House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat.

[an]

ucodegen, one other factor I can think of for the cost difference is room occupancy. Hospital are usually not at 100% room occupancy most of the time. There are fixed cost that they still have to pay regardless of how full they are. While nursing homes are much more likely to be at or near full occupancy.

I know someone who works at a non-profit hospital and yet, their budget is also very tight. So, it’s not as lucrative as you think it is. Maybe a publicly traded hospital might have their cost structure for you to see in their earning report.

[ucodegen]

ucodegen, one other factor I can think of for the cost difference is room occupancy. Hospital are usually not at 100% room occupancy most of the time. There are fixed cost that they still have to pay regardless of how full they are

50% occupancy will only double the cost, 33% occupancy multiplies the cost by 3.. to get a 10x multiplier, you need the occupancy at 10%… cost increase will be the inverse of occupancy because same costs spread over fewer people.. the result being that the greater costs are still not explained. When my mother went to Glendale Adventists, occupancy was about 80%. Almost all the rooms had at least one if not two people in them. True, you have to keep nurses staffed up, but there still is a problem because the ratio difference can support almost 13 full time RNs dedicated to one individual.

I know someone who works at a non-profit hospital and yet, their budget is also very tight. So, it’s not as lucrative as you think it is.

Not for the RNs, technicians etc working within.. but Glendale Adventists(a non profit) has similar room costs to a for-profit.. I think the money is going elsewhere than to the RNs, technicians.. etc. I know that companies portray the budget as tight even when it may not be. The company I was laid off from declared a greater profit the next quarter (except for one-time costs). There is really a big difference between what the budget is and what amount of money may really be available.

Maybe a publicly traded hospital might have their cost structure for you to see in their earning report.

It is not broken out to the detail I need.. I would want the detail that a Corporate or Tax auditor would want… show me the receipts.. 😎

[ucodegen]

ucodegen, one other factor I can think of for the cost difference is room occupancy. Hospital are usually not at 100% room occupancy most of the time. There are fixed cost that they still have to pay regardless of how full they are

50% occupancy will only double the cost, 33% occupancy multiplies the cost by 3.. to get a 10x multiplier, you need the occupancy at 10%… cost increase will be the inverse of occupancy because same costs spread over fewer people.. the result being that the greater costs are still not explained. When my mother went to Glendale Adventists, occupancy was about 80%. Almost all the rooms had at least one if not two people in them. True, you have to keep nurses staffed up, but there still is a problem because the ratio difference can support almost 13 full time RNs dedicated to one individual.

I know someone who works at a non-profit hospital and yet, their budget is also very tight. So, it’s not as lucrative as you think it is.

Not for the RNs, technicians etc working within.. but Glendale Adventists(a non profit) has similar room costs to a for-profit.. I think the money is going elsewhere than to the RNs, technicians.. etc. I know that companies portray the budget as tight even when it may not be. The company I was laid off from declared a greater profit the next quarter (except for one-time costs). There is really a big difference between what the budget is and what amount of money may really be available.

Maybe a publicly traded hospital might have their cost structure for you to see in their earning report.

It is not broken out to the detail I need.. I would want the detail that a Corporate or Tax auditor would want… show me the receipts.. 😎

[ucodegen]

ucodegen, one other factor I can think of for the cost difference is room occupancy. Hospital are usually not at 100% room occupancy most of the time. There are fixed cost that they still have to pay regardless of how full they are

50% occupancy will only double the cost, 33% occupancy multiplies the cost by 3.. to get a 10x multiplier, you need the occupancy at 10%… cost increase will be the inverse of occupancy because same costs spread over fewer people.. the result being that the greater costs are still not explained. When my mother went to Glendale Adventists, occupancy was about 80%. Almost all the rooms had at least one if not two people in them. True, you have to keep nurses staffed up, but there still is a problem because the ratio difference can support almost 13 full time RNs dedicated to one individual.

I know someone who works at a non-profit hospital and yet, their budget is also very tight. So, it’s not as lucrative as you think it is.

Not for the RNs, technicians etc working within.. but Glendale Adventists(a non profit) has similar room costs to a for-profit.. I think the money is going elsewhere than to the RNs, technicians.. etc. I know that companies portray the budget as tight even when it may not be. The company I was laid off from declared a greater profit the next quarter (except for one-time costs). There is really a big difference between what the budget is and what amount of money may really be available.

Maybe a publicly traded hospital might have their cost structure for you to see in their earning report.

It is not broken out to the detail I need.. I would want the detail that a Corporate or Tax auditor would want… show me the receipts.. 😎

[ucodegen]

ucodegen, one other factor I can think of for the cost difference is room occupancy. Hospital are usually not at 100% room occupancy most of the time. There are fixed cost that they still have to pay regardless of how full they are

50% occupancy will only double the cost, 33% occupancy multiplies the cost by 3.. to get a 10x multiplier, you need the occupancy at 10%… cost increase will be the inverse of occupancy because same costs spread over fewer people.. the result being that the greater costs are still not explained. When my mother went to Glendale Adventists, occupancy was about 80%. Almost all the rooms had at least one if not two people in them. True, you have to keep nurses staffed up, but there still is a problem because the ratio difference can support almost 13 full time RNs dedicated to one individual.

