View Full Version : Senate bill fines people refusing health coverage
Senate bill fines people refusing health coverage
AP via Google ^ | 7/02/09 | RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR
Posted on July 2, 2009 5:18:48 PM CDT
Senate bill fines people refusing health coverage
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR – 58 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans who refuse to buy affordable medical coverage could be hit with fines of more than $1,000 under a health care overhaul bill unveiled Thursday by key Senate Democrats looking to fulfill President Barack Obama's top domestic priority.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated the fines will raise around $36 billion over 10 years. Senate aides said the penalties would be modeled on the approach taken by Massachusetts, which now imposes a fine of about $1,000 a year on individuals who refuse to get coverage. Under the federal legislation, families would pay higher penalties than individuals.
In a revamped health care system envisioned by lawmakers, people would be required to carry health insurance just like motorists must get auto coverage now. The government would provide subsidies for the poor and many middle-class families, but those who still refuse to sign up would face penalties.
Called "shared responsibility payments," the fines would be set at least half the cost of basic medical coverage, according to the legislation.
In 2008, employer-provided coverage averaged $12,680 a year for a family plan, and $4,704 for individual coverage, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation's annual survey. Senate aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said the cost of the federal plan would be lower but declined to provide specifics.
The legislation would exempt certain hardship cases from fines.
The new proposals were released as Congress neared the end of a weeklong July 4 break, with lawmakers expected to quickly take up health care legislation when they return to Washington. With deepening divisions along partisan and ideological lines, the complex legislation faces an uncertain future.
These people have lost their flippin' minds!
:mad::mad::mad::mad:
JSandi, I am far from being a supporter of current administration, I don't believe that they know what to do with healthcare, and I am generally opposed to mandatory-anything.
Having said that: as of March 2008 (i.e. before current economic collapse) there were approx. 40 mil uninsured people in this country, of which about 10-15 mil were categorized as "free-riders" - people who could buy some insurance and pay some money for their care but chose not to. Society tends to think of free-riders as drug addicts or illegal immigrants - and they are - but there are millions of Joe Schmoes who don't get insurance because "I never get sick", "I can always go to County hospital" or "my new job is going to start in 2 months so no, I don't need that COBRA plan". Whether proposed option is good or not is debatable, but I have absolutely zero problem with making them take some responsibility.
Wouldn't need insurance if we brought back debtors prison. :D
Don't want to buy insurance? No problem, but you will pay your hospital bill somehow, someway. I had to fork out a shit ton of cash for my child's birth and my wife worked at the hospital, WITH GOOD INSURANCE! When the remainder was finally settled I called the hospital to complain about my bill (which had double and triple charges for certain things!) to which they responded right away with, "we can set up a payment plan based on whatever you can afford at no interest."
Let me recap the entire thing. My wife had health insurance from the hospital for years without ever having used it. Call it, 3 years. Monthly cost for her and me was around 250ish a month. No problem with that so far. She gets pregnant late in the year. We pay our deductible, $2000 I think it was, and insurance never had to kick in. The pregnancy continues into the new year. I was informed I was going to be paying the deductible AGAIN because it was a new calendar yer. So it's deductible per year not per "condition". Nice.... So I paid the deductible again. Wife has baby with a few small complications. I am responsible for 20% of everything the insurance didn't cover.
THEN!!!!!! I find out the hospital, which is the sister hospital to where she works and directly across the street from the one she works and is the ONLY hospital within 2 hours that has a mother baby unit... is considered OUT OF NETWORK which means an increased % that I'm responsible for! I'll get to that in a min.
Moving on:
3 years of payments and no use of insurance @ 250mo: $9000
First deductible with no insurance pay out: $2000
Second deductible: $2000
20% of costs: $13,000ish
When I called the hospital to get the charges fixed I asked them "what do you do for people with no insurance?". The lady responded they provide a discount that she wasn't willing to share with me. I had my wife investigate. The "discount" is over 80% and most times, especially for child births, is simply written off. NOW GET THIS: While I was getting my bill fixed for the double and triple charges, which the hospital admitted they were in the wrong, they sent my bill to collections........... That was another fiasco.
So after all is said is done, I paid out the f-ing ass for being responsible enough to have insurance. I eventually negotiated with the hospital at the upper management level concerning the "out of network" BS and the fact my wife is an employee etc. to a number (of the 13k) that we were both happy with. While meeting with these guys, they made the comment that they have been hemorrhaging cash with the amount of non insurance no pay people, that they have to milk every single dollar they can where they can. Great business plan fellas.
Nowadays, my wife has a new job with health care provided free for her. My department takes care of me and on top of it I have what is called a surgical and hospital plan that is around $22 a month that covers 90% of costs associated with major medical issues. Anything that I am hospitalized for and/or need surgery for. The stuff insurance is meant to protect consumers from. I know plenty MDs around here and between being friendly and my departments health care I'm covered. My daughter has her own plan (it was cheaper that way) that has full coverage.
What does a Dr. office visit cost? $200? How often do you go? Other than physicals which the department covers, I don't think I've been in 5 years, maybe longer.
Sorry for the ramble.
I have absolutely zero problem with making them take some responsibility.
I have absolutely zero problem making you let Barney Frank inside YOUR house to check YOUR prostrate.
If y'all think a few folks choosing not to buy health insurance are the cause of health care costs, please do some research.
What was the last thing that was fixed or made better by more government involvement?
The land of the free and home of the brave my ass....
YVK-Take responsibility? How about they pay their bill, or they have payroll deductions, or they take out a loan? Like the idea of debtor's prison also. The majority of the so-called uninsured are illegals. They deserve nothing but, if they show up at the emergency room, they get taken care of. 12-15 million chose not to have health care b/c they are young, independently wealthy, stupid, etc. See above ways to be made to pay.
The CBO estimated the current health care bill would increase coverage to include around 15 of the so-called 48 million uninsured. Let's look at that.
Approx. 20 mil are illegal, they deserve nothing. Let's go with the low estimate of 12 mil choosing not to have health care. That leaves 16 mil. that do not have health ins. But wait, if they go to an emergency room, they get care. Let's put that to the side for now. 16 mil out of 300 mil: roughly 95% of the population has health care or chooses not to have it. I'd say our health care system is ok. But you want to penalize people for refusing insurance. It is their right to choose not to. The minute you say they should be penalized for a personal decision, you open up pandora's box. Why do they want these people to pay? Because they know the system will be outrageously expensive. Can you say 45-50% overall tax rates, as in European countries? Lived there, the rates are that high.
If y'all think a few folks choosing not to buy health insurance are the cause of health care costs, please do some research.
10-15 million people who can pay for their care but don't isn't "a few folks", it is freaking 15 mil. No, it isn't the sole cause of health care cause, but it is a sizable chunk.
