free market will provide better options than a one size fits all ass raping. The government can't even run a goddamned whorehouse let alone provide decent health care.


But will your doctor accept Random Insurance Company from 8 states over, is the question.
 
2012-06-09 11:06:12 AM

batcookie: Yes, but corporations are made up of... say it with me now... PEOPLE.


Will someone please think of the corporations?!
 
2012-06-09 11:17:45 AM

rustypouch: Quite a rant, but it really shows off your ignorance.

So you're willing to pay twice as much as the rest of the industrialized world, screw over everyone who isn't rich, and risk bankruptcy because "shocalizm?"


Does it sound to you like he's defending the status quo...namely, what memeslave alluded to:

And they burn all their capital battling lifestyle diseases, dying poor

Because that's what happens now. Government or private insurance, pick your poison - they're both stuck cutting checks for expensive procedures to treat not random cancers and bolts from the blue, but near-100% preventable lifestyle diseases...and we have a federal government that actively promotes policies that have increased the incidence of those diseases.

The solution to that is not to add to the power of a government that cannot wisely or honestly handle the power it has now no matter who's calling the shots, but to subtract from the harm it's already doing.

Killing agriculture subsidies with fire would be a wonderful start.

Fixing the food-stamp program so that it provides actual nutritious food and not a card to go buy crap at Wal-Mart would be another. Is delivering meals and ingredients that much more labor intensive than staffing offices with bureaucrats to administer benefits programs? Even if so, it's worth paying extra for it because of the immense savings down the road.

What Mr. Right said is far from actual GOP policy, though. It's far closer to Gary Johnson than Mitt Romney.
 
2012-06-09 11:27:40 AM

relcec: WhyteRaven74: relcec: listen raven, you are out of your depth. y

No I'm not out of my depth. I just happen to think insurance should have absolutely no say so in where someone goes to a doctor or a hospital, ever. You know, like in the rest of the world. Also, on the employer side, if you're not willing to take care of your employees, you shouldn't be running things.

yes you are out of your depth. you laughed at the massive impact of discounts and then said something about having to go to the hospital to even be eligible for them (wtf) and then proposed a solution that solves the structural problem not one bit. just stick to explaining your personal feelings. don't try to go pontificating about what the current state of the industry actually works because you don't have the foggiest.


They are mentally ill. You've been here long enough to know this. Sure it feels good to be right and all but, really? I can kick the ever living crap out of your average five year old child but it doesn't make me a tough guy. ;)
 
2012-06-09 11:45:48 AM
I was recently fraternizing with the enemy in Toronto and came down with a UTI. Went to an urgent care center. When the triage nurse heard I was an American, she sent me to some kind of walk in clinic which would be cheaper for a cash patient. Total experience (including prescription) was $120. They took my debit card. Wait time was about an hour. Pretty comparable to the US. Yes there is a shortage of primary health care physicians in the boonies, but guess what? That's true for the US as well.

Have a British podiatrist friend who practices under the NHS and likes and is proud of their system.
 
2012-06-09 11:49:29 AM

kingoomieiii: Darth_Lukecash: If corporations could get away with it, they would pay people very, very little.

*cough*
Link

1) Bring in foreign students for a work exchange program
2) Pay them as little as you legally can
3) Charge then 99% of what you pay them for absolute shiat housing and forbid them from living anywhere else
4) ...
5) Profit!
6) Pretend you're not Foxconn West by playing the victim when the students strike


In the words of Tony Stark:
That's how our fathers did it,
That's how our GRANDFATHERS did it...
And it's worked out pretty well so far.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you...indentured servitude.
 
2012-06-09 11:51:49 AM
If I go to a farking mechanic they're required to give me a quote and stay within 10% of that quoted price.

The medical market is completely FUBAR. The only way to fix it is to start letting people see the real costs and values out of what they receive, before they sign on for treatment.
 
2012-06-09 11:53:27 AM
...and I just looked up the movie scene I tried to quote, just to find out it actually goes "That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it".

I can't quite decide whether I made it better or worse by mangling the quote.
 
2012-06-09 11:58:06 AM
Headline and article don't match. The article says they're avoiding health care, not health insurance. They seem to have insurance, they just don't want to pay co-pays and deductibles. Like the guy who says he can't afford to pay 50% of an MRI for twisting a knee on the soccer field. Well, I have really good insurance, and I'd still have to pay several thousand for an MRI too. Those machines are expensive. Health insurance does not equal free. You'll still have deductibles and co-pays and things.
 
2012-06-09 12:04:30 PM
As a society, we should support them in their selfish and dumb decisions and keep the snowflakes safe.

