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

Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 305 posts

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#161

Post by SyneRyder »

djsumdog wrote: post #116
philliphaydon wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know if it’s the same for everyone, but about 8 years ago I got gastro and thought I was dying because I was in so much pain. I was a Kiwi living in Australia l, called myself an ambulance and I don’t have Medicare so figured I had to pay the bill. After being discharged I gave them my passport and the hospital bill was $0 while the ambulance bill was around $950 Aud. When I moved to singapore to live I got a…

So Aussies and Kiwis can live/work in the other country without visas (instant residence) but whoever drafted that agreement really fucked up. Aussies get instant ACC in NZ but Kiwis don't get Medicare in Australia. I remember there were discussions about it on Radio NZ a few years back. There is a big private health care industry in Australia (for better or worse) that's not employer based (you see adverts on TV), s…

> I'm wondering how much it costs an actual Australian resident/citizen with medicare.

Here's the costs for St John's Ambulance. It's $949 for a life-threatening or urgent call, $510 for non urgent. It mentions that Medicare doesn't cover the cost, and that the costs will always be incurred by the patient. (I actually thought it was covered by my private health insurance, but apparently not.)

http://www.stjohnambulance.com.au/ambulance-and-health-servi...

Some doctors in Australia bulk-bill, so it's free for me to go to see a doctor whenever I want. Though for a short period when the government changed the billing rules, he started charging $25 per visit, but he's gone back to bulk-billing again.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#162

Post by elgenie »

domenzain wrote: post #107
blhack wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is pretty much nothing that infuriates me more than the health insurance system. Here is just one example (other than your ambulance example, which is like some trolley-car problem come real): We use "insurance" for routine medical examinations which are supposedly to be done regardless of health. We use "insurance" for YEARLY checkups. The absurdity of this is on par with insuring yourself against getting hung…

It makes good financial sense for insurers to push the insured to take preventative measures. An insurer should provide incentive to bring a building up to code to avoid a costly fire. The option to simply raise prices accounting for the fire leaves out the business of those who cannot afford it: the people leaving in a building that's not up to code.

> "It makes good financial sense for insurers to push the insured to take preventative measures."

This is only true in a well-designed system. In a system in which insurance policies are for a one-year term and can be declined or premium-hiked as necessary after that term is up, encouraging preventive checkups can be counterproductive if the risk of being on the hook for problems discovered in the checkups is higher than the preventive benefit during the duration of the policy.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#163

Post by dpwm »

dantheman wrote: post #153
blhack wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is pretty much nothing that infuriates me more than the health insurance system. Here is just one example (other than your ambulance example, which is like some trolley-car problem come real): We use "insurance" for routine medical examinations which are supposedly to be done regardless of health. We use "insurance" for YEARLY checkups. The absurdity of this is on par with insuring yourself against getting hung…

The health insurance system in the US is about as far away as you can get from capitalism. It's heavily regulated, a cartel, the prices are not transparent, and there is no competition (existing hospitals have to approve new hospitals, etc).

You can't disown capitalism from its problems that easily. It's not hard to see that it is in short-term self interest to form cartels, lobby for regulation, crush competition and treat their (now captive) customers with contempt.

This is a pattern we have seen time and again. Describing this as "about as far away as you can get from capitalism" is the no true Scotsman fallacy. Perhaps it doesn't match how you believe capitalism should work or you have a very different definition of capitalism to the more regular meaning of the term.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#164

Post by mmjaa »

KyeRussell wrote: post #125
djsumdog wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much is an ambulance in Australia? Last time I was there, I saw a protest against the Abbot government (yea it was that long ago) because he wanted to put in a co-pay (yes, Australians don't have co-pays). In the US, with insurance, they're typically like $300.

Ambulances are not a nationalised service in Australia. In some States it is State run, in others it is a private company. I live in Western Australia and it's all done by St John's Ambulance. My partner has needed two non-urgent ambulance call-outs (transfer to a public hospital), which were both charged at ~$500. She's on my private 'extras'* insurance policy, and my insurer fully covers an unlimited amount of ambu…

Just to give you some context, I'm a West-Australian, living in Austria.

I've had to take an ambulance to hospital a number of times. Cost to me: eu0.

I've also had to stay in hospital a couple of times, had a couple operations. Cost to me: eu0.

Of course, I pay regularly into the Austrian health system with portions of my pay check every month. But there is no suffering beyond that, if I have to have any medical procedures or take the ambulance for an accident.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#165

Post by chrisseaton »

sitepodmatt wrote: post #132
rconti wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife was in a car accident, and surprisingly, the ambulance bill (perhaps 5 miles, "night" surcharge (7pm), private ambulance in the bay area) was "only" ~$3400. I seem to recall an ambulance ride when I was a kid (20 years ago) costing something like $5k plus when I crashed my bicycle. Funny thing, though, the ambulance bill was the only thing NOT covered 100% initially. The hospital and surgeons bill your insura…

3.4k and 5k. I would expect the keys to ambulance after the ride for that price. How can that cost be justified, did you get any treatment in the ambulance other than oxygen and maybe some morphine?