I have absolutely zero problem making you let Barney Frank inside YOUR house to check YOUR prostrate.
1. Learn to make intelligent points 'cause you are not making any 2. Learn to spell "prostate" correctly.
YVK-Take responsibility? How about they pay their bill, or they have payroll deductions, or they take out a loan? Like the idea of debtor's prison also. The majority of the so-called uninsured are illegals. They deserve nothing but, if they show up at the emergency room, they get taken care of. 12-15 million chose not to have health care b/c they are young, independently wealthy, stupid, etc. See above ways to be made to pay.
The CBO estimated the current health care bill would increase coverage to include around 15 of the so-called 48 million uninsured. Let's look at that.
Approx. 20 mil are illegal, they deserve nothing. Let's go with the low estimate of 12 mil choosing not to have health care. That leaves 16 mil. that do not have health ins. But wait, if they go to an emergency room, they get care. Let's put that to the side for now. 16 mil out of 300 mil: roughly 95% of the population has health care or chooses not to have it. I'd say our health care system is ok. But you want to penalize people for refusing insurance. It is their right to choose not to. The minute you say they should be penalized for a personal decision, you open up pandora's box. Why do they want these people to pay? Because they know the system will be outrageously expensive. Can you say 45-50% overall tax rates, as in European countries? Lived there, the rates are that high.
6933:
1. I actually stated that "whether proposed option is good or not is debatable", i.e. I didn't endorse it.
2. I've lost you a bit at the areas which I highlighted. There are 12 mil who choose not to have insurance while they can. Those are my primary "targets" - and I think you and I agree they should pay for their care. That leaves 16 mil who have no means to obtain insurance. Your statement about "their right" (above in bold) - are you referring to 12 mil of free-riders or 16 mil of truly uninsured?
When I called the hospital to get the charges fixed I asked them "what do you do for people with no insurance?". The lady responded they provide a discount that she wasn't willing to share with me. I had my wife investigate. The "discount" is over 80% and most times, especially for child births, is simply written off. NOW GET THIS: While I was getting my bill fixed for the double and triple charges
ZDL: you probably figured it out, but those "write-offs" for people who have no insurance aren't really write-offs; they are paid by means of triple-charging you and everybody else who has insurance.
Free health care doesn't exist.
People think about this for one minute. Name one program that the government manages that works. Social security is a joke. If these whores really cared about us common folks they would give us the same program that they have. You know which one right? The one that requires no payments and they get the best health care available. Or how about their pension plan. The one that pays for the rest of their lives after serving one term.
These whoes are running this country into the ground and it seems like every 24 hours they come up with another quick fix plan that they drafted in 5 minutes.
The_War_Wagon
07-02-09, 20:08
People think about this for one minute. Name one program that the government manages that works.
The DMV! Oh wait...
http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/DOHHH.jpg
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-02-09, 20:24
Wife is a doc, you should hear her now. Not only will we pay more taxes because we are 'rich', they will tax our health care (along with a lot of other people), and my wifes pay is going to eventually get cut. Talk about triple billing.
Notice how Obama's plan doesn't mention lawsuit reform and liability? Lots of those 'needless' tests are for CYA, a pushy family with no med knowldege (or worse a little bit), or 'needless' only in hindsight.
You cannot have universal health care and have 10,000,000 illegals here. We all will have to wait in line for care, because if we go to the emergency room they will fine the b'Jesus out of us, but illegals will only be able to go to the ER and the front of the line.
There are a lot of problems with health care. Get sick, lose your job and you eventually lose coverage. That's not right and should be addressed.
The odd thing is, the wife is a doc, but if I got really sick, we couldn't pay for care out of pocket. Something is wrong there.
That, and Barry keeps talking about preventive care, IF you can get people to go to the Doc once a year, and if there are enough primary care doc available, WHAT happens when you are 'fat' for more than two years in a row? We are going to end up with Black market twinkees and pizza. Won't do anything about not being healthy, how about fine. Of course illegals and slackers won't have to pay.
I know a little extrapolation, but nothing that is out of the realm of possibiility.
Just wait till people see how much free health care costs.
Not advocating free health care or any government ran program at all. I'm not even faulting the insurance company matter of fact. I should have read the fine print better. Lesson learned. I do blame the hospital for double and triple charging me, intentionally, to cover the degenerates financial responsibility.
Pay your bills people. Don't buy bullshit policies. Use the free market to cast your vote on the current health care system. I'd venture to say that if people actually paid their bills through payment plans with the hospital, the hospitals would fare better. Pipe dream for sure but it begs the discussion. Only a course of action containing such drastic shift in cash flow would cause insurance companies and everyone else involved to change course.
I still default to the idea of debtors prison though.
Senate bill fines people refusing health coverage
AP via Google ^ | 7/02/09 | RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR
Posted on July 2, 2009 5:18:48 PM CDT
Senate bill fines people refusing health coverage
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR – 58 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans who refuse to buy affordable medical coverage could be hit with fines of more than $1,000 under a health care overhaul bill unveiled Thursday by key Senate Democrats looking to fulfill President Barack Obama's top domestic priority.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated the fines will raise around $36 billion over 10 years. Senate aides said the penalties would be modeled on the approach taken by Massachusetts, which now imposes a fine of about $1,000 a year on individuals who refuse to get coverage. Under the federal legislation, families would pay higher penalties than individuals.
In a revamped health care system envisioned by lawmakers, people would be required to carry health insurance just like motorists must get auto coverage now. The government would provide subsidies for the poor and many middle-class families, but those who still refuse to sign up would face penalties.
Called "shared responsibility payments," the fines would be set at least half the cost of basic medical coverage, according to the legislation.
In 2008, employer-provided coverage averaged $12,680 a year for a family plan, and $4,704 for individual coverage, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation's annual survey. Senate aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said the cost of the federal plan would be lower but declined to provide specifics.
The legislation would exempt certain hardship cases from fines.
The new proposals were released as Congress neared the end of a weeklong July 4 break, with lawmakers expected to quickly take up health care legislation when they return to Washington. With deepening divisions along partisan and ideological lines, the complex legislation faces an uncertain future.
Wait, Wait...Yes!!!!I finally I understand Obama. When he say's Overhaul Healthcare what he really means is Ruin...Or no, NO. He means Rape Health Care, Yeah that’s what he means. Whew....I didn't think I was ever going to understand what the Hell he was up to. That’s a Relief.
JSandi, I am far from being a supporter of current administration, I don't believe that they know what to do with healthcare, and I am generally opposed to mandatory-anything.
Having said that: as of March 2008 (i.e. before current economic collapse) there were approx. 40 mil uninsured people in this country, of which about 10-15 mil were categorized as "free-riders" - people who could buy some insurance and pay some money for their care but chose not to. Society tends to think of free-riders as drug addicts or illegal immigrants - and they are - but there are millions of Joe Schmoes who don't get insurance because "I never get sick", "I can always go to County hospital" or "my new job is going to start in 2 months so no, I don't need that COBRA plan". Whether proposed option is good or not is debatable, but I have absolutely zero problem with making them take some responsibility.
