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

Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 440 posts

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#371

Post by agensaequivocum »

jschwartzi wrote: post #140
dandersh wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When our youngest was born the nurses (incorrectly) thought his blood sugar was low and had him transferred to a different hospital via ambulance. We were able to fight and get the $2000 bill waived on account of the fact that it was a needless trip. Unfortunately my wife spent the night alone as I was with our son. On a somewhat related note in the span of 10 years the cost to us to deliver our kids doubled. Same ho…

This was a serious discussion my wife and I had when we were deciding to have a kid. The maximum out of pocket for both of us could easily wipe out my savings. It felt really fucked up to have this discussion in what is supposed to be a first-world country. Like we were talking about alternatives like hiring a midwife or a doula because it would be cheaper. I don't even think that would be a discussion in most second…

You probably won't hit the out of pocket maximum unless there is a complication. When my wife and I had our first, I was making decent money, still the hospital wrote off the entire bill through their financial assistance program.

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#372

Post by arcticbull »

unishark wrote: post #366
arcticbull wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is your point then that food is cheap because it is socialized at a 100% rate as you want healthcare to be? Or that your references to socialism are all red herrings? My point is food is cheap because the government intervenes, it's not a free market as you make it out to be, and yes food is provided to those in need. However, there aren't many in need in no small part because food is already the cheapest in the wo…

> The alternative to socialized services are privately owned and operated businesses. Not anarchy, necessarily, but libertarianism. Privatizing these would mean anarchism as there's no longer a monopoly on force. >- The freeways? Socialized. >- The schools? Socialized. >- The police? Socialized. >- The fire stations? Socialized. >- The army? Socialized. >- The post office? Socialized.

Ah yes who can forget the Armed Postal Forces and the Teachers Brigade. The Fire Fighters Battalion really whipped the enemy in Iraq. It's strictly not true that privatizing these would risk losing a monopoly on force.

It's not anarchy to pay the fire department to put out your fire. It's libertarianism. Just like paying your doctor to splint your leg.

Even if I agreed with you, whether it risks losing the monopoly on force or not doesn't make it any less a socialized service.

This might be a fun read for you: https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertari...

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#373

Post by AdrianB1 »

gotostatement wrote: post #358
AdrianB1 wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't want to search, try this: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/waiting-your-turn-wa... . Or on camera here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw And there are more.

your sources are a conservative thinktank, and noted bigot and liar Steven Crowder https://www.healthcare-now.org/blog/new-poll-shows-canadians... - Canadians Overwhelmingly Support Public Health Care https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/public-satisfaction-nh... - 60% public satisfaction with NHS https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2071992/ - "US has highest dissatisfaction with health care" (out of 7 indu…

I am talking about wait times, you are talking about satisfaction; they are different things.

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#374

Post by gotostatement »

AdrianB1 wrote: post #373
gotostatement wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

your sources are a conservative thinktank, and noted bigot and liar Steven Crowder https://www.healthcare-now.org/blog/new-poll-shows-canadians... - Canadians Overwhelmingly Support Public Health Care https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/public-satisfaction-nh... - 60% public satisfaction with NHS https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2071992/ - "US has highest dissatisfaction with health care" (out of 7 indu…

I am talking about wait times, you are talking about satisfaction; they are different things.

You have demonstrated bad faith by moving the goalposts, therefore I am leaving this conversation.

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#375

Post by spaetzleesser »

powvans wrote: post #326
jsperson wrote: post #13

That it takes such effort to pass a bill like this - 80% public approval, banning a clearly predatory practice, has turned me from a pure free market thinking into a believer in single payer healthcare. The free market just doesn't work when there is very little elasticity in consumption. I've been on the receiving end of a $15K air ambulance bill (thankfully covered by insurance) as well as the out of network specia…

What if they don't even come into the room? I experienced this incredible phenomenon a couple years ago after taking my son to the ER while out of state on vacation. We were there for a few hours to have a very horror movie-esc swollen lymph node looked at. He needed a CT scan to confirm that it was not an abscess and some IV antibiotics for strep. The doctor and nurses were great, I paid up front, and additionally p…

So they are basically bullies that exploit the weak and defenseless and are afraid of people that fight back.

