If all those things occur, and still the net result is more people with cheaper insurance, I’d call that a success. I don’t care if you can find isolated people who are worse off. We should not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
A real conservative would know that the free health care at the ER (and in the rest of the hospital, when the ER sends the patient upstairs) isn’t free. It’s paid for by people like me. And the free care that isn’t free is given not only to the poor, but also to people who thought they neither needed not wanted such care, until they did.
When it comes to health care, they are almost everyone’s answer. Just over half of congressional Republicans voted yes to Medicare. And Ronald Reagan had no problem signing the EMTALA law forcing hospitals to give that free care.
Health care is unlike normal economic goods, even ones as crucial to life as food and (at least up north here) clothing. That’s because when you just got thrown from your vehicle in a crash, or when that squeezing in your chest just spread to your neck and jaw, it is too late to start shopping around, and, in a civilized country, unthinkable that you be left to die.
Exactly.
The freetards who don’t think they need healthcare are the ones who show up at the ER after ignoring an ear infection for a month and drive up the cost for the rest of us who make an attempt to be responsible.
The idea that “uninsured get free health care at the ER” is one of the more amazingly ignorant misconceptions in the health care debate.
First of all, it isn’t free. Many of these patients may end up paying zero, but that’s often because they have zero to pay. Patients who do have assets or income can get confiscated or garnisheed.
Second, such ER health care is severely limited in scope and quality. The vast majority of medical needs will not be covered by “free” ER service. Those that are will not receive proper follow-on care, etc.
“Amazing ignorance” is a severe understatement for this peculiar meme, but we’re not in BBQ Pit and I don’t want a Warning.
I will say that the question of providing minimal healthcare to those who cannot afford it may serve as a simple benchmark for humanitarian values – a benchmark where most developed countries have given one answer, but where U.S.A. has been found wanting.
This is true. I wonder how common it is that hospitals go this route rather than writing off the debt. Does it depend of whether the hospital is for-profit? Anyone have numbers?
I’ve been looking for a while, on the net, for figures on the cost of medical care for the uninsured. I’m thinking it is more than 50 percent of what the insured get, because the care you get that starts out as an ER visit is the most expensive kind. However, your guesstimate, which I can’t disprove, is obviously quite different.
Last-year-of-life expenses constituted 22 percent of all medical expenditures, according to one US survey. Most Americans are on medicare by then, but far from all, and I find it hard to believe end of life costs are significantly less for the uninsured. And you can’t garnish wages of dead people. Instead, the costs are primarily coming from people like me in the form of higher insurance premiums.
Agreed. As already noted, this commonly makes the costs of providing the medical needs, when the patient does return to hospital, greater.
So Terr said:
And then I said:
Guess what?
From: Another Obamacare myth exposed: The California doctor 'boycott'
So, it’s another case of conservatives believing nonsense misinformation because it feels good.
A fib from Covered California. All together there may be 58,000 doctors (and, due both to the fact that not all will accept Obamacare, as the article admits, and the fact that HealthNet and BlueShield’s networks overlap by quite a bit, it’s probably more like 25,000-30,000). But for each enrollee, the available number is WAY smaller. In fact probably closer to that 30%. Like, for example, if you’re a Keiser enrollee, you have access to 14,000 doctors out of 72,000. What percentage is that?
And the article contradicts itself. First it says that all the HealthNet’s network doctors and BlueShield’s network doctors are available. And in the next paragraph it says “not all the doctors in [HealthNet’s and BlieShield’s] insurance networks will be available to all those insurers’ enrollees; there are reports that some may see patients only in non-exchange plans.”
How many is that “some”? I suspect many. But the article pretends that it is zero, in its zeal to “debunk”.
So - thanks for the confirmation of narrow networks, Lobohan.
No, it says that:
Which is not what you just said.
All of Kaiser docs are available in the exchange. Some of HealthNet and Blue Shield’s are. Presumably because Kaiser requires Kaiser Docs to accept it, where HealthNet and Blue Shield don’t. There is nothing wrong with what the article says.
I can’t force you to genuinely engage. I can only show other people how worthless your arguments are. <3
Except the article implies that there are 58,000 doctors available. Which is bull, because as the article itself says out of those 58,000 there are overlaps between networks, and some doctors do not take Obamacare patients. So why even cite the 58,000 number? To mislead, of course.
The article claims that it is debunking the 30% number. And yet, when you read through its arguments you can see that the 30% is basically the correct number. Well, you can see it if you don’t have Democrat blinkers on.
Ditto.
No, it says that there are 58k doctors accepting exchange patients.
It says that all 14K of the Kaiser Docs accept exchange insurance.
It says that 43k of Health Net’s docs accept exchange insurance.
It says that 35k of Blue Shield’s docs accept exchange insurance.
It further says that there are additional Health Net and Blue Shield docs, not counted in the above that do not accept exchange insurance.
If further says that some of the Health Net and Blue Shield docs overlap, so the ending total is 58k.
14k Kaiser + 43K Health Net is 57k. So if the Blue Shield docs mostly overlap, that’s 58k.
I think you’re trying too hard.
Note also, that the 70% number you still want to trust came from “a half dozen” insurance brokers. Based on nothing but their intuition.
Can you quote the “additional”, “not counted in the above” part from the article, or did you just make it up?
I try not to make stuff up on the internet.