Taking responsibility is making them pay their bills -- garnish wages, etc until they are paid. Not forcing people to "buy insurance."
Also, of that 40mil, a very large portion are not permanently without insurance, but may be between jobs. This survey that generates this number basically asks if they are without insurance at any time during the year so the number is a BS number
i'm not sure what the answer is. i know we need one, though. medical care has gotten out of ****in hand, as many of you have already stated.
i'm a disabled vet- i have VA coverage for life (or at least until they do away with that). I'm also basically self-employed. no one will insure my wife, due to her medical history- so i cant even GET insurance for her. i just write a check when she goes to the doctor.. excruciatingly expensive, i might add.
i had private insurance for myself and my boys.. until i went to the ER one night for a chronic service-connected condition.. somehow- don't know how exactly, never did get a straight answer- i ended up with a $6,400 bill from one night in the ER and a couple of blood tests. i wasn't even admitted- i have to pay 20% of the total bill, so i didn't want to soak up a huge bill from being admitted and all the tests and crap they wanted to do to me. so, because i refused to be admitted, the insurance WOULDNT PAY FOR THE ER VISIT!
i expected the $22,000 bill for my last born's delivery... as i said, no one will insure my wife. we saw that coming. but I'm supposedly insured- $6,400 for a ****in ER visit? and you know what? it would have cost me LESS had i not had insurance at all, because i would have been elligiable for the their uninsured patient discount!
so now i have no insurance for myself.. just VA. i just make damn sure i don't get hurt/sick. i hate the VA.
my wife.... God protect her, cause if she ever needs anything major, it'll be out 20, 50, 100K just like that.
10-15 million people who can pay for their care but don't isn't "a few folks", it is freaking 15 mil. No, it isn't the sole cause of health care cause, but it is a sizable chunk.
2. I've lost you a bit at the areas which I highlighted. There are 12 mil who choose not to have insurance while they can. Those are my primary "targets" - and I think you and I agree they should pay for their care. That leaves 16 mil who have no means to obtain insurance. Your statement about "their right" (above in bold) - are you referring to 12 mil of free-riders or 16 mil of truly uninsured?
Those who don't have insurance but could if they wanted to are not freeloading. They pay their bills when they come -- they choose to pay cash for services etc. Those people are a non issue in terms of the "health care crisis." The govt wants these people to have coverage as a way of extracting $$$ from them. This won't make a bit of difference to the cost of health care for everyone else.
The problems are the ones who don't have coverage because they cannot afford to or otherwise cannot get it. That is much smaller than 40 million. Illegals, drug users, etc. My wife is a nurse and sees these frequent fliers all the time. Forcing me to pay for those peoples coverage is ridiculous.
Do you want to know how to solve it? Get rid if 3rd party payers as the first in line to pay. Get rid of govt mandates and community rating. Go to "consumer directed" health care where each person is in charge of paying their own bills and has insurance as a fall back for catastrophic need. These are the so-called high deductible plans. You pay your families first 3000 or 5000 in bills and after that they cover you at 80 or 90% or whatever. This way you don't waste healthcare dollars that you are responsible for. This is the sort of plan we have through my wife's hospital job. She works part time so we have to pay about $2500 a year anyway for a family plan. If she worked full time (she works 28-30 hours a week on average, I think full time is 36 hours or more) that would be a "free" plan. We have to cover the first $5000 (it was $5000, it may have gone down a bit this year) of costs except for routine well-checkups which we only pay a $20 co-pay for. After that it is 20% we pay up until some limit at which point they pay 100%. We stick $250 a month about in our HSA so that if we do need to pay for something, the money is there (untaxed). It is still cheaper for us than the $750 a year family deductible plan which costs like $450 or more a month. We have 2 kids. Our normal yearly costs for healthcare, not including the high deductible catastrophic plan fees, is less than $1000 a year.
Everyone (almost) should be on such a plan. That alone would drive down healthcare costs as people would be aware of what they pay in healthcare and would be wiser in their use.
The more government has become involved in healthcare the more expensive it has become.
Those who don't have insurance but could if they wanted to are not freeloading. They pay their bills when they come -- they choose to pay cash for services etc. Those people are a non issue in terms of the "health care crisis."
No, it is not true. Nobody can afford current healthcare rates out of pocket. I do see my patients' bills once in a while and they are incredulous. I could go broke easily if I paid out of pocket what my hospital charges for my services. Those "self-guaranteed payers" pay fraction of their bills, and then most of them drop off from long-term care, just to come back through ER in worse condition. And, unless I can figure their med regimen through 4-dollar Walmart's formulary, they don't take pills.
Those people are just the same uninsured as other uninsured are in terms of societal burden.
These are the so-called high deductible plans. You pay your families first 3000 or 5000 in bills and after that they cover you at 80 or 90% or whatever. This way you don't waste healthcare dollars that you are responsible for. This is the sort of plan we have through my wife's hospital job. She works part time so we have to pay about $2500 a year anyway for a family plan. If she worked full time (she works 28-30 hours a week on average, I think full time is 36 hours or more) that would be a "free" plan. We have to cover the first $5000 (it was $5000, it may have gone down a bit this year) of costs except for routine well-checkups which we only pay a $20 co-pay for. After that it is 20% we pay up until some limit at which point they pay 100%. We stick $250 a month about in our HSA so that if we do need to pay for something, the money is there (untaxed). It is still cheaper for us than the $750 a year family deductible plan which costs like $450 or more a month. We have 2 kids. Our normal yearly costs for healthcare, not including the high deductible catastrophic plan fees, is less than $1000 a year.
This is a good plan, although it implies you can afford $5000 out of pocket; many families can't. I wonder if your wife works for an IHC facility, because the plan you're describing is similar to mine. As much as a bad rep IHC gets, it is actually one of the most, if not the most, efficient healthcare system in this country with very good quality of care.
This whole thing pisses me off to no living end. Seriously, I'm sitting here fuming now, and that's just from skimming the thread.
Solving healthcare with more insurance is like plugging the holes in a leaky dam with sticks of lit dynamite.
Healthcare reform is always talked about in terms of "health insurance coverage for all" but no one wants to acknowledge that health insurance itself is the MAJORITY of the problem! The whole system is completely ****ed up, and there's no better way to say that. It's just ****ed up.
I don't want socialized medicine to become official policy, but let's admit that the insurance system we currently use is really just "privatized socialism" anyway. Some people pay in more than they use, and some people take far more than they put in, subsidized by the healthy folks. It's a damn good example of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need", the only difference is that there's a corporate middle man making a killing skimming profit off the top.