I know someone who works at a non-profit hospital and yet, their budget is also very tight. So, it’s not as lucrative as you think it is.

Not for the RNs, technicians etc working within.. but Glendale Adventists(a non profit) has similar room costs to a for-profit.. I think the money is going elsewhere than to the RNs, technicians.. etc. I know that companies portray the budget as tight even when it may not be. The company I was laid off from declared a greater profit the next quarter (except for one-time costs). There is really a big difference between what the budget is and what amount of money may really be available.

Maybe a publicly traded hospital might have their cost structure for you to see in their earning report.

It is not broken out to the detail I need.. I would want the detail that a Corporate or Tax auditor would want… show me the receipts.. 😎

[ucodegen]

ucodegen, one other factor I can think of for the cost difference is room occupancy. Hospital are usually not at 100% room occupancy most of the time. There are fixed cost that they still have to pay regardless of how full they are

50% occupancy will only double the cost, 33% occupancy multiplies the cost by 3.. to get a 10x multiplier, you need the occupancy at 10%… cost increase will be the inverse of occupancy because same costs spread over fewer people.. the result being that the greater costs are still not explained. When my mother went to Glendale Adventists, occupancy was about 80%. Almost all the rooms had at least one if not two people in them. True, you have to keep nurses staffed up, but there still is a problem because the ratio difference can support almost 13 full time RNs dedicated to one individual.

I know someone who works at a non-profit hospital and yet, their budget is also very tight. So, it’s not as lucrative as you think it is.

Not for the RNs, technicians etc working within.. but Glendale Adventists(a non profit) has similar room costs to a for-profit.. I think the money is going elsewhere than to the RNs, technicians.. etc. I know that companies portray the budget as tight even when it may not be. The company I was laid off from declared a greater profit the next quarter (except for one-time costs). There is really a big difference between what the budget is and what amount of money may really be available.

Maybe a publicly traded hospital might have their cost structure for you to see in their earning report.

It is not broken out to the detail I need.. I would want the detail that a Corporate or Tax auditor would want… show me the receipts.. 😎

[an]

Where did you get the 13 RN number again? RN makes ~$35/hr right now. So a full month of RN care is $25k/month. Add in the cost of their employee benefits, it should be closer to $35-40k/month? I’m not sure about nursing home, but at hospital, they need a RN every minute of the day. So a patient will have a total of 60 RN shifts every 30 days. That’s where I got the $25k-$40k/month in RN cost alone. Add in CNA/LVN cost and you’re probably looking at around $55-60k/month. That’s not counting in the overtime pay, if the RN works beyond their 12/hrs/day shift (that’s double time, $70/hr). If you have 13 dedicated nurse per patient, you’re looking at nursing cost of $105k/month.

[an]

Where did you get the 13 RN number again? RN makes ~$35/hr right now. So a full month of RN care is $25k/month. Add in the cost of their employee benefits, it should be closer to $35-40k/month? I’m not sure about nursing home, but at hospital, they need a RN every minute of the day. So a patient will have a total of 60 RN shifts every 30 days. That’s where I got the $25k-$40k/month in RN cost alone. Add in CNA/LVN cost and you’re probably looking at around $55-60k/month. That’s not counting in the overtime pay, if the RN works beyond their 12/hrs/day shift (that’s double time, $70/hr). If you have 13 dedicated nurse per patient, you’re looking at nursing cost of $105k/month.

[an]

Where did you get the 13 RN number again? RN makes ~$35/hr right now. So a full month of RN care is $25k/month. Add in the cost of their employee benefits, it should be closer to $35-40k/month? I’m not sure about nursing home, but at hospital, they need a RN every minute of the day. So a patient will have a total of 60 RN shifts every 30 days. That’s where I got the $25k-$40k/month in RN cost alone. Add in CNA/LVN cost and you’re probably looking at around $55-60k/month. That’s not counting in the overtime pay, if the RN works beyond their 12/hrs/day shift (that’s double time, $70/hr). If you have 13 dedicated nurse per patient, you’re looking at nursing cost of $105k/month.

[an]

Where did you get the 13 RN number again? RN makes ~$35/hr right now. So a full month of RN care is $25k/month. Add in the cost of their employee benefits, it should be closer to $35-40k/month? I’m not sure about nursing home, but at hospital, they need a RN every minute of the day. So a patient will have a total of 60 RN shifts every 30 days. That’s where I got the $25k-$40k/month in RN cost alone. Add in CNA/LVN cost and you’re probably looking at around $55-60k/month. That’s not counting in the overtime pay, if the RN works beyond their 12/hrs/day shift (that’s double time, $70/hr). If you have 13 dedicated nurse per patient, you’re looking at nursing cost of $105k/month.

