Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-23-2017, 10:31 PM   #161
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11,401
Interesting article in the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/o...col-top-region

"For every doctor, there are 16 other health care workers. And half of those 16 are in administrative and other nonclinical roles...."
Meadbh is offline  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 04-24-2017, 05:27 AM   #162
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: The Great Wide Open
Posts: 2,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelover View Post
I have to chuckle at this. At MegaMotors, we knew not only how much every part of every car costs, but how much it cost to paint vs plate that part, how much it cost to install it, to ship it, to replace it, to stock it as a spare. Yet here we have an industry consuming 17% of the largest economy on Earth and we act like understanding where the money goes is an impossibly complex task. Given that we are not stupid, it is obvious that there are forces basically sabotaging any effort for a comprehensive understanding leading to meaningful reform. And, if I had to guess, sniffing backwards on the money trail would lead one straight to the culprits.
I remember years ago reading about the state of US automakers. Opinion was that upper management was a bunch of healthcare experts and not car manufacturing experts.
Winemaker is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 06:56 AM   #163
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 13,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winemaker View Post
I remember years ago reading about the state of US automakers. Opinion was that upper management was a bunch of healthcare experts and not car manufacturing experts.
The industry is complex and can't be summarized into an sound bite, but my point is that complicated systems that involve huge amounts of money can be broken down, analyzed and optimized. When the analysis doesn't happen, it is fair to ask why.
travelover is online now  
Old 04-24-2017, 10:32 AM   #164
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 4,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by LARS View Post
The US spends approximately 17% of GDP annually on healthcare. According to data from the World Bank other industrialized high income nations (like Canada, France, Finland, Germany, Australia, etc.) spend approximately 12%.

If we could reduce the difference by half (or approximately 2.5% which would still leave the US spending 20% more than the average) that would equate to a savings of $500 billion annually. The CBO estimates the cost of ACA at $136 billion a year as a referendum point.

The real discussion ought to be how to increase efficiency, and eliminate waste, in the Healthcare delivery system. We, as a nation, need to understand the reasons why the US spends 42% more on healthcare compared to comparable countries. And using average life expectancy as a proxy suggests the US is not getting its money's worth.
My opinion about healthcare in the USA (It is JMHO), is simply the lawmakers just do not get it. They measure healthcare in costs (to them, the government coffers) instead of citizen coverage. Again IMHO the healthcare model is completely wrong.

Insurance is in business to make a profit, and by design is obliged to avoid paying anything it can, whenever it can and for as long as possible, regardless off the consequences. Their ideal situation for any insurance application is to take a premium and never have to pay out (of course this is the extreme).

Instead we should measure the success of healthcare to how many citizens it covers, NOT how much money can be saved in covering less. In Canada, Australia & Europe, (whatever you wish to call each system), they are all successful BECAUSE they cover ALL their citizens. the US is a failure because it does not. Personal income aside, a governing body has no business deciding who will get healthcare and who will not.

We brandish numbers around as if they are poker chips. 24m people will lose their healthcare if..... 24m people will be covered if we do that. Instead of saying "What do we have to do to ensure ALL our citizens are covered!"

Medicare attempts to achieve that for folks over 65. That is a great start. But still a large percentages of US CITIZENS do not have coverage.

I am trying to avoid using the word insurance as I do not believe healthcare funding should be a For Profit industry.

Costs are important and of course should be controlled, but are costs more important than your life? Of course not. Then why should they be more important for someone else's, the answer is also they are not.

So getting 100% of a countries citizens healthcare coverage should be priority number 1 and costs a close second.

Unfortunately when we seem to be prepared to fund and do anything OTHER than provide decent healthcare for ALL our citizens, this is just a pipe dream for me.
__________________
"Never Argue With a Fool, Onlookers May Not Be Able To Tell the Difference." - Mark Twain
ShokWaveRider is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 10:35 AM   #165
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Fedup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Southern Cal
Posts: 4,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post
My opinion about healthcare in the USA (It is JMHO), is simply the lawmakers just do not get it. They measure healthcare in costs (to them, the government coffers) instead of citizen coverage. Again IMHO the healthcare model is completely wrong.

Insurance is in business to make a profit, and by design is obliged to avoid paying anything it can, whenever it can and for as long as possible, regardless off the consequences. Their ideal situation for any insurance application is to take a premium and never have to pay out (of course this is the extreme).

