This would never happen with Universal Single Payer.

"Her hospital charges alone will be $1.2 million. "

That, folks, is one indicator of what's wrong with U.S. healthcare.

"This would never happen with Universal Single Payer"

Ya Riiiiiiggggghhhhttt!!!

Barry's death panel would have nipped this shit in the bud.

"This would never happen with Universal Single Payer"

Ya Riiiiiiggggghhhhttt!!!
#3 | Posted by bph320 at 2009-10-29 08:53 PM

Yes. RIGHT. The insurance industry has set these prices, not the factual care paid for.

"Million dollar babies" are not all that uncommon an occurrence. The NICU is not cheap.

Lifetime Maximum... but hey, at least we don't have "rationing." Amirite, right-wingers?

Amirite, right-wingers?

#7 | Posted by snoofy

They don't care if you are right. As long as they get rid of the Dems by 2012, nothing else matters.

Technicaly yes that is not rationing she is free to receive health care the rest of her life. She will of course either have to be fabulously wealthy or wait days in the waiting room at ER.

She will of course either have to be fabulously wealthy or wait days in the waiting room at ER.

#9 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2009-10-29 09:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

If she has to wait days in the ER waiting room, wouldn't she have to be twice as fabulously wealthy? ER medicine es muy caro.

Si es verdad, but you know she doesn't have to pay it. The hospital sells it to a debt collector and they can send her ugly letters for a while then it screws up her credit then 7 years later she is fine. Well not really she has no credit history so that sucks. She does get care though.

Talk to the hand.

-Obamreidpeloson

Careful for what you wish for - you just might get it.

i have always been a huge opponent of universal healthcare. how ironic it is that i finally came around. then, a few months later i broke my foot. that brings me to now. i can't go to the doctor because i transferred positions and the company i work for (la quinta hotels) made me wait another 3 months at my current position before i can get healthcare. i have worked here for 2 years. by then my foot will have been set for a while. and i am still paying on my $3000 dollar kidney stone bill. wtf, is a $9/hr student supposed to do?

MICHAEL MOORE: What's your deductible?

CANADIAN MAN #1: Nothing.

CANADIAN WOMAN #1: I don't think we have any.

Regardless of what system we end up with, people should have to pay copays. Not ridiculous ones, but if there are copays, then people won't have any incentive to self-limit, especially with medicine. When I have to pay a co-pay, I start to ask if I really need to go to the doctor, or the emergency room, or need certain medications. Without something like a co-pay to limit it, the only limit will be long lines and degraded care, and people will use the system until it is overburdened.

I think it makes sense for the government, or state governments to collect money from either taxes or the insurance companies as a whole to cover the cases where people end up with huge bills that would hit the "lifetime maximum" range.

wtf, is a $9/hr student supposed to do?

You could die.

Sincerely;
The RNC

MICHAEL MOORE: What did they charge you for that baby?

I dont know why but when i read that, i just about fell over laughing.

Like...

Hey how much was that Driver?
or Hey, how much was that ipod?

egardless of what system we end up with, people should have to pay copays. Not ridiculous ones, but if there are copays, then people won't have any incentive to self-limit, especially with medicine. When I have to pay a co-pay, I start to ask if I really need to go to the doctor, or the emergency room, or need certain medications. Without something like a co-pay to limit it, the only limit will be long lines and degraded care, and people will use the system until it is overburdened.
I think it makes sense for the government, or state governments to collect money from either taxes or the insurance companies as a whole to cover the cases where people end up with huge bills that would hit the "lifetime maximum" range.

#15 | POSTED BY LEGREGIUS AT 2009-10-29 10:27 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

what is this you speak of?

self limit...?

do you really enjoy spending time in a doctors office?

Are you sitting in your living room on a sunday afternoon and think..

You know, i havent been to the doctor all week! Why dont i pop around and see if they can find anything wrong with me.

I avoid the doctor at all costs.
i hate hospitals.
There are sick people in there. SICK!
they might give me germs!

Now i know you are going to bring up Hypochondriacs, and women who at the drop of a single ball of snot from their child's nose, run to the emergency room...

Those people are also sick.. and would also be helped under universal health care..

its called a Psychiatrist.

Well, praise be unto Lateasha!

It takes incidents like this to put a human face on a debate, and this kid's dilemma comes at exactly the right moment.

