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

When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

features.propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 233 posts

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#171

Post by Broken_Hippo »

tehlike wrote: post #152
jliptzin wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They need to compete for our business. No, they don't. When you're out of breath with pain running down your left arm and are about to collapse, you're going to try to get to the nearest hospital, not first shop around to see which one has the most competitive rates like you're buying a new car or something.

Emergency is one thing. For others you could have time to shop.

Ok. So when you have flu complications? Gall bladder issues? When you fell and twisted your ankle but don't need emergency services even though you can't really walk? When you need a stint put in? Or how about when you've been diagnosed with an autoimmune disorder?

Sure, you technically have time to shop, but it seems to me that this is just an excuse and makes sick people suffer more.

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#172

Post by FDSGSG »

hestipod wrote: post #22
t34543 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take your savings and move out of the country.

I lived abroad in the past. Had a much better life and healthcare. But now that savings is so small and my health so limited I cannot just "move". I wouldn't be able to sustain myself financially. There are immigration requirements I cannot meet. I would love nothing more to leave. But even then things are so bad with pain and health I would never have a good life, maybe just a survivable one in a more comfortable en…

This is only one problem of many, so I definitely don't expect pointing this out to do anything to change your situation.

>There are immigration requirements I cannot meet

If you could vastly improve your life by moving, why would you let immigration laws stop you? It's really hard to get kicked out of the EU and you shouldn't have any issues with access to healthcare in places like Catalonia, Helsinki and I'm sure many others.

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#173

Post by Broken_Hippo »

novalis78 wrote: post #150
journalctl wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop with this free market nonsense. This is healthcare, this is real lives. It’s not the same as choosing which burger joint to patronize, it’s life and death.

The problem with avoiding market solutions to your problem is that many other areas of life could also make that argument "cell phones are needed to call the police, it's a matter of life and death, they should be free". "Houses keep people warm, they should not cost anything" etc. Reign in the cost of healthcare by allowing actual (cross state) competition and eliminate laws that give incumbents a free check. They s…

"cell phones are needed to call the police.." In the US, all cell phones with a charge can call the police (there are laws for this!) and there are programs to get free phones to those in danger. We already do this.

"Houses keep people warm, they should not cost anything" etc." I'm not sure who is arguing this, but it isn't a stretch for folks to agree that everyone should have access to shelter, even if you cannot afford it. I personally wouldn't mind standard and basic housing being free (Small kitchen/living room, bathroom, and bedroom or bedrooms)

I'd also point out that cross state competition would only help a little. Your laws need to be the same state to state, minimally, and most of the providers wouldn't change. Most insurance is provided through a job anyway, and I'd like to mention that most people's "tech company", besides social media, are ISP's with little to no competition.

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#174

Post by dthul »

flexblue wrote: post #161
hannasanarion wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because for-profit healthcare is immoral, wasteful, and inevitably results in scenarios like the above. A Bismarck system (nonprofit govt sponsored insurance companies that all charge the same and are taken by all doctors) would be fine too, but that's not on the table in the US

> Because for-profit healthcare is immoral, wasteful, and inevitably results in scenarios like the above. There's no such thing as a healthcare system where nobody profits in some way. Lots of people working in "non-profit" organizations are still lining their pockets. > A Bismarck system (nonprofit govt sponsored insurance companies that all charge the same and are taken by all doctors) would be fine too, but that's…

I guess the point is: No matter whether you are privately or publicly insured in Germany, a transport in an ambulance, an emergency helicopter ride, a long-winded illness like cancer, or any other medical treatment won't ruin you financially. The same goes for most (all?) of Europe.

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#175

Post by kgantchev »

hannasanarion wrote: post #122
xhgdvjky wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why Medicare for all vs other reforms

Because for-profit healthcare is immoral, wasteful, and inevitably results in scenarios like the above. A Bismarck system (nonprofit govt sponsored insurance companies that all charge the same and are taken by all doctors) would be fine too, but that's not on the table in the US

> Because for-profit healthcare is immoral

The [majority of hospitals in the US are non-for-profit](https://www.aha.org/statistics/fast-facts-us-hospitals). Needless to say, they are not able to provide a cheaper service than the for-profit hospitals. So there is some factor, unrelated to profit, which makes healthcare expensive.

If profit was causing healthcare expenses to rise, then non-for-profit hospitals should be be able to maintain lower prices than for-profit ones. They can't. So what's driving up the cost? The answer is pretty simple: government intervention.

