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

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

thecity.nyc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 175 posts

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

#61

Post by kortilla »

pstuart wrote: post #17
toomuchtodo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Single payer healthcare for all has always been radical in the US. The Overton Window shifting to the left over the last decade is what has allowed Bernie to have any relevance at all.

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

#62

Post by munk-a »

bradstewart wrote: post #55
munk-a wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I lived in the states I was on a medication I needed to get filled every month (Methylphenidate for the curious) due to life situation my cost to do so varied in this manner over the span of half a year: 30$ (1$/pill) while on uni insurance 0$ on state healthcare while unemployed (Green Mountain Care) 270$ (9$/pill) while employed and not qualifying for employer healthcare 120$ (4$/pill) while employed with my b…

It's pretty crazy how this works. Despite having pretty good coverage, I often use GoodRx because the prices are so much cheaper than using my insurance...

Ha! So I work adjacent to the insurance industry and, hilariously, sometimes tier based copays on medication fills can exceed the pharmacy's price - usually pharmacists will catch this and just never bill the insurer, but sometimes patients can end up paying more for a drug because of their insurance.

Healthcare is all kinds of insane at every level.

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

#63

Post by karatestomp »

thorwasdfasdf wrote: post #3

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.

Price controls, de facto or de jure, seem to be one prominent, common factor in the health care systems of every other advanced economy. Even Singapore, practically the only "see, the market can work for health care!" example I see used, has them.

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

#64

Post by staticassertion »

munk-a wrote: post #45
halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An opposite example, went to the ER last year and spent a couple hours there. Paid a $100 copay. Haven’t seen any other bills.

When I lived in the states I was on a medication I needed to get filled every month (Methylphenidate for the curious) due to life situation my cost to do so varied in this manner over the span of half a year: 30$ (1$/pill) while on uni insurance 0$ on state healthcare while unemployed (Green Mountain Care) 270$ (9$/pill) while employed and not qualifying for employer healthcare 120$ (4$/pill) while employed with my b…

Yeah. A lot of people focus on the insured vs uninsured gap - if you're uninsured you're fucked. But the reality is that, even with insurance, medical care is a disaster. Finding a doctor in your network, waiting months to see them, completely unpredictable costs that, to me, borders on fraud, etc.

I've recently started a company, and at the same time a friend was laid off, and over the last 6 or so months I've gotten to experience the absurdity of this system from a few angles. It has been eye opening.

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

#65

Post by mitchdoogle »

sagarm wrote: post #41
toomuchtodo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am unsure how you cultivate courage and compassion at scale, but we have never needed it more as a society. Somehow we must get from "I've got mine, f___ you" to "I've got mine, how can I help you?" Otherwise, ruin awaits us.

There's plenty of evidence that single payer polls better than Sanders. Maybe a candidate without his baggage can get it done.

What baggage? The label of 'democratic socialist'? No Presidential candidate in recent memory has been as devoid of scandal as Bernie Sanders.

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

#66

Post by ska »

bluntfang wrote: post #35
swozey wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I paid something like $800 for one crutch when I sprained my ankle once. Think another $300 for ibuprofen. Now I know why there's a crutch market on craigslist/thrift stores. Not sure what my insurance paid for xrays, etc, but my tab was something like $1100 for that ER rendezvous. Thought I broke my leg. I had a laparoscopic surgery a few years ago that was $35k.

to be fair, you paid a doctor to administer you a crutch and ibuprofen, I'm certain that's not the raw material cost.

separate line items, typically

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

#67

Post by sailfast »

CydeWeys wrote: post #33
halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An opposite example, went to the ER last year and spent a couple hours there. Paid a $100 copay. Haven’t seen any other bills.

Gonna go out on a limb and assume you have good health insurance. Many (most?) Americans do not. I'm on an HDHP for example, so the first several thousand dollars in medical expenses per year come directly out of my pocket before insurance starts helping at all.

Right, but you also benefit from the fact that it's an HDHP, right? Must you be on an HDHP (because the other plan is too expensive, or because another plan is not offered) or did you choose the HDHP even when presented with the options?

The big up-front deductible and an HSA is pretty much the point of the plan, and it's mostly advantageous to those that are young and/or don't have to go to the doctor that often, with a max downside of their deductible + catastrophic.

EDITL To be clear, I also believe significant reform is required, but there is also a lot of misunderstanding about how plans work which is not helping. The whole industry is extremely opaque.

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

#68

Post by munk-a »

solotronics wrote: post #5
thorwasdfasdf wrote: post #3

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 am a pessimist - I think that once the dust has settled another Shkreli like ass-hat will be hung out to dry and everyone will decry how much they were charging for such-and-such component of the treatment while drawing attention away from the unreasonable prices in every other portion of the treatment.

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

#69

Post by sailfast »

platetone wrote: post #43
CydeWeys wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gonna go out on a limb and assume you have good health insurance. Many (most?) Americans do not. I'm on an HDHP for example, so the first several thousand dollars in medical expenses per year come directly out of my pocket before insurance starts helping at all.

i work for a tech company in the fortune 500 top 25... i would assume the best insurance possible, still killing us (paid nearly $7000 out of pocket last year + the actual premium costs of several thousand more). i've got three small kids including one with a heart condition, so it's particularly bad right now.

For insurance, I have found it's difficult to beat the negotiating power of the multiple large Federal Government offerings - and you can shop before you decide to join:

https://www.opm.gov/healthcare-insurance/healthcare/plan-inf...

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

#70

Post by toomuchtodo »

kortilla wrote: post #61
pstuart wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Single payer healthcare for all has always been radical in the US. The Overton Window shifting to the left over the last decade is what has allowed Bernie to have any relevance at all.

Has it been? Those 65 and older (Medicare), those on assistance (Medicaid), and current/past military service members (Tricare) all appear to be very satisfied with their single payer healthcare.

I genuinely don't understand why this is considered a radical idea when so many citizens are happy with this public benefit. This leads me to believe that the only cohort who believes it to be radical is that which is to be disrupted by such a policy.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/186527/americans-government-hea...

"Americans' satisfaction with the way the healthcare system works for them varies by the type of insurance they have. Satisfaction is highest among those with veterans or military health insurance, Medicare and Medicaid, and is lower among those with employer-paid and self-paid insurance. Americans with no health insurance are least satisfied of all."

Post reply on HN