I need to figure out why this board eats a number of my posts when I try to edit the content.
Oh well.
I want actual discussion and I don't give a crap if you call me a name. I'm just going to respond in kind. How about this, what you're saying is stupid.
There are literally thousand of medical procedures that are entirely elective. My youngest just had his tonsils taken out. The entire thing was elective. I have no incentive to search for someone to do it by price because I wasn't paying for it and I never saw a bill.
Hip replacement, Achilles tendon repair, knee replacement, you name it. All of these are elective. And of course there is a need to advertise the cost of a CT scan, it people were actually paying the cost out of their own Medical Savings Account. If you needed a CT scan and you were paying for it why wouldn't you go to the place that was $300 less than the place across town? There is no need to advertise now, because most people aren't paying directly for their medical care.
This is fair.
And even for a disease like cancer, for example, treatment often doesn't begin instantaneously. It might take a few days to get in for a CT scan or whatever other diagnostic test the doctor might want to run. So there would be time to do a little research.
The 3rd party payer system is the biggest problem we have with our healthcare system. As government got more involved in healthcare taking on more of the costs that's when costs really started to explode. The graph that someone posted here in that other thread illustrated that fact nicely.
What I'd like to do is greatly expand the use of medical savings accounts so that people are contributing to them during all of their working years. Make the contributions pre-taxes, allow the money in the accounts to be invested and only allow healthcare expenditures to be made from the account. When the person dies the account is treated as a personal asset that can be willed to someone else.
If people were more directly involved with what they were paying for their healthcare you'd start to see some market pressure on price. There would be incentive to not just continue medical treatment when there little or no chance of success.
The problem with people being directly involved with what they are paying is the vast majority of medical expenses covered by insurance are not discretionary. You want to buy a car so you shop around and find the car and the price you want or you keep your old car. The medical world isn't like that. I had a kidney stone, I can't go call around for the cheapest place to get treated to find out why it feels like my kidney is giving birth.
So the medical world couldn't advertise the prices they charge for dealing with a kidney stone? Why not?
Because there's no market forces needed for them to do that. The only way to make that happen is through government intervention. Which you are against.
This is beyond stupid. The changes I advocated and clearly stated would create the market forces needed to that. The government wouldn't need to intervene in order make people advertise their prices any more than the government intervenes in order make lasik providers advertise their prices.
Sometimes you need to just keep your mouth shut Hondo.
No there are no market forces causes medical providers to advertise prices because they are not elective. Elective procedures like invisiline and plastic surgery, prices are up front and open. There's no need to advertise Cancer Care or the cost of a CT scan or whatever. Cause if you need one you need it. Now.
But keep calling me stupid. Weren't you just arguing for an end to the name calling and wanting actual discussion?
I need to figure out why this board eats a number of my posts when I try to edit the content.
Oh well.
I want actual discussion and I don't give a crap if you call me a name. I'm just going to respond in kind. How about this, what you're saying is stupid.
There are literally thousand of medical procedures that are entirely elective. My youngest just had his tonsils taken out. The entire thing was elective. I have no incentive to search for someone to do it by price because I wasn't paying for it and I never saw a bill.
Hip replacement, Achilles tendon repair, knee replacement, you name it. All of these are elective. And of course there is a need to advertise the cost of a CT scan, it people were actually paying the cost out of their own Medical Savings Account. If you needed a CT scan and you were paying for it why wouldn't you go to the place that was $300 less than the place across town? There is no need to advertise now, because most people aren't paying directly for their medical care.
This is fair.
And even for a disease like cancer, for example, treatment often doesn't begin instantaneously. It might take a few days to get in for a CT scan or whatever other diagnostic test the doctor might want to run. So there would be time to do a little research.
See, and we can still call each other Kunt's and morons if you like. Thanks
First off the argument about a "pure free market" is a red herring that's not what I'm advocating and you could never achieve it on account of the number of poor and disabled people that would still need some kind of public care option.
Yes, people with higher incomes would benefit. Just like they benefit now. They get to live in bigger houses, drive nicer cars and take better vacations but they also improve the goods and services for the non-wealthy over time. It's not as if the wealthy don't have better access and healthcare right now.