Serioualy, this could put health care reform over. Opponents can bluster and use all the scare tactics they want, but the story of a little girl who didn't do a damn thing wrong possibly being rendered uninsurable for life because someone coughed on her is hard to talk your way around.

if there are copays, then people won't have any incentive to self-limit, especially with medicine. When I have to pay a co-pay, I start to ask if I really need to go to the doctor, or the emergency room, or need certain medications. Without something like a co-pay to limit it, the only limit will be long lines and degraded care, and people will use the system until it is overburdened.

This makes sense for people with jobs and money, but people with next to nothing are faced with the choice: "If I take my baby to the doctor, I won't make rent."

For "regular" people though, yeah, a nominal copay for a trip to the doctor is well within reason.

As a Canadian, I can truly thank the lucky stars that we have a national health care program.

As for US citizens, WAKE THE FUCK UP.

Crisis

As a Canadian, I can truly thank the lucky stars that we have a national health care program.

Spud thanx them same stars.

FTA: Lateasha Howard's hospital charges? $1.2 million - and rising.

Tony's bill? Almost $900,000.

And that's just the hospital.

"That doesn't include the doctors or nurses, or the CT or the plastic surgeons that came into the room," Hugh Estlinbaum said. "The list is long."

Anybody who can't see that American Health Care is obviously ill are themselves sick, in the head.

Hopefully stories like these will shake some people up and make them see the necessity and moral imperative of health care reform.

Be Well.

Hopefully stories like these will shake some people up and make them see the necessity and moral imperative of health care reform.

It won't happen until the American mindset changes from "Who makes a buck off it?" to "Who took my buck?!"

Good luck, and good night.

P.S. keep sending natural gas and trees, Canada.

Republicans could care less because they are greedy. They don't give a rats ass what happens to their fellow man as long as their pockets stay fat.

This would never happen with Universal Single Payer.

...yes, this is likely-the person would be allowed to expire when a $40K limit (or whatever) would be spent.

Ok Snoofy, we'll keep sending the trees, natural gas, maybe some Tragically Hip music, even some Sleemans but you guys got to send us some Friehofer's and a couple of zillion tons of fresh untracked exquisite Utah powder or the deals off.

Crisis

"... a couple of zillion tons of fresh untracked exquisite Utah powder..."

My brother asked me about our annual ski trip the other day. Completely blindsided me. It's been a busy year. Since I had to pay for almost the whole thing last year I gave a non-committal answer.

I miss Park City.

Republicans could care less because they are greedy. They don't give a rats ass what happens to their fellow man as long as their pockets stay fat.

#23 | Posted by jackass at 2009-10-30 07:07 AM | Reply |

Funny post to be included in a story about a child named Lateasha Howard whose mother is not responsible for one damned dime of her own or her childrens healthcare. Someone is paying the bill. Is it someone with fat pockets or a poor person?

Jackass you are a dumbass.

scumsterwilly, It's her insurance footing the bill which her mom paid the premium for just in case she needed to use it which she did.

Aren't you really 2ndcrusade??

Anybody who can't see that American Health Care is obviously ill are themselves sick, in the head.

Hopefully stories like these will shake some people up and make them see the necessity and moral imperative of health care reform.

Be Well.

So lets review. Latesha Howard's bill is paid by Medicaid(aka Taxpayers). How will that change under the reform?

for the other family, why can't the government offer catostraphic coverage after someone has exceeded their lifetime maximum payout from private?

Instead we have to spend trillions of dollars?

Cash for clunkers: $25K per auto sold per Edmunds.com

Stimulas 700 billion to save ~700K jobs. That is $1million per job....hahahah

And you lib fools want to let the government run the healthcare industry.

It's her insurance footing the bill which her mom paid the premium for just in case she needed to use it which she did.

#28 | Posted by jackass at 2009-10-30 07:57 AM | Reply

Really, can't you read boy?

From the story:

"Carolyn Howard relies on Medicaid -- which will pay Lateasha's bills. "

Aren't you really 2ndcrusade??

#29 | Posted by jackass at 2009-10-30 07:58 AM | Reply

Boy, I am your sugar daddy. Scum like you desparately need people like me. Someone has to pay the bills for scum like you.

Even better! My tax dollars at work saving a kid!

That's right scumster I'm going to get my welfare check on the 1st of the month which I will buy weed with.

