-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NYT: Newest Scam in US Health Care, Taking Advantage of ER Patients Unable to Say No.
- Thread starter NYCmetsfan
- Start date
- Status
QuicheFontaine
Member
Get used to it because we will have to do it soon.
Are any parties proposing a change to free-at-the-point-of-delivery? I wasn't aware of it.
I have heard that the TTIP deal being struck by the EU will make it so that privatised parts can't be subsequently un-privatised. Not a big fan of that.
Edit:
Eh? Unless "abortion on request" is some legalese term with a specific meaning, I'm pretty sure we do. It's free on the NHS.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Counseling? In the US we just tell you to man up. :3
Man, you are shifting a lot of goalposts here.
Not to mention you seem to have dropped the idea the US is a world leader on minimum wage.
IndoAssassin
Banned
Why are Americans so against Universal health care? I have a very hard time understanding this mentality.
Can someone help me understand?
Can someone help me understand?
Why the fuck should I have to pay for your health care?
Fix your own problems.
^ Yes, this is sadly the problem people have.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
It was my original intent. And I specifically said it was just to counter the "USA follows on everything".
We instituted a minimum wage in 1938, the UK in 1998.
My goal isn't to portray the US has better, but having lead on human rights and social supports. And to counter his ignorant, condescending, and incorrect statements
CornBurrito
Member
Free market will solve this obviously.
Angelus Errare
Banned
NYCmetsfan
Banned
This is the justification not the reason.
Angelus Errare
Banned
The reason...Republican party has gotten very good at getting people to vote against their best interest? If you just work hard enough you'll become rich! Your time is just around the corner, the harder you have to work and more stressful it is the sweeter it'll be when you "make it".
IpsoFacto
Member
Yes, why would Americans be oppossed to something so overwhelming positive with absolutely no negatives?
As someone who had family members go through that wonderful system I have to ask the supporters of good ol' NHS: why do you hate human beings?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
This is not their health care rhetoric
Our corporations have enormous influence on our government and convince the ignorant people of America that universal healthcare is bad for them. There are a lot of ignorant people in this country. They constantly vote against their own interests because they are susceptible to demagoguery from politicians in the pockets of billionaires. Every piece of legislation designed to benefit them is butchered, burned to the ground, or gutted to compromise just enough to pass it.
Couple that with individualism, greed, "fuck you, got mine" and you got assholes across the board. The whole "why should I have to pay for some lazy slob's healthcare?!" mentality. Some people believe socialism is the great Satan or that the government is too incompetent to run healthcare. They can't figure out why universal healthcare would be bad for them without right-wing propaganda telling them why. They can't even explain how the status quo (mountains of debt) is any better.
Basically, a bunch of mental gymnastics, cognitive dissonance, and willful ignorance on their part.
It's marketing and money and fear that keeps things as they are.
I'm not seeing how the US has lead on human rights and social supports. On some issues maybe. The US is a great place to live though for most.
I'm not seeing how the US has lead on human rights and social supports. On some issues maybe. The US is a great place to live though for most.
Exactly. No party would remove thre NHS outright. The backlash would be huge. Just slowly erode it and make it very difficult to push back the other way.
And New Zealand instituted one in 1894. Australian states had all done so by 1902.
So however you try to twist your argument here, it's still wrong.
Perfection. Nothing can be added to this.
I pay over $400 a month for insurance that I basically can't use because we have a $6000 deductible. If my kids are sick and I take them to the doctor, I have to foot the entire bill.
Case in point: Over the summer, I broke the glass jar to our blender and put a half inch gash down the side of my finger. Did I go get stitches like a normal person? No, I slathered it with neosporin and put a few band aides on it.
Case in point: Over the summer, I broke the glass jar to our blender and put a half inch gash down the side of my finger. Did I go get stitches like a normal person? No, I slathered it with neosporin and put a few band aides on it.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
That was the entire point
And none of this was in regards to the us vs uk comparison.
UltraMagnanimous
Member
As someone who has experience with the health system in two Western European countries and the US, and lives in the US now.
It's totally and utterly broken here. And dental care too.
It's totally and utterly broken here. And dental care too.
benjipwns
Banned
Ha, good one.
So America cares twice as much about getting people the best health care in a timely fashion as the UK.
Tabris first post about the USA trailing specifically mentions compared to the Western World, using the UK as a jumping off point.
Taking one instance where the UK trails the US does nothing to counter the underlying point about how the USA can learn a great deal from other nations about how to move forward, which is kind of the bread and butter of this topic.
Look, I feel we're getting a little into the weeds here, I think I'll just finished by saying this; it'd be simpler to say that the USA is a country that's been great by global standards in terms of human rights and rights for its citizens, but there's very little you can point to in what we've discussed and say they were a leader in the exact areas you've named.
...and again I'll reply. Where would the money come from if you had to spend it on defense? Out of thin air? I'm not saying you would necessarily cut healthcare, but you sure as hell would be cutting something. Healthcare funding would either have to be cut or some of the other social programs.
Also, of course it would be hard for any country but especially hard for a population as large as the U.S. The ACA couldn't even be rolled out in a timely matter and that was relatively small move compared to UHC.
Timely? In America? Have you been in an ER? Or gone anywhere other than a walk-in clinic?
2 years ago I was told by my medical center to wait 6 weeks for a testicular ultrasound (To get a lump examined). Called back about 5 times before I got a secretary that was willing to set me up for the next week.
