shutdown

[CA renter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=livinincali]
Why does it cost 20, 30, 40, 50K for a relatively standard baby delivery procedure. [/quote]

It doesn’t. Californians pay among the highest rates in the country, and average cost for a vaginal delivery without complications are below $20K. In some states it’s less than half that. But it has gone up dramatically. 27 years ago, I paid $1,400 at Grossmont Hospital.[/quote]

Interesting, brief article about some of the reasons for the high cost of healthcare in the U.S.

IMHO, it all boils down to privatization. Patents are also a huge part of the problem, even though taxpayers subsidize the medical industry to the tune of billions of dollars per year. Much of the private research could not happen without the public research that came before it, so why are taxpayers not getting a return on their “investments”?

http://www.npr.org/2013/08/07/209585018/paying-till-it-hurts-why-american-health-care-is-so-pricey

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]

Interesting, brief article about some of the reasons for the high cost of healthcare in the U.S.

IMHO, it all boils down to privatization. Patents are also a huge part of the problem, even though taxpayers subsidize the medical industry to the tune of billions of dollars per year. Much of the private research could not happen without the public research that came before it, so why are taxpayers not getting a return on their “investments”?

http://www.npr.org/2013/08/07/209585018/paying-till-it-hurts-why-american-health-care-is-so-pricey%5B/quote%5D

It would be nice if there was just one or two things wrong with the US medical financing model. Just one or two things to fix. But it is far from that simple. The entire system is irreparably broken. I generally hate videos as a source of info, but this is one of the best explanations of the cluster-fvck we’re stuck in right now.

http://www.upworthy.com/his-first-4-sentences-are-interesting-the-5th-blew-my-mind-and-made-me-a-little-sick-2?g=2&c=la3

[CA renter]

[quote=SK in CV]

It would be nice if there was just one or two things wrong with the US medical financing model. Just one or two things to fix. But it is far from that simple. The entire system is irreparably broken. I generally hate videos as a source of info, but this is one of the best explanations of the cluster-fvck we’re stuck in right now.

http://www.upworthy.com/his-first-4-sentences-are-interesting-the-5th-blew-my-mind-and-made-me-a-little-sick-2?g=2&c=la3%5B/quote%5D

Thanks for the link. I agree with what he’s saying, but would add that his entire argument could be summed up in one word: privatization. 😉

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]

Thanks for the link. I agree with what he’s saying, but would add that his entire argument could be summed up in one word: privatization. ;)[/quote]

I don’t think the word even applies. It usually refers to the shift of ownership and delivery of goods and services from the public sector to the private sector. A hundred years ago, there was almost no involvement of government in health care. Significant funding for the CDC is less than 70 years old, for the NIH, less than 50. Medicare is 50 years old, Medicaid a few years younger. What we’ve seen over the last 50 years is de-privatization.

[joec]

[quote=livinincali]

So you paid $12K/year for a plan with maternity because you had an addition to family. I assume you were worried that the hospital was going to charge 10s of thousands of dollars to have that child even if it was a standard delivery. Why does it cost 20, 30, 40, 50K for a relatively standard baby delivery procedure. 50 years ago it cost a couple hundred dollars that pretty much anybody could come up with out of pocket. Even with inflation it might cost a couple thousand dollars in today’s money. Why do you need to pay $12K year to cover something that should cost a couple grand. We know that is doesn’t because the hospital is probably billing north of $20K.

But I will agree that for some individuals Obamacare is going to be good. For others it’s going to not be so good. Your particular circumstances landed you on the good side of Obamacare. There will be others on the bad side of Obamacare. Some single male somewhere is helping you pay for your affordable maternity coverage.[/quote]

Actually, the bills could run upwards of 100k+. A co-worker of mine was planning a normal vaginal birth with no meds, but had complications and had to do an emergency c-section and his bill was well over 100k. Our eldest was a primie and bill with all the stuff involved was near 300k…Thank god for large employer insurance during that event years ago.

We only carry maternity now “in case”.

That said, if it was only 20k, I may risk it and just pay, but you don’t want to fight the hospitals and people end up in bankruptcy because of medical bills. 62% from this article:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/pf_article_109143.html

This is why I think something needs to be done and since putting people bk doesn’t help anyone…

Even young kids won’t want to get strapped with huge medical bills early on so just buy the insurance.

[spdrun]

If the bills were incurred when the kid was under 18 and thus unable to legally sign a contract, could the kid say “fuck you, I’m not paying” upon his 18th birthday?

