SMGBobbyScott
13 years ago
At Dr. Mad:

Oh how do I get started...shesh...I won't bother...you are truly hopeless. Okay, I will say this though. If you want Holland's roads, you have to pay Holland's taxes (and maybe smoke a little weed too). Oxford, while cool, is only one university and I'd stack our Ivy League up against it any day. I think we have eight and at least one of them has a pretty good football team (BEAT THE DUCKS!). Other countries can try to challenge our currency's status, but during every economic downturn...everybody BUYS AMERICAN BABY!!!

Cheer up dude, or buy a bomb shelter...either way, I'm done arguing with you!

[-x
HockeyDad
13 years ago
Come on people...it works in France!
HockeyDad
13 years ago
You all need to break off a piece of that "hope" tha bobby's holding!
ZRX1200
13 years ago
Teedubbya the Medicare admin cost as a percentage is a red herring. Most people on Medicare are old and are having expensive procedures done routinely. But you probably knew that and couldn't pass up a chance to be a contrarian.
SMGBobbyScott
13 years ago

7 patients a day for 7 figures?

I usually just ignore you but this is asinine.

No doctors in my area make 7 figures from salary alone and 7 patients a day? Maybe a plastic surgeon or orthopedic specialist.......and BTW we have an award winning hospital here.

I have discussed at length with local doctors here and thanks to insurance they spend as much time filling out paperwork as they do seeing patients. That's why many forgo private practice unless its a group and most just look for good hospital jobs.

A major issue besides what Bloody stated about insurance management is also patients behavior. Going to the doctor every time you have the sniffles or using the ER as a physicians office has financial consequences. Also THE INCREASE OF STATE AND FEDERAL INSURANCE (MEDICARE/MEDICAID) raises private insurance costs because everone takes it in the azz on their pricing.

ZRX1200 wrote:



I SAID I was overstating...but I was referring to specialist and sub-specialists. BTW, I work in healthcare and have for over 24 years so this isn't word of mouth...I've lived it. Here's the deal...Doctor's offices since the 1950's or so have been basically run like mom and pop shops. In the late 1980's insurance companies started driving them to computerized billing and that pinched them a little but most did okay with it. They hired "office managers" to handle the office side of things.

Over the years though, the insurance companies, NOT THE GOVERNMENT, have played games with them and made the billing side more and more difficult...driving the cost of operations up. Many have chosen to stop taking certain types of insurance because of either reimbursement or hassle and that has made business even more difficult. Now we have the Obamacare, some insurance requirements, and a number of other federal regulations taking effect and these "small businesses" either can't or don't want to cope. What is interesting is that the Obamacare provisions come with significant financial incentives to comply, the insurance ones are unclear...maybe they will, maybe they won't.

BTW...patients wouldn't go to the ER when they had the sniffles if they thought they had a legitimate alternative.

Oh, and specialists make a TON of money REGARDLESS of what they may tell you...that's why they live in those big houses and have those big families.
ZRX1200
13 years ago
Mark Twain has a great quote about arguing with someone like you. I'll take his advise.
HockeyDad
13 years ago

Teedubbya the Medicare admin cost as a percentage is a red herring. Most people on Medicare are old and are having expensive procedures done routinely. But you probably knew that and couldn't pass up a chance to be a contrarian.

ZRX1200 wrote:




Isn't TW medicare admin? We should fire him for wasting our time with that post.
SMGBobbyScott
13 years ago
Again, something we can agree!!!
victor809
13 years ago

That isn't true...some do make some choices based upon cost that cause longer waits for some services (i.e.England, Canada, etc.) but these are by and large specialist and high end services. In the US many of these services we have similar problems, they are just called "problems getting an appointment". That isn't due to government regulation, it is due to inefficient and poorly planned systems and providers that make seven figures seeing 10 patients a day (a little overstatement there, but not much).

I personally choose longer life for our citizens and access to primary and preventative services...the kind that really have an effect on length and quality of life.

We do agree on one thing...It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

SMGBobbyScott wrote:


you're not thinking long term enough...

When I talk about indirect cost, I mean the cost of innovation, or the incentive to create new facilities or for the next generation's doctors to become educated.

As a small example, think of the multinational pharma companies. The companies manufacture and sell the same drug around the world, earning a different profit everywhere. A highest profit, and therefore a bulk of the future R&D spending, comes from US sales. What do you think will happen if policies restrict drug prices in the US? Do you think a publicly traded company will reduce its earnings? No, they'll cut costs.

Or think about the investment decision making process. A company/hospital/individual decides to invest based on the expected future income stream against sunk costs. All investments at the margin (where they just exceed break even, will probably not occur.

Anyway, that's what I expect to have a long term impact.
Brewha
13 years ago
Regulation, of the people, by the people, for the people.
And unlike France, it will work.
teedubbya
13 years ago
Z you know you can run various utilization models to account for that right? You can actually normalize things for an apples to apples comparison. Anyone know where I can find such data?

teedubbya
13 years ago
You can also isolate profit, marketing, economy of scale etc. really interesting analysis models are out there for anyone interested in the study of data rather than hyperbole or anecdotes.

Start with the kaiser foundation if you are bored.
DrafterX
13 years ago
The internets..??😕
teedubbya
13 years ago
Hint. It's not all flattering to government. It's also not all unflattering.
teedubbya
13 years ago
The sad part is all of the sources are biased therefore we can say whatever we want and were right
DrafterX
13 years ago

The sad part is all of the sources are biased therefore we can say whatever we want and were right

teedubbya wrote:



Ya, then all we have are our own opinions.... 😞
teedubbya
13 years ago
Like bung holes
DrafterX
13 years ago

Like bung holes

teedubbya wrote:


True... true.... 😟
victor809
13 years ago

You can also isolate profit, marketing, economy of scale etc. really interesting analysis models are out there for anyone interested in the study of data rather than hyperbole or anecdotes.

Start with the kaiser foundation if you are bored.

teedubbya wrote:



I'm sure there are some very good models out there. I don't actually care enough about the outcome (voted for Obama, remember?) to go digging around in it. I'm not trying to stop Obamacare or any of the other permutations of it that may pop up, I just have some expectations of the impact they have on the future based on simple macroeconomics. I don't care enough whether I'm right or wrong on this one (other than getting to say "I told you so" 30 years down the line) to put much more effort into it.
SMGBobbyScott
13 years ago
Here is an example of how crazy our healthcare system is...I have GREAT Healthcare insurance, it is rated among the top 25 in the nation. This is a bill I paid today...

Total Charges - $628.00
Ins Payments - $17.60
Ins Adj. - $596.00
Amount Due - $14.40

Now if this was an uninsured person, they would have been expected to pay the ENTIRE $628.00 or if they didn't pay it would appear on their credit report and it would be written off to bad debt. The bad debt becomes a tax write-off OR the organization in some cases gets money from the federal and/or state government to cover the shortfall. This has been the case for YEARS...long before Obama became Senator, much less President. The entire system is set up to screw the government and the poor.

This SUCKS!!!
Users browsing this topic