Instead we should measure the success of healthcare to how many citizens it covers, NOT how much money can be saved. In Canada, Australia & Europe whatever you wish to call each system, are successful BECAUSE, they cover ALL their citizens. the US is a failure because it does not. Personal income aside, a governing body has no business deciding who will get healthcare and who will not.

We brandish numbers around as if they are poker chips. 24m people will lose their healthcare if..... 24m people will be covered if we do that. Instead of saying "What do we have to do to ensure ALL our citizens are covered!"

Medicare attempts to achieve that for folks over 65. That is a great start. But still a large percentages of US CITIZENS do not have coverage.

I am trying to avoid using the word insurance as I do not believe healthcare funding should be a For Profit industry.

Costs are important and of course should be controlled, but are costs more important than your life? Of course not, then why should they be more important for someone else's. The answer is also they are not.

So getting 100% of a countries citizens healthcare coverage should be priority number 1 and costs a close second.

Unfortunately when we seem to be prepared to anything OTHER than provide decent healthcare for ALL our citizens, this is just a pipe dream for me.
You are getting in dangerous territory. Posting political comments here. Maybe it's time for porky pig.
Fedup is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 11:21 AM   #166
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 13,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedup View Post
You are getting in dangerous territory. Posting political comments here. Maybe it's time for porky pig.
I don't see this as overtly political.
travelover is online now  
Old 04-24-2017, 11:26 AM   #167
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 4,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedup View Post
You are getting in dangerous territory. Posting political comments here. Maybe it's time for porky pig.
Which part? Please tell me. It is NOT intended to be political at all. I do not mention anything about politics, only my opinions on healthcare. I do not think it is at all. Seems mentioning anything to do with healthcare gets labeled political.
__________________
"Never Argue With a Fool, Onlookers May Not Be Able To Tell the Difference." - Mark Twain
ShokWaveRider is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 11:33 AM   #168
Administrator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland again!
Posts: 34,837
No worries, the discussion is fine so far. Hopefully it will stay on track...
MichaelB is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 11:42 AM   #169
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
ivinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post
Which part? Please tell me. It is NOT intended to be political at all. I do not mention anything about politics, only my opinions on healthcare. I do not think it is at all. Seems mentioning anything to do with healthcare gets labeled political.
Well insurance companies sell you insurance and the government regulates it so any intense discussion is going to go off in the ditch, it's the nature of beast and the biggest problem we face today re health insurance.
ivinsfan is online now  
Old 04-24-2017, 12:50 PM   #170
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Fedup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Southern Cal
Posts: 4,032
Interesting enough, I think comment like a government body has no business in deciding who gets health care or not is political comment.

I would prefer it to stay out, no ACA, nothing. Will see how that goes. I believe you choose to not think it's political but I think it is. How about giving back all those millions that you made from working in USA so you can get free healthcare.
My husband's uncle is in his 80s and still working in UK. I don't want a system like that either. Somebody has to pay for the tax. While you don't think government has anything to do with it but who pays for them.

Healthcare works fine for my family and other immediate family members. But nobody, emphasis is on nobody demands to have cheap health care so they can retire early. In fact none will retire early. Most will retire in their 70s and only two will retire when he gets Medicare. Not because he needs Medicare but his wife has retiree's insurance.
Fedup is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 12:55 PM   #171
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 4,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedup View Post
Interesting enough, I think comment like a government body has no business in deciding who gets health care or not is political comment.
It would have been if the comment was referring to a specific faction, but it was not. (See Michael & Alan, I am learning)
__________________
"Never Argue With a Fool, Onlookers May Not Be Able To Tell the Difference." - Mark Twain
ShokWaveRider is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 01:01 PM   #172
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Fedup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Southern Cal
Posts: 4,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post
It would have been if the comment was referring to a specific faction, but it was not. (See Michael & Alan, I am learning)
How could it not be? It's a political charge topic even within one party.
Fedup is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 01:04 PM   #173
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,280
Well the main thing now that people worried about relying on the ACA for ER has to think about is that the administration may yet again try to pass a repeal and replace law.

But some of the ideas floated would lead to more uninsured people than the first incarnation of the AHCA and there's talk about giving states the right to revoke community rating, which could lead to higher premiums for older people and those with preexisting conditions.