Meanwhile, that system has allowed the actual medical field to become so bloated, mismanaged, and inefficient that it can't survive on it's own without the insurance teat, and an individual can never afford to pay the non-insurance prices. Ever really think about the extreme difference in insured vs. non-insured costs? It's not just the difference in what you pay, but also in what the hospital/doctor accepts. The total the hospital accepts an amount from the insurance that is often far, FAR less than they originally billed. Yet there's a fat chance that an individual can look at a $10k bill and go, "Hey, I'm only going to pay $2.5k of this, just knock the rest off" and have the hospital agree -- they'll just try and set up a payment plan :rolleyes: Yet the big reason they cite for requiring insurance is that non-insured people won't pay their bills. Well no shit! Maybe if you actually charged everyone the smaller amount that insurance pays, then people could afford to pay some of their bills off. I don't know about everyone else, but getting hit with a $1000 bill is unpleasant; getting hit with at $10,000 bill is a disaster.
Now about the billing itself: I have never in my life seen a more inefficient cluster**** than the medical billing system. This is only a single example, but here's a case study: my wife just had a baby, and had some preterm labor problems requiring her to go in and get checked out pretty often. Every time she went through the door, we'd get a new bill for about $50, which they would set up on a whole new account, each time! We literally have 25-30 open accounts with them right now, which they can't even manage to total and explain to us so we can begin to pay it all off!
You want to fix healthcare? Abolish insurance. Make efficiency and customer service paramount. Charge everyone the same, and allow the pricing and service drive the customers to choose their doctors.
No, it is not true. Nobody can afford current healthcare rates out of pocket. I do see my patients' bills once in a while and they are incredulous. I could go broke easily if I paid out of pocket what my hospital charges for my services. Those "self-guaranteed payers" pay fraction of their bills, and then most of them drop off from long-term care, just to come back through ER in worse condition. And, unless I can figure their med regimen through 4-dollar Walmart's formulary, they don't take pills.
Those people are just the same uninsured as other uninsured are in terms of societal burden.
Actually, yes. We were talking about those people who do not have insurance coverage but could afford to buy it f they wanted. Those people do pay out of pocket for their medical needs. They are generally young, healthy, and/or better off. They don't usually have many costs and I would bet that many of them live in states where health insurance has been priced out of sight by govt intrusion (NY, NJ, and any of another dozen or two progressive states) through community ratings, mandates, etc. Where a private policy can cost $12-18000 a year as it is.
Also, most doctors and hospitals have a "cash" rate. You tell them up front you are not using insurance and you are paying cash and your bill is 50-60% less than it would be otherwise.
Also, most insurance companies have brokered special rates for their policy holders (which is why when you get your explanation of benefits and/or a bill you will see [on an EOB] what was charged, what was approved, and what your share of that approved amount is or [on the bill once insurance has paid] you will see adjustments etc made to the total before insurance payments were applied leaving you with your balance). Their list rates are only charged the walk-in insuranceless folks and that is so they have something to bargain away. Very few people pay the "list" price that is charged. So if you are self-insuring, you can go in and negotiate to at least get the preferred rates insurance companies get.
This is a good plan, although it implies you can afford $5000 out of pocket; many families can't.
Well, yes and no. First, most people do not regularly have that many health care bills every year. They may occasionally get there but most don't regularly. THERE ARE exceptions where people have conditions or whatever which are high maintenance/cost but in general most people do not reach the high deductible and do not need to except for rare catastrophic needs. Second, these sorts of plans are usually associated with an HSA so you put a small amount aside every month or pay period that is saved in an account that you can use for health care costs. An account where the money is put in pre-tax, is used tax-free for health care, and which you own and can take with you and also which you can invest, depending on the HSA. And after retirement you can withdraw the money for any purpose, not just healthcare, though it would incur taxes like an IRA does at that point if used for non health care.
These high deductible plans are often cheaper overall than the more normal low deductible plans that cost much more per month. If you have a $5000 high deductible plan ($5000 per family / $3000 per individual like we have) and save $300 a month in premiums (for a family plan) over a $500 or $750 deductible plan (per family) you save almost that $5000 in costs EACH YEAR ($3600 plus the deductible so $4100-$4250 is what the low deductible plan costs you each year if you need at least $500 or $750 in actual healt care) and even if you don't use it you have paid that. The high deductible plan only costs you $5000 if you really need a lot of health care in a year -- we did last year with a new baby but the year before and most likely this year we will use much much less) and otherwise you are ahead. And the money you save you can stick in the HSA to cover that $5000 in case of catastrophe.
[these numbers are roughly pulled from our own plan, form memory, and are only for used to illustrate the points -- there are many plans out there, some more expensive, some less, but in general the idea holds from what I have been able to see reading a health care think tank newsletter most months plus my own research]
I wonder if your wife works for an IHC facility, because the plan you're describing is similar to mine. As much as a bad rep IHC gets, it is actually one of the most, if not the most, efficient healthcare system in this country with very good quality of care.
Yes, she does work for Intermountain Health Care (as they are called now -- whoopdee do -- IHC was easier to say ;) ). Their efficiency is at least built partly on the backs of their employees who lose out. For example, nursing staff can be called at 5am the morning they are supposed to be at work at 7:30am and told they are cancelled for the day. They get 0 for that and of course they are not told until they are waking up to get ready and so it is not like you can use the day for any pre planned events. Earlier this year my wife lost significant hours and $$$ this way across several pay periods and some full time nurses were losing 25-30% of their hours or more for the pay period. Some weeks things are really full and some weeks the nurses get called off a lot. Abuse of employees. Many of her nurse friends are divorced single moms and cannot afford to not have a reliable job and be called off a lot. Her department has also been trying to put people on call without paying on-call money. They do it by only cancelling you for the first 4 hours of your shift. You then have to call in to see whether you will be cancelled for the rest of the shift. They are putting you on call but calling it something else to avoid paying the on-call 12.5% rate.
THAT is how IHC saves money. Employee abuse. I would like to see Nursing Managers forfeit the same percentage of salary as the average nurse in their department loses to being called off each pay period. Right now there is no incentive to properly staff a department since they can call off what they don't really need so they can overstaff without cost. If the nursing manager had to lose money equal to the average call off amount in the department they would make much more effort to properly staff. Also, the executive team should also lose their salary at the same percentage that nursing and other employees are called off and lose theirs. Spread the pain.
The wife always tells me about how the management says they have to "meet their budget" which is why they aggressively call off nursing staff. If they gave a 45 bed hospital, as an example, and the budget does not allow them to have enough nurses for 45 beds, then they need to not accept patients for all the beds. If the beds are all full, they will bust their budget, and if not, then why are they getting called off? They are expected to do all sorts of in-service training, paperwork, etc. so if a day is "light" they should be able to enjoy that and get their required training done for which they are not otherwise given extra time.