Had it been cancerous, that lump could have progressed from early stage 1 to late stage 2 /early stage 3 over the original wait period.
America's health care costs so much because it's so bloated. There are redundancies everywhere. There is extra paperwork. There are inconsistent policies and standards between providers and across states. There is more paperwork because of this. There is less transparency. There is more overhead.
1. For instance, if I need a prescription for a controlled substance, here's what happens.
2. I go to the doctor and get the prescription.
3. I give the prescription to the pharmacist.
4. The pharmacist contacts my insurance provider to determine coverage/billing.
5. The pharmacist fills the prescription if the insurance provider covers it - if it doesn't, they ask me what I want to do.
a. Do I want to fill it as a prescription, or over the counter (What the fuck does that even mean?! I don't care, just give me the drugs the doctor recommends, I don't care about how the bureaucracy is handled)
b. Do I want a different medication? If so, goto 4.
c. Do I want to go and consult my physician? If so, goto 2.
6. I learn what the fuck I'm going to pay, pay it, and get the medication. Possibly the meds my doctor prescribed, unless the insurance company and pharmacist decided to ignore it and tell me to take something else.
That's if everything goes smoothly. 45 minutes to 1.5 hours between drop off and prescription pick up, minimum.
In the UK, you get your prescription, you go to the pharmacist, you pay a flat 5 pound fee ( I think) per prescription, and after 2 minutes to verify your information and your provider's in the national database, you get your meds. Simple. Accessible. Quick.
GregLombardi
Member
I had a situation recently where I got a blood test and the testing doctor decided to send it to an out of network lab. $500+.
Not paying it. I shouldn't have to fix something for which I wasn't even presented with the option to choose another lab. I swear the healthcare industry makes enough money through administrative BS to float a country.
Not paying it. I shouldn't have to fix something for which I wasn't even presented with the option to choose another lab. I swear the healthcare industry makes enough money through administrative BS to float a country.
Correction: It was a 2 week wait. I just checked my records.
WITH insurance, I had to pay $700 out of pocket for a testicular ultrasound after I noticed a lump. And that was after a 2 week wait I only got by aggressively pressing the matter. This is how OUR country operates. In England, I'm pretty sure the NHS won't tell a 24 year old male (prime age for ball cancer to show up) to wait a few months to get a lump on his balls checked out. And they sure as hell won't charge you money for it.
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
I'm going to be moving to America soon, and the healthcare system is what scares me the most.
benjipwns
Banned
Yeah they will.
The major problem is step one. And then involving a third-party (actually a third and fourth party, since all insurance is regulated by the state and now the feds) in what should be a transaction between (multiple sets of) two parties.
I just pay with cash for generics at ye ol Target. Cheap, accessible, quick. And then I take all the pills at once because fuck the DEA.
I am a physician.
The NYT is on a quest to degrade physicians every chance it gets and a lot of you are buying into it.
The problem is the insurance companies, not the physicians.
Those stitches that cost $5000, the physician probably got paid $50 to do the procedure.
That assistant physician in that case that caused an extra $117k to be added on to the bill, probably was paid between $500-1000 for the procedure.
Do the math everyone. If the assistant physician got paid $117k, why is the average neurosurgeon salary ~$400k?
Please do not beat up on physicians who work extremely hard to make $300k a year. The majority of us are not out to exploit the population.
The problem is insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and device manufacturers.
I'm sorry some of you have been saddled with out of network costs. It is impossible for a physician to know which network every patient is in. They change CONSTANTLY. This is most likely done on purpose in order to make private practice more difficult for physicians. But that is an argument for another time.
The salaries of all physicians in the united states make up 9% of healthcare spending. Let me repeat that. The physicians who are responsible for the delivery of healthcare in this country make up 9% of the total costs. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
The NYT is on a quest to degrade physicians every chance it gets and a lot of you are buying into it.
The problem is the insurance companies, not the physicians.
Those stitches that cost $5000, the physician probably got paid $50 to do the procedure.
That assistant physician in that case that caused an extra $117k to be added on to the bill, probably was paid between $500-1000 for the procedure.
Do the math everyone. If the assistant physician got paid $117k, why is the average neurosurgeon salary ~$400k?
Please do not beat up on physicians who work extremely hard to make $300k a year. The majority of us are not out to exploit the population.
The problem is insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and device manufacturers.
I'm sorry some of you have been saddled with out of network costs. It is impossible for a physician to know which network every patient is in. They change CONSTANTLY. This is most likely done on purpose in order to make private practice more difficult for physicians. But that is an argument for another time.
The salaries of all physicians in the united states make up 9% of healthcare spending. Let me repeat that. The physicians who are responsible for the delivery of healthcare in this country make up 9% of the total costs. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
Hale-XF11
Member
How so? My understanding (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that emergency rooms can't turn anyone anyway, regardless of their status or ability to pay.
Yup. We got punishment for being poor down pat.
Feeling pressure? Good, you have a better shot to change shit than any of us.
Despicable this fucking system.
So you self-medicate?
benjipwns
Banned
Or I make jokes, whichever helps you sleep at night.
It won't be long before he'll be forced to accept Medicare patients and rates.
He's a physician, not a member of the medical-industrial complex bureaucracy, he doesn't have any power to change anything.
It won't be long before he'll be forced to accept Medicare patients and rates.
- Status