Greg Knauss's 10-year-old son's $23,800 bug bite • Hacker News Board

Re: Greg Knauss's 10-year-old son's $23,800 bug bite

#211

Post by lutusp » Tue, Sep 04, 2012, 7:12 AM UTC

brazzy wrote: post #207

lutusp wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're right, my statement was too broad, but I submit that it is still correct for health insurance ... It's correct because the present system is set up that way. But this doesn't mean it must be that way, or that insurance requires a large pool of clients with the same policy and coverage. That's a coincidence. From the standpoint of a large publicly-held corporation, many clients with identical policies, or man…

> It's correct because the present system is set up that way. But this doesn't mean it must be that way, or that insurance requires a large pool of clients with the same policy and coverage. That's a coincidence. No, it is not. > From the standpoint of a large publicly-held corporation, many clients with identical policies, or many clients each with unique personal policies, work internally exactly the same way -- it…

>> It's correct because the present system is set up that way. But this doesn't mean it must be that way, or that insurance requires a large pool of clients with the same policy and coverage. That's a coincidence.

> No, it is not.

It is a coincidence, and many insurance companies write policies that apply to only one person. They can do this because a large pool of people, all with the same policy, is not essential for the system to work. Example:

http://voices.yahoo.com/bizarre-insurance-policies-famous-ce...

A quote: "America Ferrera is the newest addition to the list of stars who have some of their body parts insured. Famous for her role as Betty Suarez in the top-rating ABC sitcom "Ugly Betty", Ferrera has had her smile insured for 10 million dollars by Lloyds of London."

One person, one smile, one client, one policy.

> The economy exists to serve people, not the other way round.

Please, to discuss that topic, start a new thread. It has precisely nothing to do with present topic, which is how insurance companies work.

Re: Greg Knauss's 10-year-old son's $23,800 bug bite

#212

Post by njs12345 » Wed, Sep 05, 2012, 2:01 AM UTC

api wrote: post #58

The US healthcare system combines everything that is bad about a state-run socialized system with everything that is bad about privately funded care. To add insult to injury, we do not pay substantially less taxes than, say, Canadians. If we paid Costa Rican taxes I'd be fine with it, but we don't.

The US federal government spent more on healthcare last year than the UK government did, despite the fact that federal programs in the US cover 27.8% of the population compared to 100% coverage by the NHS in the UK.

Re: Greg Knauss's 10-year-old son's $23,800 bug bite

#213

Post by zaphar » Wed, Sep 05, 2012, 2:29 AM UTC

ojiikun wrote: post #15

Every time a healthcare discussion comes up and everyone gets derailed on whether (or how much) to socialize things, I wonder the following: from a technology, taxation, and moral standpoint, what the hell led to a system where some heavy-duty antibiotics cost about 10-15X what they should? More importantly, why do generally intellegent audiences get caught up in arguments over socialism rather than correcting the co…

You make an assertion that the heavy duty antibiotics cost 10-15x what they should? How do you know what they should cost?

    - How much money did it take to develop them? (Count the failures in your estimate)
    - What is the supply vs demand for them? (demand is probably low since you don't want to use these unless you really need to)
    - What's the shelf life for them. 
        - Do hospitals have to toss them if they don't get used? 
        - Do they have to keep them on hand or can they be Just In Time manufactured and delivered in an emergency?

As others have said here the real problem is lack of transparency into these issues. Speculating about what the cost of antibiotics should be only adds to the cloud of misinformation around medical billing.

I agree though that demanding more transparency is a good thing.

Re: Greg Knauss's 10-year-old son's $23,800 bug bite

#214

Post by CJefferson » Fri, Sep 07, 2012, 1:42 PM UTC

lutusp wrote: post #198

Confusion wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the issuer is betting that the applicant won't suffer a loss, the applicant is betting that he will. An actuary sets the rate based on his best guess about the possibility of a claim. Emphatically: no! The issuer is betting that in the entire group of clients the total loss will be smaller than the rates they set. Almost nobody can ever financially deal with the greatest risk health insurance insures against. Health…

> When you need the insurance, it's the money of the other clients, that with hindsight never needed the insurance, that pays for your costs. This is the normal approach, but it's a coincidence -- the insurance system doesn't collapse if it's not the model. Insurance can equally be a case of one policy, one client, all depending on what's being insured -- see below. > Emphatically: no! The issuer is betting that in t…

No, Lloyds of London have huge numbers of clients. There is not one person / group of people who will personally lose a huge amount of money if that pays out. The money will come from someone else's car insurance not paying out.

Re: Greg Knauss's 10-year-old son's $23,800 bug bite

#215

Post by FireBeyond » Fri, Sep 07, 2012, 5:14 PM UTC

clarky07 wrote: post #149

TheAmazingIdiot wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then please, for the sake of the public good, do the following: Don't drive on the roads. Do put out your own fires if you house catches fire. Do hire private police for your security. Don't use public transportation. Don't use the Internet (including HN). Don't use, or have your children use public schooling. Do pay completely, without subsidy or federal grant, for all your higher education. Pay for a septic tank if…

You're right. Clearly because I don't want socialism it means I want 100% anarchy and no government whatsoever. That doesn't follow at all. You also added several things in there that the government doesn't provide, so I'm just really confused by this comment. (side note I could probably get by without almost everything on this list except for food and roads. I'm disregarding internet, as the gov't doesn't provide th…

"Do put out your own fires if you house catches fire. - i have a sprinkler system installed so it's unlikely I'll need them."

Haha. Sorry. As a Firefighter, you're very wrong. It'll definitely help, no doubt. But most commercial buildings today have sprinkler systems, and they burn.

"I suspect I could get private insurance to cover this though in a free-market. pay small money into pool (just like taxes) and we can all have firemen without your government."

Plenty of places do this. And it's an unregulated market. With sometimes horrific consequences. Grant's Pass, Oregon, for one, with three fire companies. Make sure you do your research - you don't want to get the company that has an engines with insuffient GPM capacity, or doesn't have sufficient tenders/tankers if you don't live in a hydranted community. Make sure their firefighters are all accredited (there is both an art and a science to it). Make sure they have SCBA so they can go inside your burning building (or your neighbors, who might cause a risk to yours). These are things you think should be obvious, but are not.

"Also, if you don't live in a city, it is very possible that there are no firefighters who will come to your house."

Most such areas also have a volunteer firefighter presence.