/helicopter parent ---> helicopter society
 
2012-06-09 12:04:35 PM

aiiee: that's not bright kids. Get the catastrophic coverage that only kicks in after 5000 has been spent. I'ts under 100/mo if you're under 30


I would love a link. I've not been able to get a quote for less than $140.00. Complete bullshiat they don't take into account your individual health. Instead I'm stuck paying for all you fatties that don't do shiat to keep yourselves in good shape.
 
2012-06-09 12:17:10 PM

capitafun: aiiee: that's not bright kids. Get the catastrophic coverage that only kicks in after 5000 has been spent. I'ts under 100/mo if you're under 30

I would love a link. I've not been able to get a quote for less than $140.00. Complete bullshiat they don't take into account your individual health. Instead I'm stuck paying for all you fatties that don't do shiat to keep yourselves in good shape.


My wife and I have a similar policy through Golden Rule Health. I think we pay about $170 a month for both of us.
 
2012-06-09 12:24:43 PM

capitafun: aiiee: that's not bright kids. Get the catastrophic coverage that only kicks in after 5000 has been spent. I'ts under 100/mo if you're under 30

I would love a link. I've not been able to get a quote for less than $140.00. Complete bullshiat they don't take into account your individual health. Instead I'm stuck paying for all you fatties that don't do shiat to keep yourselves in good shape.


This. I go out of my way to maintain a healthy lifestyle, but the ridiculous quotes I get for insurance imply id be subsidising less responsible peoples healthcare. Just like my car insurance... been paying that every month for 15 years, never even come close to having a claim, because I drive carefully and observe my surroundings. My buddy has totaled SEVEN cars since he started driving. The difference in our premiums is like $200 a month. I really dont think that covers the cost difference of insuring him vs me.

/Damn, thats like $30k in car insurance. Assholes.
 
2012-06-09 12:55:56 PM
Before I got laid off, I was working in a field where income hasn't gone up in 30 years. I crunched the numbers, and when taking inflation into consideration, I was making about 30% of the income I would have back in the 80's. That's the problem with the economy now. No one wants to pay a decent wage. The irony is, the bigwigs are devaluing their own money that way.

When the average Joe doesn't have the money he needs to afford more than basic necessity, luxuries go out the window. When he's not buying luxuries, the price goes up because they become more expensive to manufacture. When luxuries get more expensive, the people building those luxuries get their wages cut to make up for the lack of profit. It's an endless cycle.

Capitalism doesn't work in an environment devoid of generosity. Socialism won't work in that same environment. The government just replaces the corporations as the greedy farkers who drive the system by raising taxes and devaluing the very currency they print.

Greed is the enemy of America.

/rant off.
 
2012-06-09 01:03:15 PM

Alonjar: Bigjohn3592: farkityfarker: Too bad the public option was killed by the Republicans.

As if. Obama was ready to proceed with public option until aheadcount showed he didn't have enough Democrats to pass it either.

/you probably knew that. +1

The democrats could not have passed it without republican support. They didnt/dont have that kind of majority.


Actually, they did. How on earth did you come to believe they didn't?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_A c t

Read the section under "House" and "Senate."
 
2012-06-09 01:14:48 PM

rustypouch: Mr. Right: Every time there is a discussion about health care, it is posited, as received wisdom, that health care is a right. What the U.S. has lost sight of is . . .

Quite a rant, but it really shows off your ignorance.


Are you going to try to convince the class that rights do not have attendant responsibilities? Are you going to give examples of where the government does not dictate how moneys from its sponsored programs are spent? Look at welfare. The government will give you money only if you jump through the proper hoops. Look at food stamps. The government will give you money for food but they control what you can buy with it. Medicare? The government decides what it will pay for and how much it will pay. Social Security? The government confiscates 15% of your earnings, takes it completely out of your control and then doles it out to you at its discretion. If you have the misfortune of dying before you reach retirement age, all of the money you earned is gone. These aren't arguable points. They are facts. The only judgement I passed in my "rant" was that I prefer not to participate in that kind of program.

Because you read my post from an extreme leftist point of view, you didn't understand a thing I wrote. My point is this: in order for the government to provide anything for the citizenry, it must first confiscate either the wealth or productivity of its citizens. Our form of government is based on private property rights, thus the government does not own the means of production. The federal government supposedly has limited powers (although they have been increasingly over-stepped since the 1920s). But it does have the responsibility of providing a common defense and other things so it has the right to lay taxes in order to fulfill those responsibilities. If the government spends more money than it takes in, is assumes debt. That debt can only be discharged by, again, collecting money from the citizens. Hopefully, you can deduce from this that any money the government spends on your behalf must come from you or your friends.

This thread is about health insurance. The way insurance normally works is to manage the risk of catastrophe. Health insurance in this country has moved far away from that concept. We believe that a good health insurance plan must cover all medical expenses. Consequently, health insurance is not really an insurance plan at all, rather it is a prepaid health care plan. That difference is significant. The bottom line, however, is that the productive people of society need to make enough money and then be willing to turn it over to either the insurance companies or the government in order for all health care to be paid for. If the productive people of a society are not willing to do that, then the government must assume debt in order to pay for the health care. Private insurance companies will not go into debt. The government will not tolerate the insolvency of a company even while it is rushing headlong into its own insolvency. Thus the insurance company will either raise premiums or slash coverage.