Fair enough. And along the lines of your point, in the Canadian system, the wealthy are still free to obtain healthcare from a parallel private system.
Health savings accounts are interesting. I see some problems that may or not be solvable:
1. They create financial disincentives for people to obtain preventative care, which has been shown by research to be the best way to reduce costs and improve outcomes.
2. They siphon funds away from insurance funds. Less money would be available to pay for care for the sick people using healthcare.
3. A disproportionately large amount of healthcare is devoted to a small percentage of the population. (I've seen 69% goes to 10%.) For sick people, HSAs wouldn't be enough.
4. In many rural areas, there is not much choice of healthcare provider. There's one local doctor, one nearby hospital, etc.
I don't know, if you knew you could keep yourself healthier and for longer by taking better care of yourself and doing things like keeping your BP in check and thus ultimately keeping more money in your pocket is it possible that a significant number of people might be willing to do it? Hell some people drive across town to go to the cheaper gas station or Costco.
I agree with you about #3 and there would almost certainly have to be some way to provide additional assistance to people with chronic debilitating illnesses, but we kind of already do that.
The fact that you hide behind a pathetic dodge that you were just "trolling" when clearly obvious you weren't exposes you for worthless piece of shit you are Hondo.
You weren't "trolling" when you claimed that we only allow 60,000 permanent resident immigrants into the country each year. You had your head up your ass. You weren't "trolling" when you swallowed like a bitch the bullshit about Trump cutting money from FEMA. You had your head up your ass.
Were you "trolling" by putting your head up your ass Hondo?
Rent fucking free.
Damn, and I was betting you were going to go with "triggered" Kunt act. Don't go anywhere, Coug will be here shortly to tongue your ass.
Both of you need to shut the fuck up.
You shut the fuck up you filthy socialist pig. Move to Mexico you Marxist swine. The USA will never fall prey to the lies of socialism. It was exposed in the 20th century and further exposed early this century by Venezuela and other failed states. Your movement will be destroyed by force if that need ever comes to pass. You will only succeed over millions of dead American bodies. You want to try it you pansy motherfucker? The same nation that obliterated Nazi Germany and collapsed the Soviet Union will gut and impale your anti-American movement if it ever gains enough steam to become a legitimate threat.
The democratic socialists will constantly attempt to steer the conversation toward healthcare, as it is a topic that concerns everyone and everyone agrees that it needs to be reformed. Their primary intention in doing this is to not actually fix things but to distract from the rest of their agenda:
* The eventual overthrow of capitalism
* The confiscation of guns so that people are unarmed and unable to fight back against an oppressive government.
* "Racial justice." What does that term even mean? What it means is shit like what is currently happening in South Africa. Seizing assets based on race and redistributing those assets to the victims of 'white privilege.'
* Open borders. They need more people who think like them to grow their numbers so they can consolidate and eventually seize power after an economic crisis. Who better than a bunch of folks from Latin America who come from socialist hellholes and bring that same mode of thinking with them when they come here. They state on their own website that they are waiting, lurking like the snakes that they are, for the right time to strike, just like the Nazis. They are waiting for an economic crisis to make big gains in government. As long as they remain well funded and organized, they will be a threat for the foreseeable future.
* Speech restrictions, hate speech laws.
* Their alliance with Palestinians and Islam. The same Palestinians and Muslims who cheered in the streets and fired off their guns in celebration of 9/11.
* The eventual replacement of the Constitution with their own 'constitution.' Any person who is capable of critical thinking can see where this is all leading. The tearing down of historical statues. The smearing of the founders and America as an inherently racist nation founded by racists and slave traders. The Constitution is a white privilege document to them.
They want to remake America in the vile image of the failed 20th century totalitarian nations of Europe.
Translation: Stop saying things that make my Kunt hurt.
Why would wealthy people voting against their own interest bother me? It's funny people like you hate the fact that successful people think it's ok to redistribute their own wealth.
If they want to great, my problem is them making everybody else do it.
Translation: Stop saying things that make my Kunt hurt.
Why would wealthy people voting against their own interest bother me? It's funny people like you hate the fact that successful people think it's ok to redistribute their own wealth.
