Live data from Hacker News

The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

nytimes.com

221–230 of 481 posts

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#221

If you want to understand how medical billing works and why these ridiculously high bills get created, there's a lot of important context that this article unfortunately leaves out. Large hospital systems accept patients who have a range of payers (Original Medicare, Medicare Advantage, various Medicaid plans, private insurance, and uninsured patients). On the aggregate, they want to make sure that their entire syste…

We're talking about how much the hospital has to pay its suppliers Except suppliers can engage in their own fiat prices, as the OP demonstrates. But your narrative does show the basic situation - where you have an elaborate digraph of buyers and sellers, most of which have a more or less monopolistic position. These monopolistic suppliers initially/formally set their prices based on "what they could possibly imagine…

> Except suppliers can engage in their own fiat prices, as the OP demonstrates.

Those aren't fiat prices by any stretch. Aside from the fact that there is a competitive market of providers, patients don't have the obligation to pay the entire billed price (a key point which this article does not mention). That's neither a monopsony nor a monopoly.

Medicare, on the other hand, is a legal monopsony over its patient population and does set its prices by fiat. (There is no competitive market; patients can opt to receive their Medicare benefits privately, but they cannot opt out of Original Medicare entirely. Similarly, most providers cannot legally opt out of accepting Medicare, in practice).

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it won't work. It works in every other developed nation in the world, and they all pay less money for better healthcare outcomes, but hey, the US is Totally Special.

The US already has single payer for a good fraction of the population and we still spend more than other nations on that fraction. The NHS in the UK can decide that certain treatments are not cost effective but in the US we have people raising the cry of "Death panels! Death panels!" at even vague gestures in that direction. And the US had never had a particularly high level of bureaucratic efficiency compared to mos…

> The US already has single payer for a good fraction of the population

No, we don't. Medicare is not single payer, though it has (for a subset of the services covered by Medicare) a default public option; it also has private, partially-public-subsidized pland; Medicaid, at least in many states, is not single-payer, either, even at the state level, even before considering overlap with Medicare and other insurance.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#223

In a past life, I worked in health insurance fraud detection. Everybody should know, the health insurance system in the US is fundamentally broken and has been almost since its inception in the early 20th century. The lack of adequate consumer protection, transparency, health systems and appropriate government regulation, in addition to organizational oversight, has lead to a situation where we have poor systems that…

how big and complex the systems are now, how much money they represent, and how many interests are involved I don't follow what you're saying. Are you proposing that the root of the problem is that it's a huge, expensive, complex industry, where a lot of people work?

Yes, I'm proposing that the high level of complexity and ambiguity involved (which originates from the intersection of the technology, organizations, politics, finances and people) in the US healthcare and health insurance system is the root cause of the problem. It is another giant machine, like the military industrial complex, for example.

I don't want to go so far as to say all huge institutions have problems like this, but I am thinking along those lines.

Some have proposed simplifying health insurance greatly by running a "single payor" system, where the emphasis is on a single health insurance entity that covers claims for every person in the US. While that might seem like a simplification in terms of process, procedure and organizations, it is very unlikely to happen in the US, and I'm not sure we could even administer that well either.

If you look at other countries that are closer to single payor, maybe say, the British NHS system - even in those countries, private insurance still exists and competes. The NHS does provide care for everyone and eliminates some issues by having a stricter control system, but the quality, availability and timeliness of that care is often called into question.

In the end, being able to dictate quality, access, and affordability (and preventing fraud) comes down to control vs. morals/ethics. Many are vying for control, for many different reasons and this often tears apart the basic industry, while morals/ethics are difficult to maintain.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#224
post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're pretty good at dealing with pregnancies, cancers, and emergencies I agree with everything you say, except the part about cancer. Even by European standards, the NHS is actually quite terrible at dealing with cancers - even "routine" cancers (like breast cancer and prostate cancer), let alone rare cancers. The five-year survival rate for prostate cancer in the UK is 55%, whereas in the US it's upwards of 90%…

2/3 of prostate cancer occurs in men over 65. That's the results of being on Medicare, the largest single payer health care system in the world.

> 2/3 of prostate cancer occurs in men over 65. That's the results of being on Medicare, the largest single payer health care system in the world.

First: no, the England branch of the NHS is still larger than Original Medicare (~53 million in England compared to 46 million on Original Medicare).

