3 ms·
Why? Why are insurance companies not demanding cash price and reducing premiums? There should be lawsuits against hospitals, this seems like something which is
by devoply 7y ago
Why? Why are insurance companies not demanding cash price and reducing premiums? There should be lawsuits against hospitals, this seems like something which is generally considered highly illegal at this sort of scale... charging different customers different prices -- especially when the ones paying more are more than capable of taking hospitals to court.
- dantheman 7y agoThe 80/20 Rule could be one reason -- the more they spend on health care, the more they can spend on other things. https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/rate-review/ https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/rate-...
- devoply 7y agoSounds like the government needs to sue both insurance companies and hospitals for collusion to stop this.
- kaibee 7y agoIt's extremely unlikely that there's actual collusion. But actors acting in their selfish best interest can definitely look like collusion.
- pkaye 7y agoI believe this rule came out of the ACA (Obamacare) however all the problems have existed well before that.
- rpmisms 7y agoI'm a generally anti-legislation kind of person, but as long as breaking up big tech is a hot topic, why not pass a bill requiring cash prices for any not-for-profit insurance providers and co-pay networks? There's a lot of interesting competition happening in those spaces, and making not-for-profit insurance a better deal seems like a great way to get capitalism grinding at the issue of overpriced healthcare.
- DaiPlusPlus 7y agoThat doesn’t work for emergency care - where the patient really doesn’t have the time to go window-shopping while having a cardiac arrest. And while greater transparency is good - not everyone in the public is able - or willing - to understand a medical price-sheet and might opt for a cheaper but medically-inappropriate procedure with similar-sounding-name to the procedure they actually need.
- PorterDuff 7y agoI would prefer a system where they charge everyone the same amount. It wouldn't surprise me if the insurance companies would be in favor of that, the whole price negotiation overhead goes out the window.
- youeseh 7y agoHospitals could also be charging insurance companies more, but not for subsidizing cash patients but for greater profit.
- vonmoltke 7y agoFor-profit hospitals, maybe, but what about the non-profit ones?
- moate 7y ago"non-profit" doesn't mean "doesn't make money" its just rules on how you have to spend that money. There's nothing saying a non-profit can't raise prices of service and then expand the hospital to buy a new wing, or better equipment or hire more doctors. They need the money to provide their services.
- vonmoltke 7y agoI understand that, but there is a limited amount of that which can be done before it becomes spending for spending's sake, which is pointless. Also "expand the hospital to buy a new wing, or better equipment or hire more doctors" sounds like exactly what they should be doing, because it means they can service more people at a higher standard of care (which is the reason they exist in the first place).
- pkaye 7y agoI found this interesting article on the situation. They say 1/3 are profitable, 1/3 are break even and 1/3 are losing money. And a lot of those losing money are in rural areas. And "In general, hospitals lose money on Medicare and Medicaid patients, but make up for that by charging private-sector insurers more." https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/hospitals-made-21b-wall-street-last-year-are-patients-seeing-n845176 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/hospitals-mad...