Lateasha Howard whose mother is not responsible for one damned dime of her own or her childrens healthcare. Someone is paying the bill. Is it someone with fat pockets or a poor person?

United We Stand.

Divide We Fall.

Do The Math.

Scum...scum...
#32 | Posted by slicksterWilly at 2009-10-30 08:02 AM | Reply | Flag: Has A Thang About Scum

Stimulas 700 billion to save ~700K jobs. That is $1million per job....hahahah

And you lib fools want to let the government run the healthcare industry.

No right-winger has ever answered me this question, so I keep asking:

Is it just American government that doesn't work? All the other modern countries have universal covergae run by the govt, more or less. And they all spend less money than we do on health care.

But apparently we can't do that.... Is the problem uniquely American?

We can put a man on the moon, the only nation to ever do so, but we can't deliver health care to every American?

Explain.

Slickster Willie - Sorry that the story was poorly written and buried the lead. The real protagonist in it is a little boy named Tony Estlinbaum. White enough? He's the one privately insured and facing that cap and uninsurability.

The part about Lateasha Howard is that she'll have one helluva time ever getting off Medicaid, because the insurers won't touch her. So, you and I get to pay for her care forever, and she's given a disincentive to ever make enough to get off Medicaid. How's that working out for you?

Doc_Sarvis why do you address me for using scum. If you had any integrity, you would see Jackass first addressed me using scum. All I said was someone has to pay the bill because the mother isn't and never intended too. So that means the taxpayer pays it. How is that mean or scummy?

We can put a man on the moon, the only nation to ever do so, but we can't deliver health care to every American?

Explain.

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2009-10-30 08:15 AM | Reply

You have a false assumption that some go without healthcare. As this story demostrats, the little girl had no insurance, so the taxpayer picks it up. The little boy had private insurance but will come close to exceeding his lifetime maximum payout. So why can't the same group that pays all of the little girl's bill pick up the little boys bill once his cap is exceeded.

This story illustrates that regardless of ability to pay, everyone in US (even those hear illegally) have access to quality healthcare.

Good point.

Let me try that again:

We can put a man on the moon, but we can't deliver affordable healthcare to every American?

(1/6th our GDP, 1.5x-3x what other countries pay, being "not affordable.")

Why should someone who is on public medical aid even care if they're uninsurable? Don't know what the stats are, but they'd have to be pretty thin on this person ever making it out of the welfare system - this government NEEDS people to be on aid. Do you believe people getting freebies all over the place are going to vote for someone who wants them OFF aid? BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!

Cloward-Piven strategy.

This story illustrates that regardless of ability to pay, everyone in US (even those hear illegally) have access to quality healthcare.
#40 | Posted by slicksterWilly

Yeah, the most expensive kind possible. That's the whole point of this debate.

Yeah, the most expensive kind possible. That's the whole point of this debate.

I think people don't know what continuity of care means.

Do you believe people getting freebies all over the place are going to vote for someone who wants them OFF aid?

Nanc,

Could you be on welfare? (yes)

Are you? (no)

I rest my case.

As long as they are willing to impoverished and bankrupt. Great system, I'm sure we are the envy of the world. Makes me so damn proud to be American. No one will ever accuse Americans of being too smart.

I don't understand what the problem is with a private corporation, whose business is allowing people to pool their money and pay out medical claims, charging some people more and even not allowing some people into the pool. They are a business like any other and should have the right to do that. I might even support a "public option" for people who can literally get health insurance nowhere else. But to say that this is an argument for the 1900-page nonsense being crammed down our throats is just absurd.

You Righty Tightys sure do have a thing about something being 'shoved down your throats'!

Don't you have a shithouse you need to go tap your toes in?

It should be against the law for providers to give insurance companies a discounted rate while giving the uninsured public a price that's as much as 20 times as high. It's an incredibly broken system.

"It should be against the law for providers to give insurance companies a discounted rate while giving the uninsured public a price that's as much as 20 times as high."

The insurance companies buy in bulk, wholesale. The uninsured are retail consumers.

It should be against the law for providers to give insurance companies a discounted rate while giving the uninsured public a price that's as much as 20 times as high. It's an incredibly broken system.

there are 2 sides to that. When a carrier can assure a hospital a high volume of patients because of their volume of members....they can negotiate a big discount for services.

