Earlier quoted context omitted.
"eliminate copays and deductibles, something no other universal healthcare system has done." Scottish NHS has no deductibles or copays in general, dentist has an fee for some people though. English system has a flat prescription fee of £9 or so for a minority of the population up to £100ish a year. It's very close to free at the point of use, however.
Canada has no co-pays. The topic of payments never even comes up, unless you're not a resident. Prescription drugs and dental care are generally not covered, however. In fact, I still struggle to understand the concept of a co-pay. Is it like a deductible for automobile insurance?
Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
321–330 of 407 posts
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
Holy crap. I am in the process of "fighting" with insurance over meds we paid out of pocket even though they were supposed to cover it.. long story. We thought we hit a wall and we contacted one of the enforcement agencies. All of a sudden, we get an individual refund form and a place to mail it to. The amount was not astronomical ($1.5k), but not something I can just ignore. And that happens all over the country. No…
yep. Dont even get me started on how many times I had to fight with the insurance/billing/admin departments to even understand why I received a bill and for what. They must have a team of smart cryptographers to generate those crazy bills and invoices /s
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#323> Employer contributions to health insurance currently average $10446 per employee and cover 71% of a household’s premium. These employer premiums are equivalent to a 12.29% tax on payroll exceeding the first $2 million... Therefore, any payroll tax less than 12.29%, our upper bound in the SHIFT interface, would result in savings for employers. This excerpt makes it glaringly obvious that no economists were consulted…
Why won't the rising cost of labor for the employers that currently pay less be offset by the falling cost of labor for the employers that currently pay more?
First labor isn't perfectly fungible between sectors and firms. Moving workers will result in significant productivity lowering frictions. The clearest example of this is that the group most likely to have low insurance outlays relative to wages are high income workers. When the denominator's larger, the fraction's smaller
For example a worker making $500,000 a year, even with a platinum plan $25,000 a year plan is only outlaying the equivalent of a 5% payroll tax. They'd get hit very hard under single-player payroll tax. In contrast a worker making $25,000 with a $6000 employer-insurance is paying 20%. Unfortunately the typical $500k/year high skilled job can't easily be replaced with twenty $25k/year workers.
Second, you have to consider not just the reshuffling of demand between employers. You all also have to consider the tradeoffs potential workers make between paid labor and leisure. Universal single-payer will cause some workers to drop out of the labor force, scale back their hours worked, or take less stressful but lower productivity jobs. When everyone has access to the same healthcare regardless, the incentives between those options becomes less differentiated. People retiring early or spending more time as homemakers could be a good thing or a bad thing. But without a doubt it lowers economic output, and therefore the tax base.
Finally raising payroll taxes creates incentives for workers to reclassify in a way that shields their income. One form is outright evasion. More jobs will pay cash under the table, more "employee leasing" schemes, or just simply not declaring income. The higher taxes are the more incentive there is to take the risk. But there's also many perfectly legal ways to dodge payroll taxes. Cash compensation can be shifted to exempt benefits like life insurance, employee discounts, and meals. Employee compensation can be reclassified as director fees. American Workers can relocated to foreign offices, where they're exempt from payroll taxes. Self-employed people can re-incorporate as an S-corp.
This just scratches the surface. Once you double the effective payroll tax, expect a lot more effort and money invested in strategies to evade it. This not only means the proposed payroll tax rate captures less revenue than projected. It also means the pre-existing payroll tax now collects less revenue.
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#324My neighbor, a colorectal surgeon and very into what he does, has remarked on several occasions that if single payer ever happens, he and most of the other surgeons he knows will likely walk away from the profession very shortly thereafter. There would be no financial or professional motivation to continue practicing.
Because all the doctors in countries that have single payer are so horribly done by...?
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#325It’s a complete scam run by insurance companies who operate with ostensibly a government mandate (although with seemingly zero oversight). I work for myself and and have historically been paying about 20k per year in premiums for my family with a family deductible which I’ve never gotten remotely close to hitting. I have an hsa which I use to pay for out of pocket expenses pre tax and there is a tax deduction for hea…
I wish i could upvote you 1000 times. Why is it so hard for many people to understand all of this ?