The Salt Lake Valley IHC hospitals, at least some of them, were given "Nursing Magnet" status, whatever that means. But now that they have it, IHC has been rolling back some of the things they had to do to get it (I don't know all the details but they had to have a nurse on some sort of advisory board, etc, and that has been cancelled now my wife said)
Sorry for my rant. IHC is not a bunch of angels. They get all sorts of accolades by abusing their staff.
You want to fix healthcare? Abolish insurance. Make efficiency and customer service paramount. Charge everyone the same, and allow the pricing and service drive the customers to choose their doctors.
You don't want to abolish insurance. You want to get insurance back. Now "health insurance" is not really insurance at all. It is a prepaid plan of some sort. This is the bit about 3rd party first line payers I said. You need to abolish THAT aspect.
Insurance should be what it is in every other field and how it used to be in health care. It should be used to cover catastrophic costs, not pay for routine care.
Fix health insurance by getting the government out (no mandates, no community rating, no medicare or medicaid underpaying). Make insurance real insurance and make people responsible for their own routine care. (This last bit is often called "consumer directed" healthcare).
You don't want to abolish insurance. You want to get insurance back. Now "health insurance" is not really insurance at all. It is a prepaid plan of some sort. This is the bit about 3rd party first line payers I said. You need to abolish THAT aspect.
Insurance should be what it is in every other field and how it used to be in health care. It should be used to cover catastrophic costs, not pay for routine care.
Fix health insurance by getting the government out (no mandates, no community rating, no medicare or medicaid underpaying). Make insurance real insurance and make people responsible for their own routine care. (This last bit is often called "consumer directed" healthcare).
I have a policy, as I explained, that does exactly that. Covers disasters. That is what insurance SHOULD be used for. I don't have insurance on my car to cover oil changes. :cool:
It should be used to cover catastrophic costs, not pay for routine care.
I don't have insurance on my car to cover oil changes. :cool:
Okay this I do agree with (and I like that analogy, ZDL).
I guess I should say I think our current system of health insurance should be abolished. Instead they're trying to permanently institutionalize it's worst features into our government. :mad:
Ever feel like the world is on fire and you're stuck with a kinked garden hose? :mad:
To plagiarize Det. Murtaugh: I'm too young for this shit.
I have a policy, as I explained, that does exactly that. Covers disasters. That is what insurance SHOULD be used for. I don't have insurance on my car to cover oil changes. :cool:
As do I (though it actually pays or subsidizes certain preventative care as well). Most people don't though they are growing in popularity.
CarlosDJackal
07-03-09, 00:10
... I have absolutely zero problem with making them take some responsibility.
Fining someone for not participating in some Socialist Program is far from "making them take some responsibility". Forcing those who choose not to have health insurance to pay their own medical bills is.
This shit is nothing more than forced welfare. It's the same type of bullshit that penalizes a single Mother for finding a job by cutting off their welfare instead of trimming it back but rewards those who choose not to seek employment and make more babies instead.
If anyone needs an example of government run health care, just look at the Veterans Administration.
Once the VA gets fixed, maybe they might be able to convince me to consider government-run healthcare.
If it's soo easy Obambi....fix the VA first....might I suggest firing all of the bureaucrats who have been there for 50+ years, and re-writing all of the policies so that it is something normal people can understand. Oh...and replace the fired bureaucrats with honorably discharged/retired military personnel...not a 20-something year old who needs to be forced into doing his/her job.
Anyone else have success working with the VA?
Fining someone for not participating in some Socialist Program is far from "making them take some responsibility". Forcing those who choose not to have health insurance to pay their own medical bills is.
Carlos, you quote one sentence from my post omitting the part where I state that I am opposed to "mandatory-anything". I also stated elsewhere that I've not endorsed this plan. I, however, deal with this shit on daily basis. I've worked in this healthcare system since 1997, ranging from "free" public to private to non-for-profit settings. Nobody - I repeat, nobody - has come up with efficient and sustainable way of "forcing those who choose not to have health insurance to pay their own medical bills". I've seen hospitals spent huge money hiring collection agencies to achieve an epic FAIL.
So you and I can argue, or better, you and I can agree that anything mandatory is a socialist program, while the reality is here - as shown above by ZDL - and reality is that insured patients are triple-billed and free-riders are written off at the expense of insured. Which is pretty much a communism.
Half or more of this country's population believes that access to healthcare is a given and unalienble right that should come at minimal or no expense, and we are talking about debt prisons? Can anybody here spell UTOPIA?
OK, this topic gets my blood pressure up and I have to work next three days, so I am going to quit here. I am going to conclude with the notion that healthcare is a reflection of societal attitudes and what's called "societal contract", and as long as there is a disconnect in attitudes and avoidance of understanding of social contract, the healthcare problem is insolvent. We - healthcare industry, people, administration that was there for 8 years - has done a marvelous job ignoring it, and are about to pay the price for apathy, inaction, and watching out for own interests only.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-03-09, 10:47
Catastphic healthcare insurance, that actually stays with you if there is an actual catastrophy, and portable and cumulating Medical Savings Accounts to help even out the spikes like from getting sick in December.
...portable and cumulating Medical Savings Accounts to help even out the spikes like from getting sick in December.
Do these exist? Properly managed, it seems like this would be a great system.
Right now I participate in the Flex Spending Account at work, and it's more good than bad, but it's definitely a flawed system. The annual use-or-lose rat race encourages wasteful spending at the end of the year as people get services that they don't really have to have because they've got to spend the money. Either that, or they skip services because they didn't put much money in and ran out before they get what they need.
If you could create have an account that you could contribute to pre-tax, but not something that was invested and subject to those risks, that individuals or families could choose to contribute as much as they want, use it to reimburse medical expenses, and maintain a rolling balance as convenient to them. It'd be great to be able to build it up to $5k, draw from that as needed for basic needs, and then replenish over time.
Is there anything out there like that? I've never heard of it.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-03-09, 12:10
I talked to someone that had one that rolled over, but I can't remember who. More of an idea than an actual plan I know of. You can shop around for preventive care and that is probably a market that can function well. Catastophic care is probably a lot harder to shop for and have a coherent market for.
If doctor's pay is going to be limited, or at least regulated, how about flat fees for lawyers medical malpractice suits, and your lawyer comes out of a pool, not one you pick from the TV commercial d uring the "Tyra Show".
Carlos, you quote one sentence from my post omitting the part where I state that I am opposed to "mandatory-anything". I also stated elsewhere that I've not endorsed this plan. I, however, deal with this shit on daily basis. I've worked in this healthcare system since 1997, ranging from "free" public to private to non-for-profit settings. Nobody - I repeat, nobody - has come up with efficient and sustainable way of "forcing those who choose not to have health insurance to pay their own medical bills". I've seen hospitals spent huge money hiring collection agencies to achieve an epic FAIL.