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#176

Post by kgantchev »

w1nst0nsm1th wrote: post #154
RHSeeger wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point was that there are multiple different reforms that are important, and why health care over another. What if there is a candidate that is for health care reform, but against something else you consider important, but there's another candidate that's for the other reform, but against health care reform? Or there is a candidate that is for health care reform but also for other things your are strongly…

You speak, you debate, you argue and because of this, nothing gets done. Even for the most urgent issues like universal healthcare that have been literaly implemented by all western countries a long time ago as well as in most developing countries, you say : "But me..." Since you're not directly affected by the matter, you simply don't care. Even if you could be the next... You're part of the problem and nothing will…

> Selfishness will break America.

Selfishness is healthy in moderation. It's what helps people come to the conclusion that they have a shared interest on which they can collaborate.

> Before your country collapses under its own debt, America will be filled by slaves and a clique of companies and billionnaires owning them.

So the answer is to bankrupt the billionaires so everybody is living a terrible life?

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#177

Post by kgantchev »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #171
tehlike wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Emergency is one thing. For others you could have time to shop.

Ok. So when you have flu complications? Gall bladder issues? When you fell and twisted your ankle but don't need emergency services even though you can't really walk? When you need a stint put in? Or how about when you've been diagnosed with an autoimmune disorder? Sure, you technically have time to shop, but it seems to me that this is just an excuse and makes sick people suffer more.

In all of those cases you can:

1. Take 30 mins to find the most affordable option. 2. Ask for a lower price.

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#178

Post by flexblue »

dthul wrote: post #174
flexblue wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because for-profit healthcare is immoral, wasteful, and inevitably results in scenarios like the above. There's no such thing as a healthcare system where nobody profits in some way. Lots of people working in "non-profit" organizations are still lining their pockets. > A Bismarck system (nonprofit govt sponsored insurance companies that all charge the same and are taken by all doctors) would be fine too, but that's…

I guess the point is: No matter whether you are privately or publicly insured in Germany, a transport in an ambulance, an emergency helicopter ride, a long-winded illness like cancer, or any other medical treatment won't ruin you financially. The same goes for most (all?) of Europe.

Doesn't insurance in the US cover these cases? I think it ultimately comes down to whether people can afford healthcare or not. For instance, healthcare costs are covered with unemployment benefits in Germany.

If you don't have insurance in Germany you'll have to pay for that yourself as well. That's rare, but it happens especially with the precariously self-employed.

The issue with the US system is that you can't have it be both non-compulsory but also that coverage must be offered to everyone, no matter their state of health. Then you'll have a few healthy people pay huge premiums to finance treatment for those who never bought insurance until they're sick.

It is my understanding that a compulsory purchase (as in Switzerland) would be unconstitutional, so I guess "Medicare for all" in the form of a tax would actually be the next best thing. Just keep in mind that with US levels of healthcare salaries, that wouldn't come cheap.

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#179

Post by basq »

ars wrote: post #145
JamesBarney wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people in the country disagree. And you politicians know this, which is why no politician would ever suggest removing Medicare.

No one smart uses Medicare, instead they use Medicare advantage, which is private health insurance funded by the government. This is the part people don't understand when they promote Medicare for all - it's a really really bad plan, that people don't use unless they have no choice. This should be the death nail in these proposals, except the people proposing it typically don't even realize the difference. Medicare f…

I'm on MediCal, California's version of Medicare. Just want to say thanks for mentioning that. I had never heard of it before. I'm a young person who is also unemployed, and an orphan. Medi-Cal has been kafka-esque in how terrible it is. I relate it to therapists and doctors at the quality of school counselors and nurses, it's third rate care and it's practically made me lose all hope in getting treatment for chronic abdominal pain I've had for over a year and a half. I've been churning through doctors because they are so unprofessional to be flat out useless. One doctor straight up told me "so what do you want me to do about it?", And that's only one incident among many of the bad experiences I've had with it.

So to add on to what you've said, yes medicare is nightmarish. Hopefully this offers me a new chance to live a life.

Re: When Medical Debt Collectors Decide Who Gets Arrested

#180

Post by basq »

basq wrote: post #179
ars wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one smart uses Medicare, instead they use Medicare advantage, which is private health insurance funded by the government. This is the part people don't understand when they promote Medicare for all - it's a really really bad plan, that people don't use unless they have no choice. This should be the death nail in these proposals, except the people proposing it typically don't even realize the difference. Medicare f…

I'm on MediCal, California's version of Medicare. Just want to say thanks for mentioning that. I had never heard of it before. I'm a young person who is also unemployed, and an orphan. Medi-Cal has been kafka-esque in how terrible it is. I relate it to therapists and doctors at the quality of school counselors and nurses, it's third rate care and it's practically made me lose all hope in getting treatment for chronic…

It's late and I just realized MediCal is medicaid, not medicare. These program names are so confusing. Going to let out a large sigh and get some sleep.
Post reply on HN