Then why don't they just do it instead of making everyone else do it? Oh yeah they think they'll be part of the elite and get to live as they do now.
Translation: Stop saying things that make my Kunt hurt.
Why would wealthy people voting against their own interest bother me? It's funny people like you hate the fact that successful people think it's ok to redistribute their own wealth.
Then why don't they just do it instead of making everyone else do it? Oh yeah they think they'll be part of the elite and get to live as they do now.
Translation: Stop saying things that make my Kunt hurt.
Why would wealthy people voting against their own interest bother me? It's funny people like you hate the fact that successful people think it's ok to redistribute their own wealth.
Then why don't they just do it instead of making everyone else do it? Oh yeah they think they'll be part of the elite and get to live as they do now.
The fact that you hide behind a pathetic dodge that you were just "trolling" when clearly obvious you weren't exposes you for worthless piece of shit you are Hondo.
You weren't "trolling" when you claimed that we only allow 60,000 permanent resident immigrants into the country each year. You had your head up your ass. You weren't "trolling" when you swallowed like a bitch the bullshit about Trump cutting money from FEMA. You had your head up your ass.
Were you "trolling" by putting your head up your ass Hondo?
Rent fucking free.
Damn, and I was betting you were going to go with "triggered" Kunt act. Don't go anywhere, Coug will be here shortly to tongue your ass.
Both of you need to shut the fuck up.
You shut the fuck up you filthy socialist pig. Move to Mexico you Marxist swine. The USA will never fall prey to the lies of socialism. It was exposed in the 20th century and further exposed early this century by Venezuela and other failed states. Your movement will be destroyed by force if that need ever comes to pass. You will only succeed over millions of dead American bodies. You want to try it you pansy motherfucker? The same nation that obliterated Nazi Germany and collapsed the Soviet Union will gut and impale your anti-American movement if it ever gains enough steam to become a legitimate threat.
Is this a politics board or is it board where middle aged men can jerk each other off try to show each other how witty they are? It can be both you know.
But for it to be both, people have to actually be willing to discuss politics and not just hide behind their passive agressive Kunt acts when they start wading into deeper waters.
I think you have many interesting political points to make, and I enjoy considering your arguments about politics, even though I mostly disagree with them.
Still, I find myself scrolling past your posts more and more because of your inability to disengage from the pointless exchanges of insults. It's not funny. It doesn't prove anything.
I'm just one guy. Maybe everyone else who reads the Tug disagrees. I doubt it, though.
I too enjoyed the exchange I had with you. Brief as it was. If someone calls me a name I'm going to return fire and if someone makes what is obviously a blatantly false statement when I'm engaging with them I will point it out and then if they respond with some pathetic dodge that they were just "trolling" me or that I was "triggered" I will also highlight what a pathetic fucking Kunt they are.
I've not directed any insults at you and I won't unless I'm greeted with the same.
Squirt and always been one of my favorite posters. Classy and always well thought out.
The 3rd party payer system is the biggest problem we have with our healthcare system. As government got more involved in healthcare taking on more of the costs that's when costs really started to explode. The graph that someone posted here in that other thread illustrated that fact nicely.
What I'd like to do is greatly expand the use of medical savings accounts so that people are contributing to them during all of their working years. Make the contributions pre-taxes, allow the money in the accounts to be invested and only allow healthcare expenditures to be made from the account. When the person dies the account is treated as a personal asset that can be willed to someone else.
If people were more directly involved with what they were paying for their healthcare you'd start to see some market pressure on price. There would be incentive to not just continue medical treatment when there little or no chance of success.
The problem with people being directly involved with what they are paying is the vast majority of medical expenses covered by insurance are not discretionary. You want to buy a car so you shop around and find the car and the price you want or you keep your old car. The medical world isn't like that. I had a kidney stone, I can't go call around for the cheapest place to get treated to find out why it feels like my kidney is giving birth.
So the medical world couldn't advertise the prices they charge for dealing with a kidney stone? Why not?
Because there's no market forces needed for them to do that. The only way to make that happen is through government intervention. Which you are against.