So you and I can argue, or better, you and I can agree that anything mandatory is a socialist program, while the reality is here - as shown above by ZDL - and reality is that insured patients are triple-billed and free-riders are written off at the expense of insured. Which is pretty much a communism.
Half or more of this country's population believes that access to healthcare is a given and unalienble right that should come at minimal or no expense, and we are talking about debt prisons? Can anybody here spell UTOPIA?
OK, this topic gets my blood pressure up and I have to work next three days, so I am going to quit here. I am going to conclude with the notion that healthcare is a reflection of societal attitudes and what's called "societal contract", and as long as there is a disconnect in attitudes and avoidance of understanding of social contract, the healthcare problem is insolvent. We - healthcare industry, people, administration that was there for 8 years - has done a marvelous job ignoring it, and are about to pay the price for apathy, inaction, and watching out for own interests only.
Stop providing any care except life or death emergency care.
Tort reform and liability reform so these lo lifes cannot sue.
end
Catastphic healthcare insurance, that actually stays with you if there is an actual catastrophy, and portable and cumulating Medical Savings Accounts to help even out the spikes like from getting sick in December.
Yes, exactly, except that Medical Savings Account has a legal meaning and you really want an HSA -- Health Savings Account, which is an MSA redone correctly.
Stop providing any care except life or death emergency care.
Tort reform and liability reform so these lo lifes cannot sue.
end
On a first point: would love to but legally can't, at least at this point in time.
On a second point: people familiar with situation tell me that AAJ (American Association for Justice, formerly and more accurately known as ATLA - American Trial Lawyer Association) is one of the most powerful and efficient lobbying organizations in D.C... AMA, ACC etc. don't even come close, apparently.
Do these exist? Properly managed, it seems like this would be a great system.
Right now I participate in the Flex Spending Account at work, and it's more good than bad, but it's definitely a flawed system. The annual use-or-lose rat race encourages wasteful spending at the end of the year as people get services that they don't really have to have because they've got to spend the money. Either that, or they skip services because they didn't put much money in and ran out before they get what they need.
If you could create have an account that you could contribute to pre-tax, but not something that was invested and subject to those risks, that individuals or families could choose to contribute as much as they want, use it to reimburse medical expenses, and maintain a rolling balance as convenient to them. It'd be great to be able to build it up to $5k, draw from that as needed for basic needs, and then replenish over time.
Is there anything out there like that? I've never heard of it.
Look up high deductible health plan and Health Savings Account (HSA). Exactly what you describe. While most HSAs allow you to invest, I don't think they require you to (except for the default money market account you get in so you earn so pitiful amount of interest on the money)
HSA you keep and they follow you and they accrue from year to year. The only flexible spending crap I do is about $300 a year to cover dental and vision and stuff that is not part of our normal health insurance
Many employers now offer high deductible plans and HSAs and they are also available in the private market
On a first point: would love to but legally can't, at least at this point in time.
well, you are only required to provide emergency care at a hospital. There is some sort of sign at the entrance to the IHC hospitals that I have been to that describe this as well as a handout we got when we had our baby. It is probably a lot more than really they should be offering in practice due to fears of being sued
However, we are talking about healthcare reform so that would be one of the reform points
On a second point: people familiar with situation tell me that AAJ (American Association for Justice, formerly and more accurately known as ATLA - American Trial Lawyer Association) is one of the most powerful and efficient lobbying organizations in D.C... AMA, ACC etc. don't even come close, apparently.
The #1 issue that needs to be done is tort reform. The people must demand it. It would happen if the people demanded it. AMA, etc are not going to get it done themselves. Let the AMA, AARP (let them get off their lazy asses and do something helpful) and a billion other orgs need to band together to get this done.
I talked to someone that had one that rolled over, but I can't remember who. More of an idea than an actual plan I know of. You can shop around for preventive care and that is probably a market that can function well. Catastophic care is probably a lot harder to shop for and have a coherent market for.
We have had this sort of plan for several years and many many companies offer them now and the private market also offers them.
Look up high deductible insurance and health savings account (HSA)
I had an idea a while back I ran by wife who is in the medical field let's see what you guys think.
For those with no insurance:
A separate hospital would be established to deal with only these patients. It would primarily staffed by med students and residents. To include MDs, RN, xray techs, cat scan techs, emts going through school etc. They would be supervised obviously by trained and professionally licensed people in those fields at all times. Those supervisory positions could be counted as CEUs for those who need it as well there could be some full time paid supervisory positions. There shouldn't be ANY downgrade of care since you get a student of some sort at the hospital now anyway.
If a person with no insurance had an emergency and the nearest hospital was the insurance holders hospital, they would be taken there of course and given emergent care. However when stabilized they would be moved. The non insurance hospital would attempt to establish payment plans for the patients and follow proper collections and litigation procedures if unable to satisfy the bill.
This would cause a few things IMO. You can surely bet the general atmosphere (at no fault of the staff) at the non insurance hospital would be...... unpleasant. The wait would be horrendous. It would keep these people out of the insurance system would allow for rates to be lowered for us responsible or capable folk. The poor would get the care they need at the cost they could afford. The med students would get their training. This might cause some of the people who can afford insurance to purchase it in an attempt to not have to go to the non insurance holders hospital.
Funded by: Our tax dollars that would need NO increase. How about we just spend a little better?
Is this socialized medicine? I don't think so. There is still a major expectation to pay for the services rendered to you. I think this idea or some variation of it would solve a grand host of issues we are having right now. Utopia for sure. :(
Every thing this administration is doing scares me. If you refuse to fill out the census form you get fined, refuse to get gov. health care you get fined, secret meetings behind closed doors with U.N. officals. The very fact someone even proposed a bill like this should be a wake up call to all free Americans, the republic is in danger. Seems like some people in a south american country this past week got it right.
I had an idea a while back I ran by wife who is in the medical field let's see what you guys think.
For those with no insurance:
A separate hospital would be established to deal with only these patients. It would primarily staffed by med students and residents. To include MDs, RN, xray techs, cat scan techs, emts going through school etc. They would be supervised obviously by trained and professionally licensed people in those fields at all times. Those supervisory positions could be counted as CEUs for those who need it as well there could be some full time paid supervisory positions. There shouldn't be ANY downgrade of care since you get a student of some sort at the hospital now anyway.
If a person with no insurance had an emergency and the nearest hospital was the insurance holders hospital, they would be taken there of course and given emergent care. However when stabilized they would be moved. The non insurance hospital would attempt to establish payment plans for the patients and follow proper collections and litigation procedures if unable to satisfy the bill.
