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

Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 345 posts

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#51

Post by alexpetralia »

point78 wrote: post #35
johnwheeler wrote: post #25

I took my 4 year old to the ER because he had a 103 fever. The doctor put an ear thermometer to him and told me to give him some childrens ibuprofen. The visit lasted all of 5 minutes. The cost: $756.00. I refused to pay it. It was the first time I did not pay a debt and the first time I was sent to collections. I refused based on principle, and not because I couldn’t afford it. Collections called me for about 3 mont…

Well as screwed up as the system is one little part of why prices are so high is to cover when people don't pay.

If people did pay, would hospitals lower their prices? Is the market that competitive? If not, where would the extra money go?

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#53

Post by mehrdadn »

johnwheeler wrote: post #25

I took my 4 year old to the ER because he had a 103 fever. The doctor put an ear thermometer to him and told me to give him some childrens ibuprofen. The visit lasted all of 5 minutes. The cost: $756.00. I refused to pay it. It was the first time I did not pay a debt and the first time I was sent to collections. I refused based on principle, and not because I couldn’t afford it. Collections called me for about 3 mont…

> I refused to pay it. It was the first time I did not pay a debt and the first time I was sent to collections. I refused based on principle, and not because I couldn’t afford it.

Why not at least pay a portion of it that you would have felt was sensible?

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#54

Post by nonbel »

ssx wrote: post #43
johnwheeler wrote: post #25

I took my 4 year old to the ER because he had a 103 fever. The doctor put an ear thermometer to him and told me to give him some childrens ibuprofen. The visit lasted all of 5 minutes. The cost: $756.00. I refused to pay it. It was the first time I did not pay a debt and the first time I was sent to collections. I refused based on principle, and not because I couldn’t afford it. Collections called me for about 3 mont…

If you had insurance it wouldn’t have been so high. If you don’t have insurance, you literally are the problem.

No, the people who keep paying insurance companies to inflate prices to insane levels are the problem.

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#55

Post by pkaye »

tareqak wrote: post #36
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t work for emergency care - where the patient really doesn’t have the time to go window-shopping while having a cardiac arrest. And while greater transparency is good - not everyone in the public is able - or willing - to understand a medical price-sheet and might opt for a cheaper but medically-inappropriate procedure with similar-sounding-name to the procedure they actually need.

OK, how about mandatory cash prices for non-emergency care?

And what if that price is too high for any uninsured to afford?

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#56

Post by legitster »

minikites wrote: post #21

I don't see how mandating clear pricing is supposed to address medical inefficiency. If it threatens your life, you're going to pay no matter what, or in other words, demand is inelastic. Insulin is often used as an example of an inelastic good in Economics 101. I'm not sure how people are supposed to comparison shop for hospitals in an emergency situation and even for elective procedures, lots of hospitals in an are…

I would recon life threatening emergency medical care accounts for a small fraction of overall healthcare. Even comparison shopping for birth is virtually impossible and one has 9 months to do it.

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#57

Post by doctorpangloss »

johnwheeler wrote: post #44
point78 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well as screwed up as the system is one little part of why prices are so high is to cover when people don't pay.

Well then it sounds like a vicious circle. Should we fix it by paying exorbitant fees or charging reasonable prices?

People saying, 'We should pay for the things I do in the economy, but not something someone else does, "out of principle"' is an opinion that exists in reality, it's just an unbecoming and non-constructive one.

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#58

Post by HarryHirsch »

Stratoscope wrote: post #9

Beyond opaque and variable pricing for the same service, there is also the question of whether something simpler would do the trick. Some years ago, I thought I might have broken my finger. I went to the doctor and it was actually the physician's assistant who saw me. I'd explained at the front desk that I had a high-deductible policy and I would be paying in full for the visit. The PA said "Usually we would send som…

With a hand injury one might lose fine motor skills, they should be taken seriously by patients and physicians. In any other first-world country the physician would have taken an x-ray, treatment cost would be nominal, there is some form of universal healthcare in place, but in America you have a choice! Your money or your range of motion!

More worrying is that people support the racket! A tuning fork, like a barefoot doctor in 1950s China might have used is a good idea! You despair about the possibility of sanity in American healthcare.

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#59

Post by velcrovan »

aianus wrote: post #29
astrodust wrote: post #8

Wouldn't it be nice to have an ultrasound and not know the price, nor care? That's what countries with single-payer are like. America needs to give up on this nonsense. There should be riots.

As mentioned below, the price doesn't matter when nobody is available to see you. Also, the opportunity cost of sitting around with a broken hip waiting to be seen can be higher than going to a privatized country/province and paying for the surgery, in which case you're a super-sucker who paid extra taxes for decades just to end up paying out of pocket for surgery anyways. Anyways, the US system is probably worse ove…

Funny, I have a sister in Canada and a sister in Switzerland, neither of them have had trouble getting ultrasounds. My wife's grandmother is also in Canada and was treated the same day for her broken hip.

I'm really sick of being told things are impossible in the US that are normal in other developed countries.

Re: Insured price $2,758, cash price $521

#60

Post by minikites »

wrs wrote: post #39
minikites wrote: post #21

I don't see how mandating clear pricing is supposed to address medical inefficiency. If it threatens your life, you're going to pay no matter what, or in other words, demand is inelastic. Insulin is often used as an example of an inelastic good in Economics 101. I'm not sure how people are supposed to comparison shop for hospitals in an emergency situation and even for elective procedures, lots of hospitals in an are…

No. For the market to work, substitute goods would need to have transparent pricing so the customer can choose with price in mind. Most ultrasounds — indeed, most entire hospitals — are pretty close to identical goods. Everyone will die without food, but supermarkets don't take advantage of that fact to mark up food by 500%.

It's easy to evaluate the quality of an apple and there are dozens of substitute goods (other fruit). It's not easy to evaluate the quality of an ultrasound machine, the staff required to operate it, and their interpretation of the results. Depending on the medical issue, there may not be a substitute good (procedure).

Medicine does not work with market principles.

Post reply on HN