$curious$

[Jeff Matthews]

5 minutes ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

What we have also seen elsewhere is that when our govt gets involved with an enterprise for some reason costs skyrocket.

Except that the cost for services to Medicare is a lot cheaper than the cost for services provided to privately-insured people.  This is one instance where government has managed to reduce costs.  Medicaid is even lower than that - in fact, so low that many providers will not accept Medicaid patients, but that's another issue.

[Jeff Matthews]

10 minutes ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

Personally when I saw the costs of my care ($130,000 +) I was shocked and asked myself, are you worth this level of expenditure? And I am asking genuinely.

Although there is a rhyme and reason for why these charges are so high, it's interesting to ponder how we got here.  I think it's because of all the care which is provided and never paid for.  It's quite a large amount.

 

This is similar to why lawyer's hourly rates are so high - as in $200 - 500 per hour.  At the low end of $200/hr., math dictates that if you work full-time, you will earn $400k per year.  Wow!!!  But then look at the average income of lawyers and you know those hourly rates do not reflect these rates - unless you know what's going on under the surface.  Fact:  We don't get enough work to bill full-time.  Not even close.  

[Jeff Matthews]

13 minutes ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

You seem to demand idyllic care for everyone, as in anyone from anywhere. Nice idea. How can that work?

I used to think like you, but I changed my mind.  There is plenty of wealth to go around.  The only shortage exists among poor and middle class folks.  Here's a simple statistic:

 

Total household wealth in the US as of the end of 2016 was $93 trillion.  The population of the US is 326 million.

 

Let's pretend wealth was evenly distributed.  $93 trillion / 326 million = $285,276.  That's per person, including every man, woman and child.  If everyone had merely average wealth, a family of 4 would have a net worth of $1,141,104.

 

Still think there's a shortage?

 

 

 

[Zen Traveler]

14 minutes ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

You choose to vilify the ‘capitalistic’ insurance industry.

Wait! Let me frame it differently. Other countries Healthcare solutions don't require a middle man to make a profit. I suggest we let the Health Insurance industry make their profits somewhere else because historically they have been the enemy of the people who rely on them...If you aren't familiar with the concept of "Underwriting"  check into it--If you were in the private market and healthy you got a decent plan, but through continuous underwriting if you ever got diagnosed with an illness then they could (and did) raise your rates or deny you coverage on a new plan....From there on Insurance Healthcare coverage could be a crap shoot. To cut to the chase: Preexisting Conditions are covered by the ACA and there is no plan to cover them if the law is repealed, That is the truth regardless which side of the issue you are on.

14 minutes ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

 

What we have also seen elsewhere is that when our govt gets involved with an enterprise for some reason costs skyrocket.

Learn about what the introduction of Medicare meant for our country and that it is a successfully run system. 

14 minutes ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

 

In this case the authors of the ACA essentially was the insurance industry so voila.

Umm...It actually wasn't. Yes, they kept their hands in the pie because one side wanted them there but Government did do things to contain the costs--Check into it and realize those discussion went on for almost 2 years and surprisingly only a few of us were paying attention. 😑

14 minutes ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

The govt spends what we earn (and they can leverage) and has a habit of not being very thrifty. 

 

Back to the question. Who gets care when care is limited?

To answer your last question , the only people who think care is limited are those who don't have it. Insofar as your first question it is EXTREMELY relevant but too political to get into...On that note I will say I am for balancing budgets and not increasing the National Debt and feel there are answers for those issues as well.  

[T2K]

 

For informational purposes:

 

I carried my pre-existing condition from private insurance to Medicare. Contractual cost paid for a single IV drug by private insurer $11,994.00. Medicare pays $9615.00. If my math is correct Medicare pays 20% less for same treatment. YMMV

 

Keith

 

[Bosco-d-gama]

It is an extremely dimensional topic. Not a matter of agreeing to disagree so much as agreeing that we cannot adequately cover aspects of it in these forums. So we sally forth and carry on, etc.

[garyrc]

6 hours ago, Jeff Matthews said:

I used to think like you, but I changed my mind.  There is plenty of wealth to go around.  The only shortage exists among poor and middle class folks.  Here's a simple statistic:

 

Total household wealth in the US as of the end of 2016 was $93 trillion.  The population of the US is 326 million.

 

Let's pretend wealth was evenly distributed.  $93 trillion / 326 million = $285,276.  That's per person, including every man, woman and child.  If everyone had merely average wealth, a family of 4 would have a net worth of $1,141,104.

 

Still think there's a shortage?

 

Exactly!

[Zen Traveler]

3 hours ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

It is an extremely dimensional topic. Not a matter of agreeing to disagree so much as agreeing that we cannot adequately cover aspects of it in these forums. So we sally forth and carry on, etc.

Ha! Actually this is one topic we have discussed on this forum and came closer to solutions than Congress has! 

[Bosco-d-gama]

Y’know it would be interesting to evenly divide the wealth of the country. Every person would be financially equal. Wonder how’d things would stack up after 2 generations? 🤪

[oldtimer]

3 minutes ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

Y’know it would be interesting to evenly divide the wealth of the country. Every person would be financially equal. Wonder how’d things would stack up after 2 generations? 🤪

That would depend on which families contributed enough to the right politicians.

[Jeff Matthews]

2 hours ago, oldtimer said:

2 hours ago, Bosco-d-gama said:

Y’know it would be interesting to evenly divide the wealth of the country. Every person would be financially equal. Wonder how’d things would stack up after 2 generations? 🤪

That would depend on which families contributed enough to the right politicians.

The very same types of people who are already wealthy.  Meet the new boss...