Depending on your risk tolerance, it could pay off for people to do this... But it’s certainly not for everyone.
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We just can't deal with it, because we are exposed directly to unnecessary complexity. I'd argue though that those best adept at handling the complexity are actually winning in this model. If you are reasonably healthy already and can navigate HDHP/HSA rules, you can have a much higher take-home income + savings than in other countries with government run healthcare systems.
You are missing the point. It is not about being healthy. You are always worried about the "what if I have to go see a doctor" situation in America because you don't know what it will cost and you definitely don't know what kind of issues you will have to fight through with incorrect claims, incorrect bills and what not. If someone can address that here in US, I am willing to keep the current system as is.
Ironically, the whole point of HDHPs was to put downward pricing pressure on the medical system by encouraging people to price-shop. Alas, due to a variety of market/regulatory factors, that hasn't happened.
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, I would go for ANY system right now other than what we have. I am too pissed off at how our healthcare system is. Single Payer may or may not have the same issues but I am ready to take my chances. Status quo is not good enough for me.
What problems have you had with the current system?
- Every visit to a doctor is a game of cat and mouse. I am never sure what bill to expect and how many bills to expect.
- Price is always inflated due to the fact that insurance company has to make money on every visit to the doctor.
- Every visit requires a Claim. Claims get filed incorrectly. Fun and games trying to call a bunch of different "departments" trying to understand the claim and why am I being charged ?
- In network/out of network game. Ohh, I am sick and unconscious but I have to make sure that the person seeing me is "in network" so that I don't get a million dollar bill. Sorry, bad luck. While you were unconscious, we called a doctor who was "out of network" and not our problem. Have fun fighting wit the insurance company.
- Why does every visit require me to show insurance ? I just wanna talk to my damn doctor. Can I not just give you some money directly ?
- I visited the doctor. Doctor has to file a claim for $x while the insurance company only allows $y. So the doctor inflates the amount of initial claim knowing that they will be reduced anyway by the insurance company. Cat and mouse game continues and finally, poor me is left with a bill that I now have to figure out. Have I already paid enough (copay, deductible, out of pocket limit) ? Lucky me.
- My employer changes my insurance company. Oh, I have to redo the entire paperwork with al my doctors. Ok I did it. Oops the doctor office still filed a claim with my previous company. I am now fighting to get that sorted.
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but at least, Govt. is not looking to make record profits.
No, but government has strong incentives to deny claims to control costs. At least at the state level, governments have gotten extremely aggressive about money collection. E.g. $50 administrative fee for not paying a $4.00 toll.
Which is still less incentivization than what profit-maximizing insurance companies have.
The nice thing about the government is they are completely open and transparent with what they will pay and for what, so disputes are much less common.
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why should I subsidize other people's bad decision making? This is what you already do when you live in America. Other people made a bad decision to make healthcare a private industry, creating a billion dollar insurance business, and you are writing their paycheck out of yours.
And how is writing paychecks for government bureaucrats any different? I would like to pay my doctor, and my hospital, and my pharmacy for my healthcare costs not some borg.
It's (supposedly) CHEAPER. That's right in the title. If you want to argue whether it's actually cheaper or not, that's another thing, but this kind of feigned ignorance is really not helping the debate.
> I would like to pay my doctor, and my hospital, and my pharmacy for my healthcare costs not some borg.
In South Korea, with its universal healthcare system, I always visited a hospital and paid them directly right there. Usually a few to a dozen bucks for common cold, inflamed ears, that kind of stuff. Here in the free world of America, I go to hospital and three weeks later a faceless insurance company sends me a ridiculous bill and I don't even understand how they arrived at such a price.
Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
yep. Dont even get me started on how many times I had to fight with the insurance/billing/admin departments to even understand why I received a bill and for what. They must have a team of smart cryptographers to generate those crazy bills and invoices /s
And after you think you have it all figured and and properly paid, a new bill appears out of the blue 6 months after your visit.