7 ms·

>As a South Korean citizen it is jarring that other countries including the US and Japan isn't really trying to test people. It's apparently quite expensive he

>As a South Korean citizen it is jarring that other countries including the US and Japan isn't really trying to test people. It's apparently quite expensive here. Federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, while one reported cost [0] for the test is: >$3,270 two weeks after his test. He will be responsible for $1,400 of that bill. That's almost 10% of my annual gross before insurance and I have almost 14 years at my job. For someone working a minimum wage job that's more than 11 week's gross income. I imagine they are limiting the number of tests on people that could have any number of other things and waiting for symptoms to strongly point towards the virus due to the simple fact that the tests cost so much. If a patient can't pay, whatever hospital has to carry that cost for potentially years before the patient can repay them (or not get paid at all if it pushes someone to bankruptcy). Until the government sets aside money to subsidize the tests, I imagine the testing rates will remain low. [0] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronavirus-test-medical-bill-china-us-miami-osmel-martinez-azcue-a9358146.html?amp&utm_source=reddit.com https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronaviru...

pcr910303 7y ago
Hmm, I’m not really familiar with US’s medical system... so some questions: * Does that mean someone who gets minimum wage (which probably doesn’t have an additional health insurance except for a default one) needs to pay for $1400 to test? (If true, that’s insane - why does the government only take cares of $1700 and not something like $3000?) * Does people who come from Wuhan/other places where COVID-19 is spreading (lets say an american that comes from Daegu - the district with the most patients in Korea) also have to pay the high price to be tested?
- magduf 7y ago
  The US medical system is a complete disaster. Basically, the government doesn't pay for anything; only private insurers do. And they try to avoid paying for as much as they can get away with. On top of that, the actual cost of care is far, far higher than in other developed nations for the same procedures, due to many systemic problems.
  - pmoriarty 7y ago
    "Basically, the government doesn't pay for anything; only private insurers do." That's not true. Poor people can get Medicaid, old people can get Medicare, and there are also various other ways of getting one's health care expenses subsidized by the government if you're poor or have medical reasons for not being able to work. Just to be clear: I'm for 100% state-funded medical care, but it's simply not true that "the government doesn't pay for anything; only private insurers do". The government does pay for quite a lot, even if many people in the US don't qualify for such aid. They absolutely should qualify for such aid, in my view, but my opinion doesn't change anything. Some people qualify, some don't, and the government does pay for some, and private insurance does not pay for absolutely everything in the US. These are just facts.
    - intortus 7y ago
      If you're poor and you live in the South (and certain other states), you can NOT get Medicaid. Unfortunately this decision was left up to each state. And even in states where you might be eligible, it's not going to help you (or the public) if you haven't enrolled.
    - karatestomp 7y ago
      Tricare for active and retired military and their families. Whatever the Federal government does for health care which I assume is some kind of government-managed insurance pool. Not sure how state, county, and city workers are covered (might be through private plans, might vary state to state). Lots and lots of people already have "government healthcare". Just not enough.
    - barretts 7y ago
      You're focused on the trees, not the forest. The prior commenter is right: Unless you are very poor (and get Medicaid) or old (and get Medicare), most Americans receive no government assistance for healthcare.
  - MisterBastahrd 7y ago
    The US is a disaster. Even if everyone in the country caught the virus, and 2% of the population died from it as a result, we'd still be in the same exact situation because there's a majority of people who believe that reality is biased and that some people need to suffer. There would be a huge part of the population who would see the lack of government response (due to a lack of funding and leadership) as a fundamental reason for why we should reduce the role of government influence in these situations.
- kittiepryde 7y ago
  Most minimum wage workers also don't have health insurance ( at least in my hometown area ), and that means they'd be in the hook for the entire amount.
  - pcr910303 7y ago
    > Most minimum wage workers also don't have health insurance Oh, I thought that the government provides a default one; realized that US doesn’t have a ‘default’ insurance from the sibling comment. > that means they'd be in the hook for the entire amount. Thats... insane and sad.
    - pmoriarty 7y ago
      From what I understand, under the so-called "Obamacare" legislation, everyone in the US has to have insurance, and if they can't afford it then it'll be subsidized to some extent by the government. You do have to be poor enough to qualify for such subsidies, though.