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#376

Post by spaetzleesser »

lordnacho wrote: post #11

> Surprise bills happen when an out-of-network provider is unexpectedly involved in a patient’s care. Patients go to a hospital that accepts their insurance, for example, but get treated there by an emergency room physician who doesn’t. Such doctors often bill those patients for large fees, far higher than what health plans typically pay. How do courts uphold this? You go to a restaurant, they say you can buy the tas…

"How do courts uphold this? You go to a restaurant, they say you can buy the tasting menu for $100, but they have a temp chef working that day which will cost you $50 extra, which you find out as you're paying. "

In the US you go to a hospital and basically sign a contract "you can charge me for whatever you feel like". What surprises me is that they get away with often charging for stuff that never happened. When you confront them they just say "Oops!" ad take it off only to try it again next time. I don't understand how they get away with that.

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#377

Post by baryphonic »

namdnay wrote: post #63
baryphonic wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The free market just doesn't work when there is very little elasticity in consumption. Should we have single-payer markets for auto repairs, then? Or how about toilet paper, especially in a pandemic? Both of those are very inelastic, yet socialism has a particularly poor record of producing either reliably. > I've been on the receiving end of a $15K air ambulance bill (thankfully covered by insurance) as well as th…

> Should we have single-payer markets for auto repairs, then? Or how about toilet paper, especially in a pandemic? Both of those are very inelastic, yet socialism has a particularly poor record of producing either reliably. Why do you segue from single-payer to “socialism”? Btw not sure about the states, but here in Europe, Single-payer works fine for auto repair, it’s exactly what happens when your car breaks down d…

State control of the means of production is a common (though not unique) definition of socialism, is it not?

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#378

Post by samch »

luhn wrote: post #103
t0mbstone wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

re·tard verb past tense: retarded; past participle: retarded /riˈtärd/ delay or hold back in terms of progress, development, or accomplishment. "our progress was retarded by unforeseen difficulties" It seems to me that the word's usage is an accurate description of America's lack of progress in this area...

At least here in the US, it's generally no longer considered appropriate. https://www.specialolympics.org/stories/impact/why-the-r-wor...

Thank you. My wife worked for the Special Olympics for several years, and we were privileged to meet so many wonderful athletes in the program. I doubt a single one would think this usage of the r-word was appropriate.

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#379

Post by conanbatt »

iaw wrote: post #100
jsperson wrote: post #13

That it takes such effort to pass a bill like this - 80% public approval, banning a clearly predatory practice, has turned me from a pure free market thinking into a believer in single payer healthcare. The free market just doesn't work when there is very little elasticity in consumption. I've been on the receiving end of a $15K air ambulance bill (thankfully covered by insurance) as well as the out of network specia…

> has turned me from a pure free market thinking into a believer in single payer healthcare The current trend in 'free-market economics' is to call captured markets free and then argue for the relatively lax regulation. Most markets are not free markets and the healthcare definitely isn't. There's very little true choice, participants are typically under duress when seeking expensive services, and prices are hidden.…

A handy guide to check if healthcare is a free market:

1) Can you buy medicine from whoever sells it cheapest?

2) Can you hire the healthcare provider you want?

3) Are you financially punished for choosing your own health insurance?

4) Can you opt-out of government health services?

5) Can you waiver or partially waiver your right to sue the medical professional in exchange for cheaper services?

Re: Congress is set to ban most surprise medical bills

#380

Post by conanbatt »

arcticbull wrote: post #232
npmaile wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument you are responding to is not the one the previous user presented. This issue isn't that people are trying to maximize profit leading to issues. The problem is that there is undue government interference in the market leading to all of the negatives that come from people selfishly trying to maximize profit in a cynical way with none of the benefits of people trying to maximize profits by providing…

Free markets generally work better the less leverage one party has over another. When the negotiation is "pay up or die" then it's de facto not a free market [1] and the government has a responsibility to step in and address it. The minimum viable remediation is a two-tier system in which the government takes the "or die" out of the conversation. The best approach IMO is single-payer where the government takes the "p…

Why doesn't the pay-up-or die model apply to food or shelter?
Post reply on HN