Meanwhile, it seems the main thrust for health care is to recover a lot of money used for Medicaid expansion, so that that money could be used for tax cuts. The reason they have to pay for tax cuts this way is the budget reconciliation rules, which allow them to pass laws without having to get 60 votes in the Senate.

The president has threatened not to fund some of the cost sharing provisions in the ACA. Specifically, there's something like $7 billion which were allocated to help insurers defray any losses in the exchanges. That deadline is looming soon because by May, insurers will have to commit to staying in the exchanges for 2018.

Refusal to fund these cost-sharing reductions could cause more insurers to leave the exchanges:

Trump, Democrats negotiate on Obamacare cost-sharing payments - Business Insider
explanade is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 01:05 PM   #174
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: The Great Wide Open
Posts: 2,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelover View Post
The industry is complex and can't be summarized into an sound bite, but my point is that complicated systems that involve huge amounts of money can be broken down, analyzed and optimized. When the analysis doesn't happen, it is fair to ask why.
Oh I agree, we engineers tend to add, subtract, multiply and divide everything to death. I also tend to believe that healthcare costs, although variable for a specified demographic, are also analyzed and optimized. That is why some patients are charged more for a procedure than others; someone has to pay the difference somewhere up or down the money trail.
Winemaker is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 01:08 PM   #175
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
ivinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
Well the main thing now that people worried about relying on the ACA for ER has to think about is that the administration may yet again try to pass a repeal and replace law.

But some of the ideas floated would lead to more uninsured people than the first incarnation of the AHCA and there's talk about giving states the right to revoke community rating, which could lead to higher premiums for older people and those with preexisting conditions.

Meanwhile, it seems the main thrust for health care is to recover a lot of money used for Medicaid expansion, so that that money could be used for tax cuts. The reason they have to pay for tax cuts this way is the budget reconciliation rules, which allow them to pass laws without having to get 60 votes in the Senate.

The president has threatened not to fund some of the cost sharing provisions in the ACA. Specifically, there's something like $7 billion which were allocated to help insurers defray any losses in the exchanges. That deadline is looming soon because by May, insurers will have to commit to staying in the exchanges for 2018.

Refusal to fund these cost-sharing reductions could cause more insurers to leave the exchanges:

Trump, Democrats negotiate on Obamacare cost-sharing payments - Business Insider
Here comes the padlock..come on you guys please quit the politics...
ivinsfan is online now  
Old 04-24-2017, 01:09 PM   #176
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Fedup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Southern Cal
Posts: 4,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
Well the main thing now that people worried about relying on the ACA for ER has to think about is that the administration may yet again try to pass a repeal and replace law.

But some of the ideas floated would lead to more uninsured people than the first incarnation of the AHCA and there's talk about giving states the right to revoke community rating, which could lead to higher premiums for older people and those with preexisting conditions.

Meanwhile, it seems the main thrust for health care is to recover a lot of money used for Medicaid expansion, so that that money could be used for tax cuts. The reason they have to pay for tax cuts this way is the budget reconciliation rules, which allow them to pass laws without having to get 60 votes in the Senate.

The president has threatened not to fund some of the cost sharing provisions in the ACA. Specifically, there's something like $7 billion which were allocated to help insurers defray any losses in the exchanges. That deadline is looming soon because by May, insurers will have to commit to staying in the exchanges for 2018.

Refusal to fund these cost-sharing reductions could cause more insurers to leave the exchanges:

Trump, Democrats negotiate on Obamacare cost-sharing payments - Business Insider
I also read they didn't pay insurance company even before Trump was elected.
Fedup is offline  
Old 04-24-2017, 05:19 PM   #177
Administrator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland again!
Posts: 34,837
MichaelB is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
aca. health insurance


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Freaking Out - Please Pardon Cathartic Venting bUU Other topics 98 10-22-2014 02:20 PM
Why are online newspapers so freaking expensive? soupcxan FIRE and Money 62 07-18-2012 07:13 AM
Freaking me out a little dex Other topics 20 07-22-2009 01:56 PM
Vanguard Windsor (Freaking out) arttillygirl Stock Picking and Market Strategy 8 07-16-2008 02:56 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:48 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.