This would cause a few things IMO. You can surely bet the general atmosphere (at no fault of the staff) at the non insurance hospital would be...... unpleasant. The wait would be horrendous. It would keep these people out of the insurance system would allow for rates to be lowered for us responsible or capable folk. The poor would get the care they need at the cost they could afford. The med students would get their training. This might cause some of the people who can afford insurance to purchase it in an attempt to not have to go to the non insurance holders hospital.
Funded by: Our tax dollars that would need NO increase. How about we just spend a little better?
Is this socialized medicine? I don't think so. There is still a major expectation to pay for the services rendered to you. I think this idea or some variation of it would solve a grand host of issues we are having right now. Utopia for sure. :(
that's an idea any capitalist would be proud of. some areas do have a similar system, in the form of "free clinics" and "free hospitals." we have a free hospital here in Oregon, but obviously you have to qualify. if you make more than poverty level, no go. but not too many people want to spend any time there, you're more likely to pick up a case of hep C than get your cancer cured.
as i drift more and more toward an odd political idealogy i cant really put a name to, it seems to me more and more that being healthy isn't something that should depend on the thickness of your wallet. perhaps being self-employed and having no insurance contributes to this- ten years ago, when i had no healthcare worries, i probably would have said "if people can't afford it, **** em- social darwinism at it's best." i guess i have a little more Jesus in me than i did back then.
healthcare has become a part of societal infrastructure.. people are literally living on the healthcare system- without drugs and treatments, half this country would die in two months (minor exaggeration). at least two things need to happen: find a way to end medical institutional dependence, via an aggressive health education program in all public schools- and i mean a REAL one, not just a gay ass "health and PE" class a couple of times in a child's education.
And/or socialize medical insurance. I'm NOT suggesting we make medical insurance a TAX, and I'm NOT suggesting we require anyone to buy into it. but if we opened up a nationally available insurance pool, with comparable coverage, and made it CHEAP, everyone would buy into it anyway. gets a step closer to the socialism that will eventually consume this country, but at least it's not a leap straight in.
the only other option is to completely socialize healthcare. government takeover of the medical industry. nobody around here wants that.
in my opinion.
And/or socialize medical insurance. I'm NOT suggesting we make medical insurance a TAX, and I'm NOT suggesting we require anyone to buy into it. but if we opened up a nationally available insurance pool, with comparable coverage, and made it CHEAP, everyone would buy into it anyway. gets a step closer to the socialism that will eventually consume this country, but at least it's not a leap straight in.
the only other option is to completely socialize healthcare. government takeover of the medical industry. nobody around here wants that.
The only way to make it cheap is to either give it an unfair advantage over the private insurance or to get government mandates, community ratings, etc out of the private market and allow people to buy insurance in other states.
If the government gives unfair advantage to its own then people will use it and not private and you will end up with a single health insurance option and government run healthcare as it is.
The biggest problem is the government intrusion jacks up costs.
I laugh out loud when I hear anyone in government, and especially Obama, make the claim that a government run system will drive down administrative and other costs because they will be more efficient. Total BS. Private insurers have an incentive to be as efficient as possible -- profit. If they cannot drive more efficiencies into the system then the problem lies elsewhere. Mainly government intrusion -- mandates, underpaying medicare/medicard, govt and CYA paperwork, etc.
I work at a health insurance company. You guys think you pay alot now, wait until we have socialized medicine. The reason it's expensive now is because of medicare, the medicare allowances for services provided are a joke. I've seen plenty of people that had received surgeries run $50k plus and medicare pays less than $10k. We are the ones that offset that cost. It will be worse, far worse once we have socialized medicine.
From the insurance side, we can't accept every joe shmoe that is obese, has diabetes, previous heart attacks, takes 5+ rx's and only charge him 5k a year.
And from being a human being, hearing people tell me they pay $800 a month for their family, and still have a 5k deductible, 10k stop loss or out of pocket, and we deny a first trimester ultrasound that costs $300 b/c a bunch of Dr's on a board wrote a guideline that 1st trimester ultrasounds aren't necessary unless there's some kind of medical issue, I can understand why people are pissed.
Something needs to be done, I wouldn't know where to begin though if I was making that decision....:confused:
And from being a human being, hearing people tell me they pay $800 a month for their family, and still have a 5k deductible, 10k stop loss or out of pocket, and we deny a first trimester ultrasound that costs $300 b/c a bunch of Dr's on a board wrote a guideline that 1st trimester ultrasounds aren't necessary unless there's some kind of medical issue, I can understand why people are pissed.
This should not really happen with a $5k deductible plan since in most cases it would fall into the deductible. However, a true consumer oriented healthcare system this could not happen since 3rd party first line payers would be gone out of the system until they hit the "catastrophic" level, hiting their high (in this case $5k) deductible. The CONSUMER would get to choose whether or not they want the 1st trimester ultrasounds, not the insurance company. The consumer is paying for it after all.
we have "freedom" in this country, so people don't ever like to hear things like this, for some reason.
the problem is with people's poor life choices. i don't remember all the statistics from my HPE295 class- the most enlightening, and, i think perhaps the most important class i ever took in college- but the vast majority of people receiving care they cant afford is for illnesses associated with obesity, poor diet, no exercise, alcohol, drugs, and STDs. these are all choices people made in their lives.
poor diet and no exercise is causing all the obesity, diebetes, heart problems, etc- i'm appauled at how badly otherwise "normal" (not drug users, criminals, trash, etc) people are abusing themselves- and it's the blame for the healthcare crisis.
after taking that class, a required class for my BS in criminal justice, my eyes were opened- and i felt like switching my major to something health/education related so i could go out into the world and preach fire and brimstone. America is ****in poisoning herself on a daily basis... with food and sedentary lifestyles. we've extended our lives by 20 years in the last 20 years- but we traded a shorter, healthier life for a longer life filled with twice the health problems. drugs and treatment are keeping us alive, but the quality of that life is greatly diminished.
i mean AGGRESSIVE health education- from K-12, and more required health education in college. aggressive ad campaigns against fast food. aggressive food-stamp restrictions against unhealthy foods... this is an investment, and any wisely spent money on this issue will pay out exponentially in the end.
i'm so serious about this, if it were my call, i'd tax the SHIT out of corporations that sell unhealthy food. squeeze 'em so bad they cant breath. i'd rather have $50 whoppers and big macs than socialized healthcare, which is what's going to happen if we dont figure this shit out.
sersly, and fo'rill.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-03-09, 17:38
I had an idea a while back I ran by wife who is in the medical field let's see what you guys think.
For those with no insurance:
A separate hospital would be established to deal with only these patients. It would primarily staffed by med students and residents. To include MDs, RN, xray techs, cat scan techs, emts going through school etc. They would be supervised obviously by trained and professionally licensed people in those fields at all times. Those supervisory positions could be counted as CEUs for those who need it as well there could be some full time paid supervisory positions. There shouldn't be ANY downgrade of care since you get a student of some sort at the hospital now anyway.