This is beyond stupid. The changes I advocated and clearly stated would create the market forces needed to that. The government wouldn't need to intervene in order make people advertise their prices any more than the government intervenes in order make lasik providers advertise their prices.
Sometimes you need to just keep your mouth shut Hondo.
No there are no market forces causes medical providers to advertise prices because they are not elective. Elective procedures like invisiline and plastic surgery, prices are up front and open. There's no need to advertise Cancer Care or the cost of a CT scan or whatever. Cause if you need one you need it. Now.
But keep calling me stupid. Weren't you just arguing for an end to the name calling and wanting actual discussion?
The 3rd party payer system is the biggest problem we have with our healthcare system. As government got more involved in healthcare taking on more of the costs that's when costs really started to explode. The graph that someone posted here in that other thread illustrated that fact nicely.
What I'd like to do is greatly expand the use of medical savings accounts so that people are contributing to them during all of their working years. Make the contributions pre-taxes, allow the money in the accounts to be invested and only allow healthcare expenditures to be made from the account. When the person dies the account is treated as a personal asset that can be willed to someone else.
If people were more directly involved with what they were paying for their healthcare you'd start to see some market pressure on price. There would be incentive to not just continue medical treatment when there little or no chance of success.
The problem with people being directly involved with what they are paying is the vast majority of medical expenses covered by insurance are not discretionary. You want to buy a car so you shop around and find the car and the price you want or you keep your old car. The medical world isn't like that. I had a kidney stone, I can't go call around for the cheapest place to get treated to find out why it feels like my kidney is giving birth.
So the medical world couldn't advertise the prices they charge for dealing with a kidney stone? Why not?
Because there's no market forces needed for them to do that. The only way to make that happen is through government intervention. Which you are against.
This is beyond stupid. The changes I advocated and clearly stated would create the market forces needed to that. The government wouldn't need to intervene in order make people advertise their prices any more than the government intervenes in order make lasik providers advertise their prices.
Sometimes you need to just keep your mouth shut Hondo.
No there are no market forces causes medical providers to advertise prices because they are not elective. Elective procedures like invisiline and plastic surgery, prices are up front and open. There's no need to advertise Cancer Care or the cost of a CT scan or whatever. Cause if you need one you need it. Now.
But keep calling me stupid. Weren't you just arguing for an end to the name calling and wanting actual discussion?
Fucking stupid would be a better description
It's pretty fucking stupid to believe that most medical procedures aren't elective.
I avoid the tug, but the HSA content has me intrigued...
When your orthopedic surgeon, oncologist etc.. finds out you're on an HDHP associated with a true Health Savings Account (doesn't expire, invest-able, with pretax contributions), all of the bullshit procedures and tests disappear.
They know you can refer yourself to ANY accredited facility without their permission slip.
The same procedure, physical therapy or test you had on your previous plan, is suddenly cheaper.
Its a miracle.
HSAs cover ANYTHING preventative. You get to pick what you want, not what and how Kaiser or Blue Cross dictates.
Of important note: Most folks cannot get past the first year of vesting to capitalize on the benefits of an HSA setup. Takes time to build up the asset and make it work for your health care. Being able to absorb all medical costs the first year while the account builds, can be tough with families.
We will never go back to PPO, cobra or any other setup. And, we've been through some shitty medical outcomes (chemo/radiation, multiple ortho surgeries, hundreds of PT visits, two kids born, etc) and we came out many tens of thousands ahead versus the old "way."
Life saving therapy my wife needed was not at all covered by her work plan - Blue Cross STD/high plan. They refused to cover ANY of it. Experimental they said...
HSA plan negotiated a 60% lower rate for 30 radiation treatments and covered the payments with investment income.
Glad I double-covered her. We would have ate a $300,000 bill for her to be alive today.
The 3rd party payer system is the biggest problem we have with our healthcare system. As government got more involved in healthcare taking on more of the costs that's when costs really started to explode. The graph that someone posted here in that other thread illustrated that fact nicely.
What I'd like to do is greatly expand the use of medical savings accounts so that people are contributing to them during all of their working years. Make the contributions pre-taxes, allow the money in the accounts to be invested and only allow healthcare expenditures to be made from the account. When the person dies the account is treated as a personal asset that can be willed to someone else.