Lest you think we can simply demand that companies pay for the health insurance, they will only insure people who work for them and they will only insure them to a level that the employees earn. Companies must charge their customers for the full cost of what it takes to employ you. That includes all of the employment taxes, any fringe benefits, your cubicle, equipment, and the pittance you actually see on your check stub. If you want a company to pay for a full coverage medical plan (which will cost at least $1000/month), then your employer needs to be able to charge an extra $6/hour ($1000/month x 12 months = $12,000. Divide that by an average FTE 2000 hours/year for $6/hour) Since that is a cost of employment, your employer needs to add that to the price they charge their customers.. You are earning that money for your employer but you have no control over that money. This is a key concept that most folks do not understand. In order for your employer to pay for anything related to you, you must first be productive enough that your employer can charge its customers enough to cover those expenses. But even though you are being productive enough to earn that amount of money, you never see it, you don't get to decide how it is spent, and it may or may not benefit you and your family at any point.

Those who are not productive members of society contribute nothing into that health insurance pot, so you need to earn more to put into the health care system for them to have free medical care. If you have a low paying job, it is entirely possible that you are shelling out 15% of your income to FICA so that others may have free health care while you have no insurance whatsoever. You're earning it, you just don't get to use it. And, even if you earned enough to allow your employer to pay for the insurance, the insurance company dictates which procedures are covered and which are not, the level of compensation for the procedure, how long it takes to reimburse the doctor, etc.

One of the reasons we spend so much on health care in this country is that for every doctor, nurse, and health care provider, there is an army of clerks dedicated to billing the insurance companies and an alternate universe of clerks on the other end deciding what to pay and then a bunch of folks doing battle to resolve the differences, after which you get a bill for what it would really cost in the real world. But all those clerks have taken their chunk of your premium dollar because they aren't going to work for nothing. So doctors charge more to pay their staff, insurance companies charge more to pay their staff, and you're paying for a whole lot of clerical work that has nothing to do with medical procedures or care.

Our system is well and truly broken. I would argue that moving toward a more government-centric system is not the way to go. It is antithetical to the reason our country was founded. Among the many and manifest problems of socialism is that people are much less wiling to work for the benefit of another than they are for themselves. Even if they are willing to work for and with a teammate, sooner or later they realize that they are working for those who choose not to work, regardless of capability, and their zeal wanes. As their productivity wanes, so does their contribution to the system. Regardless of any noble beginning, socialism always grinds down to the same unpleasant conclusion.

Look at Greece and you see the end result of too many years of people believing that they have the rights without assuming the responsibilities.
 
2012-06-09 01:17:12 PM

Fissile: Socialized medicine! Where does the government get off trying to force people to have medical insurance? It's anti-capitalist! Ayn Rand is turning over in her grave!

[mysite.verizon.net image 500x417]


The Founding Fathers did it.
 
2012-06-09 01:19:55 PM

BMFPitt: I have a friend that got an extra 11k in salary for not taking the company's insurance.


You have a very lucky friend. My previous employer (whose insurance cost $450/mo for an individual under COBRA) would give something like $50 per paycheck in exchange for declining insurance coverage.
 
2012-06-09 01:23:05 PM
$100/mo is most of these kid's cell phone plans. The phone is more important, that's all.

Doesn't change the fact that US healthcare industry is effectively broken. Need to start on the other end from insurance though. Why the fark does it cost $57k for a 40-day stay in the hospital? That's $10k more than the average household gross income in this country. For four farking days!

Couple that with the fact that non-profit hospitals such as University of Cincinnati were "non-profit" to the tune of +$600 million over the last couple years and it leaves you scratching your head.

We'll end up with single payer some day. It probably won't be as good a service as what many have today, but everyone will have it. Either that or this country will end up going down the drain and nobody but the top of the heap will have medical care.
 
2012-06-09 01:23:57 PM
40 = 4. Le sigh.
 
2012-06-09 01:33:38 PM

Smeggy Smurf: cptjeff: Smeggy Smurf:
Fark that I want no mandates and the option to purchase across state lines. The free market will provide better options than a one size fits all ass raping. The government can't even run a goddamned whorehouse let alone provide decent health care.


The 'free market' bullshiat is exactly why TFA is happening. If everyone agrees to raise prices, only the wealthy can buy health care. This has already happened. This is why you're getting 'ass raped', not the government.

A true free market means you buy freedom. There have to be reasonable rules. Those are called 'laws', and it's why we have a government.
 
Displayed 50 of 281 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report