If a person with no insurance had an emergency and the nearest hospital was the insurance holders hospital, they would be taken there of course and given emergent care. However when stabilized they would be moved. The non insurance hospital would attempt to establish payment plans for the patients and follow proper collections and litigation procedures if unable to satisfy the bill.
This would cause a few things IMO. You can surely bet the general atmosphere (at no fault of the staff) at the non insurance hospital would be...... unpleasant. The wait would be horrendous. It would keep these people out of the insurance system would allow for rates to be lowered for us responsible or capable folk. The poor would get the care they need at the cost they could afford. The med students would get their training. This might cause some of the people who can afford insurance to purchase it in an attempt to not have to go to the non insurance holders hospital.
Funded by: Our tax dollars that would need NO increase. How about we just spend a little better?
Is this socialized medicine? I don't think so. There is still a major expectation to pay for the services rendered to you. I think this idea or some variation of it would solve a grand host of issues we are having right now. Utopia for sure. :(
They call it the VA Hospital.
Hard working, underpaid staff, with students not just allowed, but needed to do tasks beyond anthything they would be able to do at a standard hospital.
It is my wifes time being pimped out to to a VA hospital that makes her think that the govt can't run a hospital she wants to be a patient in. And these are service men and women recieving care, imagine when is just normal citizens.
It's a priority issue. It can only be fixed, and there is no arguing this, with personal responsibility. Something you can't force.
People have cell phones, cable tv, car payments, credit cards, netflix, and various other luxuries (which if you ask them, are necessities), refuse to either get a job or education, or refuse to actually put in some effort at the job they do have to gain overtime or advancement. Then they refuse to carry car insurance, health insurance, etc. because "it's to expensive!!!" Well excuse me a second but **** YOU. It then falls on us, the responsible, to cover not only our risks but the risk of the losers who REFUSE (not can't) provide for themselves. They refuse to hedge themselves from financial disaster and instead expect US to pay for their bad choices. It's already socialized.
People are leveraged out the ass and it's been catching up for while.
People have a disillusioned idea of what the "American Dream" is. They believe it to be the accumulation of stuff rather than being free. Not only from tyranny but from debt.
Kids come out of high school now wondering where their BMW and mansion are. They don't understand the alien concepts of, get a job and money management.
This really strikes a chord with me because of a personal issue. I'll level with you guys. I've been here a while, have a lot of posts, and have never said anything like this so if you think I'm boasting, bite me. As some of you know I'm not only a LEO. My wife alone makes near 6 figures and I make a fair amount more. Now, I still drive my paid for, 2001 tahoe and I'm looking for a sub 300 payment for a new vehicle for my wife. We have the same furniture we had when we got married. It was a year or so ago when I bought my first new TV. Paid cash. We live in a nice house but I chose to spend some time educating myself and saved us a fortune on it. I cut my own grass. I use my cell phone for business and would be lost with out it yet, through educating myself and negotiating, our combined bill is $114 including tax and fees on a plan that is well over 300 retail. We have 1 kid that was an accident. We planned to have kids later in life, but hey what can you do. We have health insurance, home owners insurance, auto insurance, life insurance, retirement accounts, kids college fund, savings account, disaster accounts, etc. We don't eat out. Our only ridiculous spending habits are guns, ammo, gear, and starbucks (don't ask). I'm typing on a laptop with a broken screen that I simply attached an independent screen to until it shits out on me completely. We don't waste food. We don't have cable TV.
Let's contrast. My wife's brother. 4 years older than me. ex wife, new wife, 4 kids, 3 foreclosures, new cars every time I turn around, out of work every time I turn around, blackberries (which they have absolutely no use for), cable TV, xbox, PS3, netflix, going out to eat all the time, boob job for his wife, vacations, etc. Guess where they are every couple weeks? Either at our doorstep or their parents asking for money to float to his next job or paycheck etc. I have never given them money. I once paid their kids Dr. bill because they weren't going to take the kid otherwise and they needed to go. The entire family has herpes. New furniture. 50" flat screen. Bombed credit. No insurance for anyone, including his kids. No idea how he keeps the entire thing a float. His best job I'd bet he was make less than 30k.
Now I look at this guy who has a lot of nice stuff. Stuff that I would probably like to have, and I can not only afford it, I could pay cash. Instead, I stay disciplined. Then, he has to balls to come to us or his parents. His parents didn't teach him this shit. They are far more frugal than we are. I'd say nothing pisses me off more than watching him take his entire family down with him. The kids are innocent.
We were once over there for a birthday party and they ran out of milk. I heard him telling his wife they were already overdrawn on their checking account over 200 because he bought beer, cigs, and DVD player for the car. It's like another world watching them.
The saddest part... I meet people EXACTLY like him, every single day. I work with guys who do the same. Men who should know better. I'm probably talking a few here on the forum. I feel like a minority. Sometimes, I feel like an idiot for doing the things I'm doing... Why do it when no one else does? I make 40x's as much as these people yet they have the furniture I wanted............ Highly aggravating sometimes.
This is root of ALL our problems in the USA: Abuse of leverage.
:rant off. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-03-09, 18:24
Just Googled and scanned about cellphone use in the US. 82% of people have cellphones, as of 1/2008. What percentage have healthcare?
They often call all these programs 'safety nets', when in actuality, they are chains keeping us from striving. Yes, some people just have ingrained in them a drive. Most people need a swift kick or some fear to kick things in high gear. You take out the danger and people get complacent and the economy in aggregate suffers. Now the ultimate would be a system where people didn't think there was a safety net, so they worked like crazy to get ahead, but in actuality they were protected. I think the welfare reform of the 90s was a great example. The MSM was really good at sowing fear in our underachievers so that they didn't think that they were going to be coddled anymore, and viola, crappy jobs didn't look so bad anymore when you think the gravy train is going to end.
I can afford things now that I didn't think possible when I gradauted from HS 20 years ago. It is amazing what hard work and six degrees between my wife and I can do in two decades.
Not to get off on the job topic, but did Barry ever have a real job?
This should not really happen with a $5k deductible plan since in most cases it would fall into the deductible. However, a true consumer oriented healthcare system this could not happen since 3rd party first line payers would be gone out of the system until they hit the "catastrophic" level, hiting their high (in this case $5k) deductible. The CONSUMER would get to choose whether or not they want the 1st trimester ultrasounds, not the insurance company. The consumer is paying for it after all.
it doesn't apply to the deductible though, the claim is completely denied, so the person has to pay the total charge of the ultrasound say $600 instead of the negotiated rate of $200, it doesn't apply to the ded b/c a board of dr's says that 1st trimester ultrasounds should only be performed for risk factors or other medical reasons, previous miscarriages etc.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.