Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Employees Start to Feel the Squeeze of High-Deductible Health Plans

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–387 of 387 posts

Re: Employees Start to Feel the Squeeze of High-Deductible Health Plans

#381

Post by ivalm »

yardie wrote: post #266
civility wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You cant lower costs in the US without having a more aggressive regulatory body which 50% of political bodies strongly oppose alongside lobbying efforts Here is the fundamental problem from my point of view. Compare human medical costs to veterinary costs. Yes, people expect a slightly higher standard for themselves than they do their animals, but you can get a major knee surgery for your dog for a small fraction o…

> you can get a major knee surgery for your dog for a small fraction of what they charge for humans. I mean you can't really compare vet bills to surgery bills. Veterinarians have actual price constraints where the owner is willing to put their foot down once it gets beyond a certain point. They love their pets but they aren't willing to go financially insolvent for them. No such constraint exists for American health…

Well, the start would be mandating that the cost must be same to all patients. Which means that uninsured/underinsured patients will face bills no greater than the payout the medical professionals get from large health insurance companies. Part of the problem is that no only are the prices not transparent (for comparison shopping), they are also different for different buyers.

Re: Employees Start to Feel the Squeeze of High-Deductible Health Plans

#382

Post by ivalm »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #364
jogjayr wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're talking about an employer matched 401K, I don't think it's unreasonable at all for them to select it. What's special about 401k matching that requires the employer to choose plans? My employer doesn't force me to have a checking account with a particular bank they chose if I want to receive my salary. They should be able to match contributions to any account anywhere.

I don’t know if you understand how 401K matching works on the backend. A lot of times the employers are capped on their own plans at a percentage rate that matches their employee’s participating. So matching is often in their best interest, esp at smaller companies. But, easier version is this is a perk, not your base salary. They are paying you with legal tender and there are freedoms associated to that. There is no…

There are no "free perks" in employment contracts. These are money equivalents, just like RSUs, free lunches, and other benefits. I make employment contract decisions based on these benefits. If my employer materially alters these benefits I would change my place of employment, just as if they lowered my base salary.

Re: Employees Start to Feel the Squeeze of High-Deductible Health Plans

#383

Post by CarriersSuck »

weberc2 wrote: post #204
CarriersSuck wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans think the poor are slackers and they don't deserve anything. Even poor Americans think the "other" poor are slackers and don't deserve anything. Nothing will change until you change this mindset.

This is a pretty bold statement. How many Americans do you know?

I've lived in the US all my life, so quite a few.

Re: Employees Start to Feel the Squeeze of High-Deductible Health Plans

#384

Post by sbierwagen »

pintxo wrote: post #247
pdonis wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Healthcare is best managed as a risk pool. No, health insurance is best managed as a risk pool, which, as you say, should obviously be everyone. But much of health care is not health insurance because it doesn't deal with insurable risks. Your need to get an annual physical isn't an insurable risk. Neither is a one-time appointment with a doctor to see if your headache and runny nose is just a cold or an infection…

I might be mistaken, but here (Germany), regular checkups are paid by the insurance on purpose. The alternative being people not doing the checkups and thereby delaying diagnosis until treatment get‘s really expensive as things get life threatening. In the end insurance has an interest in people taking regular checkups resulting in early (cheap) action.

Preventative medicine sounds good, but turns out to have zero or negative effect at scale: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-preventive-economics/thin... Yearly checkups don't do anything.

Re: Employees Start to Feel the Squeeze of High-Deductible Health Plans

#385

Post by robertgale »

jkaljundi wrote: post #75

NET::ERR_CERT_DATE_INVALID - it's interesting as it's May 3rd and the cert seems valid until May 3rd as well?

This error message from Google Chrome Browser is one of the most common problems that everyone faces in our day to day life. Google Chrome warns you whenever it finds out any abnormal tracks taken while you browse things on the web. If you are getting the SSL error in chrome, it means your Internet connection or your computer is preventing Chrome from loading the page securely and privately. However, there are few changes or settings which help you to get rid you of this error.

    Check System Date and Time
    Disable Antivirus SSL Connection
    Clear Cookies and Cached Files
    Reset Chrome Browser
    Open Chrome in Incognito Mode
    Expired SSL Certificates
    Update Chrome Browser
http://net-informations.com/q/mis/ssl.html

Re: Employees Start to Feel the Squeeze of High-Deductible Health Plans

#386

Post by nobleach »

tptacek wrote: post #319
nobleach wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I look at what my insurance company actually covers for all of my doctor bills, I'd probably be better off just paying the penalty. At least I'd have a few hundred more every pay check to cover that 11 extra dollars that my insurance company could dare to part with for a $300 X-Ray.

The penalty has been more or less hamstrung by the GOP, so if that's your only consideration, then, yes, you're better off not paying for health insurance. Additionally: you can (you shouldn't have to, but you can) shop around for cheaper medical imaging. Imaging in particular has wildly varying prices, and if you stay on the "happy path" your PCP and hospital puts you on, you're going to pay the higher end of the ra…

I should probably specify the level of "tongue-in-cheek" in which my dismissive comment was made. I'm well aware of the function of medical (as well as other) insurance. Having a family, I'd be a fool to "go it alone". But you're correct, it's my responsibility, especially as one who chose a HDHP this year, to shop for the best deals.

And nope, still on my original appendix... I change the oil regularly.

Re: Employees Start to Feel the Squeeze of High-Deductible Health Plans

#387

Post by danans »

mikeash wrote: post #336
danans wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, a limit on how much the insurance company will pay to cover your healthcare expenses

I don’t understand the distinction you’re making.

Some employers put a limit on how much you pay out of pocket, even below the maximum amount of pocket required by the ACA, almost, but not quite comparable to what you get in countries with socialized medicine or health insurance systems. They essentially assure that medical treatment can't bankrupt you.

Obviously, most people in the US don't have access to such a generous plan, or the amount of medical expenses they can tolerate without going into bankruptcy is below the legal out of pocket maximum (6k/yr individual, 12k/yr family). Hence the GoFundMe pages to raise money for medical treatment.

Post reply on HN