[joec]

[quote=spdrun]If the bills were incurred when the kid was under 18 and thus unable to legally sign a contract, could the kid say “fuck you, I’m not paying” upon his 18th birthday?[/quote]

I haven’t researched what happens if someone doesn’t “buy” Obamacare and gets sick/huge hospital bill…

If it was as simple as paying a fine and then buy insurance once you get sick, then everyone would do that and not carry any car/home/fire insurance, etc…

If a young adult can pay 100-200 or a low amount with tax credits which any low income person would qualify for, just pay and get the insurance so you won’t have to fight the massive legal fight to remove/zero out some huge medical bills.

It’s just not worth it and will be a financial drag far more than the few hundred you need to pay. Families, coverage is more obviously.

For the < 18 year old, they'd probably qualify for medicaid/medi-cal in CA if no/low income so they pay little or zero anyways... Again, do the research, but from what I've seen now and for my case, Obamacare looks to be a winner.

[CA renter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=CA renter]

Thanks for the link. I agree with what he’s saying, but would add that his entire argument could be summed up in one word: privatization. ;)[/quote]

I don’t think the word even applies. It usually refers to the shift of ownership and delivery of goods and services from the public sector to the private sector. A hundred years ago, there was almost no involvement of government in health care. Significant funding for the CDC is less than 70 years old, for the NIH, less than 50. Medicare is 50 years old, Medicaid a few years younger. What we’ve seen over the last 50 years is de-privatization.[/quote]

Correct. I used the word “privatization” when I should have used private or for-profit, instead. It’s not the shift from public to private that I’m talking about (though one could make that argument WRT publicly-funded research and drugs/medical devices that end up in the hands of private companies), but the existence of a for-profit/private healthcare system instead of a nationalized/public system. The Privatization Movement does refer more directly to the private takeover of public assets and cash flows, as you’ve noted.

[all]

[quote=joec]

I haven’t researched what happens if someone doesn’t “buy” Obamacare and gets sick/huge hospital bill…

If it was as simple as paying a fine and then buy insurance once you get sick, then everyone would do that and not carry any car/home/fire insurance, etc…

[/quote]

I believe you can sign up during the open enrollment periods only, once or twice/year.

[SK in CV]

[quote=all][quote=joec]

I haven’t researched what happens if someone doesn’t “buy” Obamacare and gets sick/huge hospital bill…

If it was as simple as paying a fine and then buy insurance once you get sick, then everyone would do that and not carry any car/home/fire insurance, etc…

[/quote]

I believe you can sign up during the open enrollment periods only, once or twice/year.[/quote]

That’s accurate as far as policies sold through the insurance exchanges. Non-exchange policies won’t have the limited enrollment periods. At least for 2014, enrollment ends on 3/31 next year.

[FlyerInHi]

I think the Tea Party is right. There will be no default on the debt. Treasury will make the interest payments but will not pay other obligations that come due.

There is a difference between defaulting on the debt and defaulting on obligations in general.

Not paying some bills will just be a rougher version of the shutdown.

[SK in CV]

[quote=FlyerInHi]I think the Tea Party is right. There will be no default on the debt. Treasury will make the interest payments but will not pay other obligations that come due.

There is a difference between defaulting on the debt and defaulting on obligations in general.

Not paying some bills will just be a rougher version of the shutdown.[/quote]

I don’t think that interpretation is consistent with the law. “Other obligations” could be all debts authorized by law. Payments for federal salaries, payments to contractors, possibly payments to states are all covered under the 14th amendment. The only expenditures specifically mentioned are pensions and costs related to what could be called today, domestic terrorism.

[FlyerInHi]

There will be lawsuits for sure. When some parties are not paid while bondholders are given preferential treatment, they will sue. Maybe the Supreme Court will decide quickly.

But I think the national debt will be paid, so in that regard the tea party is right.

The Tea party will create lots of enemies so it’s probably not wise to go down that path.

Not good for the economy, but very fascinating politics.

What will boehner do if the senate passes a bi partisan bill?

[SK in CV]

[quote=FlyerInHi]There will be lawsuits for sure. When some parties are not paid while bondholders are given preferential treatment, they will sue. Maybe the Supreme Court will decide quickly.

But I think the national debt will be paid, so in that regard the tea party is right.

The Tea party will create lots of enemies so it’s probably not wise to go down that path.

Not good for the economy, but very fascinating politics.

What will boehner do if the senate passes a bi partisan bill?[/quote]

If I’m a federal contractor, and I’ve completed my work, why is the money I’m owed not a “public debt”? If a federal worker puts in his two weeks of work and doesn’t collect a pay check, how is that not defaulting on a public debt?

[FlyerInHi]

Public debt, national debt.. Semantics.
I think the president will make bond payments first if he must.

He has to make the least harmful decision. Then the courts will decide. Maybe the Supreme Court will overturn the debt ceiling limit.

[Author]

Posts