Emphasis mine.
Numbers of doctors include Kaiser, and the specific numbers from HealthNet and Blue Shield.
You are confused. The TOTAL number of doctors in HealthNet’s network is 58,000. See for example this: “Health Net’s California network of more than 50,000 providers”.
Now - how many of these will accept Obamacare plans? The article doesn’t say, but it really works hard to imply that 58,000 will. Let’s look at some research (note: this is coming from the organization that is very pro-healthcare reform)
To see the challenges awaiting some consumers, consider Woodland Hills-based insurer Health Net Inc.
In Los Angeles County, for instance, Health Net customers in the state exchange would be limited to 2,316 primary-care doctors and specialists. **That’s less than a third of the doctors Health Net offers to workers on employer plans.
**
So, unless LA County is an outlier, only 1/3 of the Health Net’s 58,000 physicians would be serving Obamacare enrollees. That’s about 20,000 physicians. Out of California’s 72,000. Can you calculate that percentage? Suspiciously close to 30%, isn’t it?
Further, from the same article:
Statewide, Blue Shield of California says exchange customers will be restricted to about 50% of its regular physician network.
Let’s see. Blue Shield has 35,000 physicians in the network. 50% is 17,500. What percentage is that of the 72,000 physicians in California? Less than 30%.
QED.
If I lived in California, I’d sign up with Kaiser. What percentage of California physicians would I be free to see? Maybe just a tiny fraction of one percent, since we would have to go to whomever we were referred to see!
Personally, I only need to have access to to whatever specialist my family doctor recommends. And it seems that all the docs at the large (but not highly prestigious) hospital where she practices do accept lower-paying insurance.
Now, actually, my wife and I do sometimes see specialists at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (HUP), the most prestigious comprehensive hospital in our state, and one that does not accept many exchange plans. But whether that care is really better is questionable. And it is physically impossible for everyone in the Philadelphia area needing specialty care to go to HUP. There aren’t enough beds or doctors.
Our daughter signed up with an exchange plan where she will be able to see our family doctor (or a colleague, not sure if ours is accepting new patients). But if she needs a specialist, she will have to go to one who is not an Ivy League professor. I am having a hard time seeing why this is unfair. What’s unfair is that, for 18 more days, as a joint UK citizen on the wrong side of the pond, she has no affordable insurance options.
Stop. Stop right now, and reread the article, please. I’ve tried to explain this several times and you are fighting the common understanding of English words here.
California’s Obamacare Exchange is called Covered California.
Covered California says that 58k of California’s doctors (some 80%) will participate. The 58k isn’t for HealthNet, it’s for everyone.
Okay, got that?
14k of those 58k come from Kaiser. All Kaiser doctors are participating in the exchange.
The remaining numbers come from 35k of doctors who accept Blue Shield and 43k of doctors that accept HealthNet. These numbers overlap.
This is what the article says. You’re throwing in all sorts of nonsense numbers to try and make your misinformation true.
You simply need to re-read the article, and stop trying to find some possible way that your foolish belief that 70% aren’t participating can still be true. It just ain’t. You got took by a RW Media lie. So what?
You’re getting desperate. Simple question: let’s say you’re an Obamacare enrollee in California and the plan you picked is Blue Shield. You call 100 random doctors and ask them if they accept your insurance. How many positive responses will you receive?
Don’t try to weasel out of answering. What is the answer?
Repeat that for Health Net. What is the answer?
I showed you, with numbers, that the answer in both cases is “less than 30”. Try to twist and turn as much as you can - that’s still the answer. Thus the “30%” number that I posted earlier.
I would call doctors who accept Blue Shield, because I’ve purchased insurance before, and I’m not stupid. So 100% of the people I called would accept my insurance. So any desperation you’re detecting is simply my disbelief that you’re still trying to spin this into a win.
I just did.
Same as above.
That’s the argument of an innumerate. If 80% of the state’s doctors accept Obamacare Exchange insurance, it is irrelevant if your particular company can only access 30% of them. You are free to choose whatever company you want.
You linked to an article saying that 30% of California’s doctors would accept Obamacare Exchange insurance. Am I to consider this a moved goalpoast?
True or False: 80% of California’s doctors accept Obamacare Exchange insurance?
First you answer my question. Then I will answer yours.
I have had the insurance I have now for 6 years. So far, every doctor I called accepted it. Out of a couple of dozen at least. I didn’t check anywhere before calling them - I just called. And they accepted it. Amazing how that works, isn’t it?
With an Obamacare insurance in California, my results would be 30% of the doctors I called accepting it. That’s the difference.
I answered your question. People who buy insurance don’t randomly call doctors in the state. They call off a list of approved providers.
I don’t need you to answer. I’ve got a reliable cite, unlike the horseshit you pretended was accurate because you heard it on FOX.
Nope. I told you. My insurance is accepted by every doctor I ever called. And I never checked off a list of approved providers before calling.
As for your silly question - I will do you one better. 99% of doctors accept some insurance. So if you want a particular doctor, it’s easy, just get on the insurance he accepts. Bingo, the network problem solved. Until the other doctor you want will not accept the insurance that the first one did.
To someone in CA who is an Obamacare enrollee, it doesn’t matter that 80% of doctors in CA accept at least one of the Obamacare plans’ patients. It matters that the doctor he calls accepts his plan. And that chance is less than 30%.