[an]

Where did you get the 13 RN number again? RN makes ~$35/hr right now. So a full month of RN care is $25k/month. Add in the cost of their employee benefits, it should be closer to $35-40k/month? I’m not sure about nursing home, but at hospital, they need a RN every minute of the day. So a patient will have a total of 60 RN shifts every 30 days. That’s where I got the $25k-$40k/month in RN cost alone. Add in CNA/LVN cost and you’re probably looking at around $55-60k/month. That’s not counting in the overtime pay, if the RN works beyond their 12/hrs/day shift (that’s double time, $70/hr). If you have 13 dedicated nurse per patient, you’re looking at nursing cost of $105k/month.

[ltokuda]

[quote=mike92104]I’d like to point out how stupid the “if we just didn’t spend money on the war, we could afford health care” argument is. Wars are temporary and a excellent example of the kind of thing that should go on the “credit card” since they can not be budgeted. The health care reform act is a LONG term expense that many people agree will cost the country much more than congress is saying. I can see the memo now. “Dear world, please do not attack us. We have decided to spend our money on health care instead of wars. Sincerely, USA”[/quote]

I’d like to point out how stupid your analysis is. Wars are not temporary expenses. We still have about 100,000 troops in Japan and Europe. We’re still paying for a war we fought over 50 years ago. And when soldiers come home, you still have to pay their medical expenses. Wars are definitely a long term expense that will cost the country much more than congress was saying. “Dear world, please do not attack us. But even if you don’t attack us, we might decide to blow a trillion dollars on bombing you anyway. But don’t worry. This is the kind of trillion dollars that is okay to put on a credit card; not the bad kind.”

[ltokuda]

[quote=mike92104]I’d like to point out how stupid the “if we just didn’t spend money on the war, we could afford health care” argument is. Wars are temporary and a excellent example of the kind of thing that should go on the “credit card” since they can not be budgeted. The health care reform act is a LONG term expense that many people agree will cost the country much more than congress is saying. I can see the memo now. “Dear world, please do not attack us. We have decided to spend our money on health care instead of wars. Sincerely, USA”[/quote]

I’d like to point out how stupid your analysis is. Wars are not temporary expenses. We still have about 100,000 troops in Japan and Europe. We’re still paying for a war we fought over 50 years ago. And when soldiers come home, you still have to pay their medical expenses. Wars are definitely a long term expense that will cost the country much more than congress was saying. “Dear world, please do not attack us. But even if you don’t attack us, we might decide to blow a trillion dollars on bombing you anyway. But don’t worry. This is the kind of trillion dollars that is okay to put on a credit card; not the bad kind.”

[ltokuda]

[quote=mike92104]I’d like to point out how stupid the “if we just didn’t spend money on the war, we could afford health care” argument is. Wars are temporary and a excellent example of the kind of thing that should go on the “credit card” since they can not be budgeted. The health care reform act is a LONG term expense that many people agree will cost the country much more than congress is saying. I can see the memo now. “Dear world, please do not attack us. We have decided to spend our money on health care instead of wars. Sincerely, USA”[/quote]

I’d like to point out how stupid your analysis is. Wars are not temporary expenses. We still have about 100,000 troops in Japan and Europe. We’re still paying for a war we fought over 50 years ago. And when soldiers come home, you still have to pay their medical expenses. Wars are definitely a long term expense that will cost the country much more than congress was saying. “Dear world, please do not attack us. But even if you don’t attack us, we might decide to blow a trillion dollars on bombing you anyway. But don’t worry. This is the kind of trillion dollars that is okay to put on a credit card; not the bad kind.”

[ltokuda]

[quote=mike92104]I’d like to point out how stupid the “if we just didn’t spend money on the war, we could afford health care” argument is. Wars are temporary and a excellent example of the kind of thing that should go on the “credit card” since they can not be budgeted. The health care reform act is a LONG term expense that many people agree will cost the country much more than congress is saying. I can see the memo now. “Dear world, please do not attack us. We have decided to spend our money on health care instead of wars. Sincerely, USA”[/quote]

I’d like to point out how stupid your analysis is. Wars are not temporary expenses. We still have about 100,000 troops in Japan and Europe. We’re still paying for a war we fought over 50 years ago. And when soldiers come home, you still have to pay their medical expenses. Wars are definitely a long term expense that will cost the country much more than congress was saying. “Dear world, please do not attack us. But even if you don’t attack us, we might decide to blow a trillion dollars on bombing you anyway. But don’t worry. This is the kind of trillion dollars that is okay to put on a credit card; not the bad kind.”

[Author]

Posts