      - mminer237 7y ago
        "Poor enough" means you make less than ~$50,000 for a single person though. (Twice that for a family of four.) That puts you in the top 20% in the US and would be the top 10% in most of Europe.
        nimish 7y ago
        It's up to 400% of the FPL and that only gets you a "credit", you're still liable for the premiums up to about 10% of your income. Plus any other "features" like deductibles, copays and coinsurance.
      - jsight 7y ago
        The requirement to have insurance has been dropped.
      - owenmarshall 7y ago
- TomVDB 7y ago
  > If true, that’s insane - why does the government only take cares of $1700 and not something like $3000?) Because a government that does healthcare is socialism that that's considered inherently evil by many. And you're right: the healthcare system is absolutely insane. If you can afford it (like I do), it's obviously world class in its medical abilities, but it's a disaster in terms of administrative overhead and its inability to serve the general population.
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    The funny thing is that a government doing healthcare is not socialism at all. It's just good stewardship over something that is too much of a temptation for the capitalists to handle properly because 'life is priceless'.
    - dTal 7y ago
      >not socialism at all. It's just good stewardship over something that is too much of a temptation for the capitalists to handle properly That's what socialism is.
- ryanmercer 7y ago
  >needs to pay for $1400 to test? The individual in that article likely had reasonably good insurance, someone earning minimum wage likely would have insurance that would cover very little if anything and they'd likely owe the entire 3* amount. The countries doing lots of testing are basically countries with socialized medicine, the cost is being passed on to the tax payers. For the United States you are responsible for your medical costs, if you are fortunate you have good insurance that will cover varying percentages of your medical insurance. I have 'good' insurance, several years ago I required hospitalization and ended up incurring somewhere between 13 and 15k USD in bills for about 30 hours in the hospital and the ambulance ride. I ended up paying something like 12-13% of that. At a start I personally owed 100 USD for every single doctor that touched my case which ended up being 5 doctors if I recall correctly, only 3 of which I ever met. In this instance the hospital was very courteous and allowed me to set up a payment plan and repay them, interest free, over many months. I paid the debt off over a year and a half if I recall correctly. They then wanted more blood over the next several days and had to see a primary care physician to get my medical leave paperwork filled out and those two things cost me another 200-300 USD after insurance.
  - pcr910303 7y ago
    > The individual in that article likely had reasonably good insurance, someone earning minimum wage likely would have insurance that would cover very little if anything and they'd likely owe the entire 3* amount. That’s worser than I thought :-( I was thinking that $1400 is too pricey to anybody — turns out that it was higher for people who don’t have insurance. > For the United States you are responsible for your medical costs Is this a culture/mind difference, or does everybody in the US doesn’t like this but has no time to fix it? Genuinely interested, as most people in our country almost everybody relies on only the default insurance — is this a cultural difference between the US(western world) and here? Are countries in the Europe similar?
    - ryanmercer 7y ago
      >Is this a culture/mind difference, or does everybody in the US doesn’t like this but has no time to fix it? This is just the way it is. We don't know anything else and when you start talking about changing it a lot of people lash out and can get quite heated. Our government is not the best at managing things efficiently, socialized medicine means it gets paid via taxes, the medical and drug companies have lobbyists and can largely get away with setting whatever prices they want right now, etc. Personally I'd be fairly hesitant to get on board with socialized medicine here in the United States purely for the fact I would fear it would be just as corrupt and I don't know if the increased taxes would be more than I pay for my insurance currently considering my employer pays more of the cost of my insurance than I do and I doubt that sudden savings would be passed on to me as increased pay.
- mtalantikite 7y ago
  The healthcare system in the US is a shameful mess, but for someone that makes minimum wage they'll likely be on Medicaid, which is one of the US government's health programs. It's complicated, but likely in that case a person getting a blood test won't have to pay anywhere near the $3000 or $1700 amount. It'd probably be free, but I say probably because it's possible that your blood test gets sent to a lab that isn't Medicaid approved and who pays for it gets complicated at that point. In the example case given from the article, that person likely made too much money to qualify for Medicaid, so they probably have a bad health insurance plan that has a high deductible. Which is why they're getting stuck with a huge bill for something that really shouldn't cost anywhere near $3000. Anyone that pretends that the way the US health care system functions right now is good is either lying or an idiot. Edit: As another person pointed out, to complicate things even more every state has a different implementation of Medicaid. If you're in one of those states that believes your poverty is your own fault, you probably have no health coverage at all.