And that might be a reasonable way to interpret the data, except that two-fifths of Medicare patients (and growing) are not on Original Medicare - they use Medicare Advantage, which is privately run. Coincidentally, Medicare Advantage outperforms Original Medicare on medical outcomes across the board, including cancer treatment.

So no, the fact that the US is drastically better at keeping prostate cancer patients alive cannot be explained by the claim that Original Medicare is so phenomenally better that it accounts for the difference.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#225

I am having problems with my insurer at this very moment. I went to an in-network hospital for an ER visit, which turned into an 8-day stay (yes, it was serious). Evidently, none of the doctors at the hospital are in-network, however, (claims from various technicians are still "in processing", so I don't know how they will turn out) despite the fact that the hospital itself is definitely in-network. I had no choice a…

[deleted]

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Luckily I have friends in the industry and it turns out if they fail to inform you within 48 hours that you're not in network you don't have to pay the out of network cost. Curious, can you perhaps provide evidence of this? Seems like a good thing to know. > Call an attorney. This is itself a cost, and maybe only makes sense if you owe ≥ $10k but for procedures billed as $1k when they should be $400 I don't think w…

Many attorneys will provide a free or very low cost initial consultation; you may have an unrealistic picture of what the actual cost of legal services for this particular scenario would be, and may benefit from actually finding out before assuming they are too expensive.

> you may have an unrealistic picture of what the actual cost of legal services for this particular scenario would be

I agree, I do, which is why I tried making my statement as much a question as possible. I am unaware that attorney's would fight for cases like this, if they are more common and do not lead to lawsuits.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Joe Lieberman single-handedly killed the public option. He was able to do so because he was the 60th vote the Democrats needed. Source: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/the_deat...

If the democrats were serious, they could have deployed the "nuclear option" on this (suspend Senate rules). But of course there was more than one person's objection going on.

There are far less than 50 votes from either party to suspend the 60-vote filibuster rule because it gives more power to each individual senator.

By contrast, Lieberman single-handedly killed the public option.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#228
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, no argument there. I work for Fortune #75 (hint; it's probably hanging on your wall). Lost dental insurance last year, vision the previous year, and switched to an HDP the year before (with massive premium increases every year). But hey, the stock price was at an all-time high on Friday. Funny thing about HR directors is that they don't last more than 1 year before rotating out. Don't want them to become too att…

To be fair, health insurance doesn't HAVE TO be provided through work. It's easier than ever to find a private plan. To the employer it's just another employee cost along with salary so if you didn't ask for a raise when that happened, that's on you then.

I did get a raise; had to threaten to quit, but did get one. It's the HSA contribution limit that pisses me off. I don't have an issue paying, but I'd at least like the benefit of pre-tax $. The HSA limit has not kept up with the ACA OOP limit. Other than inflation adjustments, it's up to congress to raise it.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#229
post #4

Over here (in Europe) we get the impression that US has such a crazy healthcare system. Why aren't people marching in the streets? Is it not as crazy as it sounds for most users? If you're taken to ER how are you supposed to know if the doctors are all part of "your network" (whatever that even means)?

Essentially, poor white Americans oppose any kind of social service that might benefit black Americans. Virtually every problem that America faces is complicated by this one simple fact, which is an echo of the fact that half the country literally went to war over their preference to enslave black people. Despite this glaring and obvious reality, most commentators are afraid to mention it.

poor white americans oppose any kind of social service that might benefit anybody but themselves including other white people.

Black americans oppose any kind of social service that might benefit anybody but themselves including other black americans.

People are people and ignorance doesn't have a color. It has always been like this. Blaming one or the other doesn't actually fix anything and it is also why nobody brings it up any longer not because they are afraid to mention it.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>NerdWallet estimates nearly 10 million adults with year-round health-insurance coverage will still accumulate medical bills that they can't pay off this year. That's only saying that you'll have bills you can't pay, not that you'll go bankrupt from it. Most (if not all) insurance plans have a maximum out-of-pocket expense amount that's like $10k. Yes, that's more than some middle-class Americans can afford to pay in…

> Most (if not all) insurance plans have a maximum out-of-pocket expense amount that's like $10k It's more like $6800 for 2016 and $7100 for 2017. That's the federally-mandated cap; many private plans set their cap even lower.

2x those for a family.
Post reply on HN