If people were more directly involved with what they were paying for their healthcare you'd start to see some market pressure on price. There would be incentive to not just continue medical treatment when there little or no chance of success.
The problem with people being directly involved with what they are paying is the vast majority of medical expenses covered by insurance are not discretionary. You want to buy a car so you shop around and find the car and the price you want or you keep your old car. The medical world isn't like that. I had a kidney stone, I can't go call around for the cheapest place to get treated to find out why it feels like my kidney is giving birth.
So the medical world couldn't advertise the prices they charge for dealing with a kidney stone? Why not?
Because there's no market forces needed for them to do that. The only way to make that happen is through government intervention. Which you are against.
This is beyond stupid. The changes I advocated and clearly stated would create the market forces needed to that. The government wouldn't need to intervene in order make people advertise their prices any more than the government intervenes in order make lasik providers advertise their prices.
Sometimes you need to just keep your mouth shut Hondo.
No there are no market forces causes medical providers to advertise prices because they are not elective. Elective procedures like invisiline and plastic surgery, prices are up front and open. There's no need to advertise Cancer Care or the cost of a CT scan or whatever. Cause if you need one you need it. Now.
But keep calling me stupid. Weren't you just arguing for an end to the name calling and wanting actual discussion?
Fucking stupid would be a better description
It's pretty fucking stupid to believe that most medical procedures aren't elective.
It's pretty fucking stupid to expect people with the big ticket items like cancer, heart attacks and bypass surgeries are elective.
I avoid the tug, but the HSA content has me intrigued...
When your orthopedic surgeon, oncologist etc.. finds out you're on an HDHP associated with a true Health Savings Account (doesn't expire, invest-able, with pretax contributions), all of the bullshit procedures and tests disappear.
They know you can refer yourself to ANY accredited facility without their permission slip.
The same procedure, physical therapy or test you had on your previous plan, is suddenly cheaper.
Its a miracle.
HSAs cover ANYTHING preventative. You get to pick what you want, not what and how Kaiser or Blue Cross dictates.
Of important note: Most folks cannot get past the first year of vesting to capitalize on the benefits of an HSA setup. Takes time to build up the asset and make it work for your health care. Being able to absorb all medical costs the first year while the account builds, can be tough with families.
We will never go back to PPO, cobra or any other setup. And, we've been through some shitty medical outcomes (chemo/radiation, multiple ortho surgeries, hundreds of PT visits, two kids born, etc) and we came out many tens of thousands ahead versus the old "way."
Life saving therapy my wife needed was not at all covered by her work plan - Blue Cross STD/high plan. They refused to cover ANY of it. Experimental they said...
HSA plan negotiated a 60% lower rate for 30 radiation treatments and covered the payments with investment income.
Glad I double-covered her. We would have ate a $300,000 bill for her to be alive today.
HSAs for the win.
I like plans that create REAL competition amongst/between providers.
The 3rd party payer system is the biggest problem we have with our healthcare system. As government got more involved in healthcare taking on more of the costs that's when costs really started to explode. The graph that someone posted here in that other thread illustrated that fact nicely.
What I'd like to do is greatly expand the use of medical savings accounts so that people are contributing to them during all of their working years. Make the contributions pre-taxes, allow the money in the accounts to be invested and only allow healthcare expenditures to be made from the account. When the person dies the account is treated as a personal asset that can be willed to someone else.
If people were more directly involved with what they were paying for their healthcare you'd start to see some market pressure on price. There would be incentive to not just continue medical treatment when there little or no chance of success.
The problem with people being directly involved with what they are paying is the vast majority of medical expenses covered by insurance are not discretionary. You want to buy a car so you shop around and find the car and the price you want or you keep your old car. The medical world isn't like that. I had a kidney stone, I can't go call around for the cheapest place to get treated to find out why it feels like my kidney is giving birth.
So the medical world couldn't advertise the prices they charge for dealing with a kidney stone? Why not?
Because there's no market forces needed for them to do that. The only way to make that happen is through government intervention. Which you are against.
