Live data from Hacker News

The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

thecity.nyc

11–20 of 175 posts

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#11
post #9

This is unfortunately why the US is going to fail miserably at containing SARS-CoV-2.

The reason we will fail to contain it is because we don't have any test kits. So we don't know the true rates of infection.

Policy: ignorance is bliss!

It looks better to have lower numbers.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#12
post #2

As a Canadian who has also lived in America, I am consistently mortified by the costs of health care in the states. Are they intentionally designed to force the lower class into even more poverty (I’ve seen $50 being charged for a pill of Advil - first hand) - or is it just an unintended side effect? I find it harder to believe it’s accidental than intentional. EDIT: Due to jiveturkey’s pathetic and wholly inaccurate…

[deleted]

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#13

Definitely need to start cracking down on predatory hospital billing. 10K billed just for stepping into the ER Room without even getting tested is absolutely insane. AT point do we decide this is criminal and start taking actions against these guys? Normally, I would never be in favor of price ceilings but this is one industry that desperatly needs it.

ERs get to deal with the unwashed masses. Everything from gunshot wounds to stokes to stubbed toes to people looking for a cab ride.

You, and someone who isn't indigent, get to pay.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#15
We decided (slash "made the mistake") of going to the emergency room last summer. Spent less than two hours in an exam room before being dismissed with no conclusion and referral to another doctor. Got a $9500 bill about six months later and have been billed a 10% copay on that (insurance paid $5500 already at their negotiated rate). Still fighting it as absolutely absurd, but there's really no hope. This country is fucked. It's an embarrassment.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#16

Definitely need to start cracking down on predatory hospital billing. 10K billed just for stepping into the ER Room without even getting tested is absolutely insane. AT point do we decide this is criminal and start taking actions against these guys? Normally, I would never be in favor of price ceilings but this is one industry that desperatly needs it.

I think once the dust has settled from COVID-19 the entire health system in America will be totally changed.

I remember studying political science as an undergrad two decades ago. My professors all said the same thing about the Electoral College: “it’s a relic that has long since stopped serving a practical purpose, but people live with it because it never rocks the boat. If there’s ever an election where the winner of the popular vote doesn’t actually win because they lost in the Electoral College, there will be a huge mass movement to finally get rid of it.”

Since then we’ve had two elections in twenty years where a candidate who lost the popular vote “won” thanks to the Electoral College. And the Electoral College is still there.

In politics, never underestimate the power of inertia.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they're doing it just because they can. there are some long winded explanations about this being about the negotation process between the hospitals and insurance companies but that's no exucuse. at the end of the day, it's just unmitigated greed on the part of the hospitals.

It's politics as well. The Democratic candidate campaigning on maintaining the status quo is leading against the candidate who is campaigning on single payer. There's not much left to do when larger cohorts of voters prefer an inefficient, wasteful system (or a candidate who supports such a system). What we currently have is what people are voting for . I've tried to make everything stated above objective in keeping…

The Overton Window has slid so far to the right that such remedies are considered to be radical. Sigh.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#18

We decided (slash "made the mistake") of going to the emergency room last summer. Spent less than two hours in an exam room before being dismissed with no conclusion and referral to another doctor. Got a $9500 bill about six months later and have been billed a 10% copay on that (insurance paid $5500 already at their negotiated rate). Still fighting it as absolutely absurd, but there's really no hope. This country is…

Meanwhile, I went to the emergency room in a hospital with my girlfriend in London two years ago and it was free for her. We're Americans.

Guess which country has better health outcomes.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#19
The statement from the hospital management boggles my mind: "In addition, there are different parts to a patient bill. One part is what the hospital charges the insurance company, one part is what the insurance company eventually pays [...]"

I can't think of any other business transaction where someone just puts a giant number on a bill and then is happy if someone pays ~25% of it. Such companies would be shunned by their customers and they'd go bankrupt. Is there any economic theory which explains how such odd of an system can emerge/survive?

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they're doing it just because they can. there are some long winded explanations about this being about the negotation process between the hospitals and insurance companies but that's no exucuse. at the end of the day, it's just unmitigated greed on the part of the hospitals.

It's politics as well. The Democratic candidate campaigning on maintaining the status quo is leading against the candidate who is campaigning on single payer. There's not much left to do when larger cohorts of voters prefer an inefficient, wasteful system (or a candidate who supports such a system). What we currently have is what people are voting for . I've tried to make everything stated above objective in keeping…

IMHO it’s not so much that they prefer the existing system as it is that they fear the unknown. No matter how bad their existing coverage is, they worry that some replacement would be even worse. It’s a downstream consequence of the collapse of faith in our institutions - as bad as things are, nobody trusts Congress to be able to design anything better. So they cling fearfully to whatever they’ve got.

The Devil you know, etc.

Post reply on HN