It's not just a ride in a vehicle is it? Ambulances carry paramedics and sometimes doctors, tens of thousands of dollars worth of drugs and equipment. Even if you don't use all of that, they can't do anything else during the time that they're on your call, they need to be heavily insured, and they also need to stand by all day waiting for calls.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#166

Post by chiefalchemist »

xor1 wrote: post #32
chiefalchemist wrote: post #29

Good stat but there's nothing about outcomes. Uber might save money for transportation but how does the lack of a proper ambulance effect outcomes?

I imagine most of the cases involving people opting for an Uber instead of an ambulance aren't in obvious risk of dying if they don't make it to the hospital in time. The first things that come to mind are broken bones, lacerations, and severed digits. Then again, there are plenty of things that can be fatal without being readily apparent, especially if the only person making that judgment call is the patient.

I don't disagree. But let's see the data and not assume. One or two extreme cases could make any savings moot.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#167

Post by dmichulke »

dpwm wrote: post #163
dantheman wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The health insurance system in the US is about as far away as you can get from capitalism. It's heavily regulated, a cartel, the prices are not transparent, and there is no competition (existing hospitals have to approve new hospitals, etc).

You can't disown capitalism from its problems that easily. It's not hard to see that it is in short-term self interest to form cartels, lobby for regulation, crush competition and treat their (now captive) customers with contempt. This is a pattern we have seen time and again. Describing this as "about as far away as you can get from capitalism" is the no true Scotsman fallacy. Perhaps it doesn't match how you believ…

> It's not hard to see that it is in short-term self interest to form cartels

Cartels are only a problem if no new suppliers can enter the market.

> lobby for regulation

This is a problem of any representative system. Convince them and you're set. No capitalism involved.

> crush competition

Just a consequence of the abovementioned.

Summary: step 2 is the crucial problem, it's usually corruption or idiocy and a governance problem - not a capitalist problem.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#168

Post by funnelsgun »

knz wrote: post #105
bubblethink wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm constantly surprised by costs for x-rays in the US too. It probably has more to do with the cost of labour, but even so, it's quite outrageous.

It's not just x-rays. I'm currently on holiday in New Zealand and had to take my infant daughter to the urgent care. The total cost was $21 USD (including the prescription). Back in the US it's $330 for a 15 minute appointment with her GP. There is no way it costs $1,300/hour to run a GP clinic. Between my employer and I, the cost of family insurance is > $20,000/year and we pay the first $6,000 in expenses. That's s…

The insurance policy for you and your family costs $20,000PA? I don't know about you, but to me that is madness. My private health cover with Bupa costs me less than $1200PA.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#169

Post by endless1234 »

jMyles wrote: post #66
joshvm wrote: post #41

Coming from a country where ambulance usage is free for citizens, it would be interesting to see the stats in Uber cities. The only reason not to call an ambulance here is if you feel it would be unethical (e.g. if you broke your arm and your partner could drive you). EDIT: That is, I imagine you might be able to see whether Uber provides a better alternative than the local cabs. This still holds in US cities though,…

> The only reason not to call an ambulance here is if you feel it would be unethical I dunno, maybe you just want to avoid the psychological feeling of urgency and gravity that comes with an ambulance. I think there's something to be said for staying calm and keeping self-control and dignity when facing an emergency situation. If you're bleeding profusely or are in-and-out of consciousness or have a deadly virus, obv…

>Might you not prefer to stay out of an ambulance in those situations, even if it's free?

Ambulance ride here in Finland has a symbolic fee (10 eur if it's deemed necessary), but still, for a non life threatening issue it feels much more sensible to get a taxi. Since the situation is not life threatening you'd be put in a pretty low priority for the ambulance and have to wait for an hour or so. Taking a taxi is even incentivized - taxi to the hospital is going to cost the same 10 euros even if it's from further away, but even without that system I'd probably still use a taxi for broken bones etc.

Re: Cities with Uber Have Lower Rates of Ambulance Usage

#170

Post by Improvotter »

Never ever have I thought this would be a side effect of not having any proper health care. I've never had to take an ambulance, but it's a second nature where I live in Europe to just call the equivalent of 911 and they'll send out the best unit depending on the injury. It can be a plain ambulance or a faster car with doctors that definitely is very expensive if you weren't covered.

What a shame.

Post reply on HN