This is beyond stupid. The changes I advocated and clearly stated would create the market forces needed to that. The government wouldn't need to intervene in order make people advertise their prices any more than the government intervenes in order make lasik providers advertise their prices.
Sometimes you need to just keep your mouth shut Hondo.
No there are no market forces causes medical providers to advertise prices because they are not elective. Elective procedures like invisiline and plastic surgery, prices are up front and open. There's no need to advertise Cancer Care or the cost of a CT scan or whatever. Cause if you need one you need it. Now.
But keep calling me stupid. Weren't you just arguing for an end to the name calling and wanting actual discussion?
Fucking stupid would be a better description
It's pretty fucking stupid to believe that most medical procedures aren't elective.
It's pretty fucking stupid to expect people with the big ticket items like cancer, heart attacks and bypass surgeries are elective.
Hondo moves the goal posts. There is a real pattern to the way you post Hondo.
Did I say all medical procedures are elective Hondo?
Did you fuck strawman ass because your initial statement blew up in your ignorant face?
Comments
And even for a disease like cancer, for example, treatment often doesn't begin instantaneously. It might take a few days to get in for a CT scan or whatever other diagnostic test the doctor might want to run. So there would be time to do a little research.
I agree with you about #3 and there would almost certainly have to be some way to provide additional assistance to people with chronic debilitating illnesses, but we kind of already do that.
* The eventual overthrow of capitalism
* The confiscation of guns so that people are unarmed and unable to fight back against an oppressive government.
* "Racial justice." What does that term even mean? What it means is shit like what is currently happening in South Africa. Seizing assets based on race and redistributing those assets to the victims of 'white privilege.'
* Open borders. They need more people who think like them to grow their numbers so they can consolidate and eventually seize power after an economic crisis. Who better than a bunch of folks from Latin America who come from socialist hellholes and bring that same mode of thinking with them when they come here. They state on their own website that they are waiting, lurking like the snakes that they are, for the right time to strike, just like the Nazis. They are waiting for an economic crisis to make big gains in government. As long as they remain well funded and organized, they will be a threat for the foreseeable future.
* Speech restrictions, hate speech laws.
* Their alliance with Palestinians and Islam. The same Palestinians and Muslims who cheered in the streets and fired off their guns in celebration of 9/11.
* The eventual replacement of the Constitution with their own 'constitution.' Any person who is capable of critical thinking can see where this is all leading. The tearing down of historical statues. The smearing of the founders and America as an inherently racist nation founded by racists and slave traders. The Constitution is a white privilege document to them.
They want to remake America in the vile image of the failed 20th century totalitarian nations of Europe.
I avoid the tug, but the HSA content has me intrigued...
When your orthopedic surgeon, oncologist etc.. finds out you're on an HDHP associated with a true Health Savings Account (doesn't expire, invest-able, with pretax contributions), all of the bullshit procedures and tests disappear.
They know you can refer yourself to ANY accredited facility without their permission slip.
The same procedure, physical therapy or test you had on your previous plan, is suddenly cheaper.
Its a miracle.
HSAs cover ANYTHING preventative. You get to pick what you want, not what and how Kaiser or Blue Cross dictates.
Of important note: Most folks cannot get past the first year of vesting to capitalize on the benefits of an HSA setup. Takes time to build up the asset and make it work for your health care. Being able to absorb all medical costs the first year while the account builds, can be tough with families.
We will never go back to PPO, cobra or any other setup. And, we've been through some shitty medical outcomes (chemo/radiation, multiple ortho surgeries, hundreds of PT visits, two kids born, etc) and we came out many tens of thousands ahead versus the old "way."
Life saving therapy my wife needed was not at all covered by her work plan - Blue Cross STD/high plan. They refused to cover ANY of it. Experimental they said...
HSA plan negotiated a 60% lower rate for 30 radiation treatments and covered the payments with investment income.
Glad I double-covered her. We would have ate a $300,000 bill for her to be alive today.
HSAs for the win.
I like plans that create REAL competition amongst/between providers.
MOAR of this.
Did I say all medical procedures are elective Hondo?
Did you fuck strawman ass because your initial statement blew up in your ignorant face?