It's how a $15K surgery gets discounted to $8K.

Yes, I realize that everybody makes money at $8K but only because of the volume steered their way by the carrier(or PPO).

This is what I am excited to see in the "public option" meaning how will it compete with carriers who grant these discounts for contracted services.

When a carrier can assure a hospital a high volume of patients because of their volume of members....they can negotiate a big discount for services.

True, but it creates a system in which people can never pay out of pocket. So unlike car insurance, where people will sometimes pay their own bills to keep their insurance rates from going up, you almost never have that option for routine medical care.

We're just widgets in this scenario.

RCade-

If your concern is the cost of medical care for the uninsured, why not push for a law that makes it illegal to charge 20x as much for individuals without insurance? That law is not in the bills proposed by Democrats. Why do you support those bills?

"They are a business like any other and should have the right to do that."

Except that under our laws they are not a business like any other, they have exemptions from anti-trust laws and they can collude with each other to fix prices and divy up geographic territories thereby creating monopolies. Further, they have so much money that they can hire lobbyists who buy Congressmen and Senators to prevent us from enacting laws to regulate them. We, as the citizens, should have the right to affordable health care and if it meant the bankruptcy of every single health insurance company in the country it would be worth it. This country has very distorted priorities.

The irony of this whole situation is that insurance companies will be refusing to cover kids that have built up an immunity to H1N1 and will in all probability never get it or any other strain of flu ever again. These kids would be a gold mine to the insurance companies, especially if H1N1 really becomes a problem.

Why do you support those bills?

I would support any bill that makes it possible for me to medically insure my family and myself without going broke and without worrying about becoming uninsurable. If the Democrats' new bill does that, I care less about the particulars as long as it gets done.

I don't think flus work that way, Bartimus. The old people who have some immunity to H1N1 because of a flu they got prior to 1950 still have been susceptible to other flus. Flu viruses evolve constantly.

If the Democrats' new bill does that, I care less about the particulars as long as it gets done.

Fair enough.

But I am going to pay close attention to the particulars also.

You should all be grateful I have your back.

:-(

^.^

Part of this has to do with the quality of the hospital and the quality of service, and the fact that so many precautions have to be taken with swine flu.

However, a $1.2 mill bill, and maxing out your lifetime cap is a bit steep. Part of the healthcare costs are from when hospitals have to pass on the expense of people who can't or won't pay to those who can and do.

Except that under our laws they are not a business like any other, they have exemptions from anti-trust laws and they can collude with each other to fix prices and divy up geographic territories thereby creating monopolies.

Fine. Then take those protections away. Again, the Democrats' supposed "solution" to this problem does not directly address your concerns.

#59 | Posted by rcade

Ooops, I stand corrected...whatever will my patients think if they hear of this???

(Just kidding, did I make any of y'all nervous?)

"Except that under our laws they are not a business like any other, they have exemptions from anti-trust laws and they can collude with each other to fix prices and divy up geographic territories thereby creating monopolies."

Fine. Then take those protections away. Again, the Democrats' supposed "solution" to this problem does not directly address your concerns.
#62 | Posted by JOE at 2009-10-30 11:59 AM

In the 70's and again in the late 80's the health insurers promised to fix their monopolizing and price-gouging and weren't held by legal, accountable documentation. It became another "broken word" scenario - because most of the members of Congress are utterly corrupt and should be audited.

Those impacted by inadvertent exposures are being denied coverage for the rest of their lives. Doesn't that undermine the purpose of health insurance? Even babies are being denied insurance and all you can compare that with is how it's the business rights that are at stake! Forgive me if I do not weep openly for Cigna.

Part of the healthcare costs are from when hospitals have to pass on the expense of people who can't or won't pay to those who can and do.

Holy shit, a right-winger who is beginning to see the light!

Cost of treating a patient is greatly reduced if they see a doctor in a regular office setting instead of the ER. At the ER, the hospital is legally required to provide service, regardless of insurance or even the ability to pay. So that's where the uninsured and indigent end up.

So, follow it through. Insure everyone. Give everyone access to the full continuum of care, rather than shunting those with the least ability to pay to the super-expensive ER. Costs will go down.

(And ER quality of care will probably go up, since they can focus on true emergencies, instead of poor people with rotting teeth.)

Someone put a muzzle on Snoofy!! He is making too much sense and the Rtards are starting to whine.