  - pcr910303 7y ago
    > in that case a person getting a blood test won't have to pay anywhere near the $3000 or $1700 amount. It'd probably be free Oh, that’s much, much more assuring to know. Looks like > Anyone that pretends that the way the US health care system functions right now is good is either lying or an idiot. Looks like the general consensus of HN agrees; I hope the US decides to overhaul the healthcare system to provide better care if everything I’m hearing in this thread is true, it’s a topic that’s saddening to hear about.
  - mnm1 7y ago
    Someone making the federal minimum wage working full time makes $15,080 a year. For an individual to be eligible for Medicaid, they have to make (for 2019) less than $17236.20 a year (138% * Federal Policy Level $12,490). So yes, in states that don't have a higher minimum wage, they would just barely be covered, but millions of people making minimum wage in states that have raised the minimum wage or making just above minimum wage are not covered by Medicaid. In such a case, it's better to make less money by working less rather than lose that insurance because Medicaid is great insurance while what is available at such jobs is likely garbage. And of course, there are the asshole states that did not expand Medicaid coverage. In those states, people making such little money are fucked. The ACA may help with discounts but I doubt any reasonable insurance can be had. Hell, I can't find decent insurance through the ACA in my state and I'm willing to pay anything. Super fucked up. I totally agree that people who defend this system are assholes or idiots. No other way around it.
- alistairSH 7y ago
  All the sibling comments touch on valid points. I'm going to try and summarize them for clarity. - The US has a few nationalized (single-payer) insurance programs... TriCare for military, Medicare for retirees, and Medicaid for the indigent. - Obtaining Medicaid is not easy - you have to be truly indigent in many states (it's federally funded, but states manage their own programs) - Everybody else is left to buy their own insurance policy. Sometimes this is partially funded by an employer, but not always. - Due to the high cost of insurance (and health care in general), many plans have very high copays and deductibles. So, even with an average health instance policy, a person could be stuck with the full cost of that test because of a deductible. In the past, I've had deductibles as high as $5000/individual, $12,000/family (note: I don't know, we're back on a PPO with a $2000 deductible). When I use a medical service, I usually receive a statement that lists retail prices for services rendered, negotiated fees (between MD and insurance), and sometimes an excess amount that I owe. If the hospital is "out of network" (no contract between insurance and hospital), I could be due a larger chunk of the bill personally (up to 100%, depending on insurance plan). This is called "balance billing" - google will give you all sorts of insane results from $50,000 helicopter rides to entire hospital centers that don't work with a single insurance provider so they can bill whatever they want. As noted elsewhere, it's a complete mess and embarrassment for one of the wealthiest nations on the planet.
  - FalconSensei 7y ago
    That's crazy. But what I think is: considering that's an epidemic that is dangerous and quickly spreading, shouldn't the government just decide to test people coming from places with a lot of cases already? And pay for it?
    - alistairSH 7y ago
      One would think that was obvious. But, we elected a deranged sociopath who placed a religious zealot with a poor history of dealing with public health issues in charge of managing the government's response to the emerging pandemic, so here we are.
    - mrguyorama 7y ago
- FalconSensei 7y ago
  What's crazy about this is that, by "saving money" on asking people to pay for their tests, people won't get tested, spreading it more, causing more deaths and cases. Which I think is more expensive than the tests...
- cmurf 7y ago
  Medicaid covers poor people and children, and is the largest single way people are covered in the entire U.S. It is managed by each state, with some federal subsidies. Someone who makes the minimum wage, working full time, will make ~$22,000 per year, and that is above the income limit in my state. Therefore they will not qualify for state Medicaid. They will have to pay out of pocket for this test, whatever their private for-profit health care plan does not pay. And whether they get their own health care plan, or the employer pays some of it through an employer provided health care plan, depends on how many employees the company has. And in fact it's no longer compulsory that individuals even have a health care plan, the individual mandate no longer exists. And there is no such thing as an option to buy into a public plan, either Medicaid or Medicare (people over 65). If this person worked part time instead, they'd actually be in a better position in terms of health care, where Medicaid would pretty much cover the cost of this test.
  - heavyset_go 7y ago
    > Medicaid covers poor people Only in states that expanded Medicaid under the ACA. The entire South and much of the mid-West didn't expand Medicaid.
- ab_testing 7y ago
  The government does not take care of anything. Almost all health insurance for working age adults is private - provided either by their employer or bought on a government run exchange. Among those private insurances, usually the insurance pays around 1/2 and the worker pays half. So you are stuck with a $1700 if you get tested. Also minimum wage in the Us ranges from $7 to about $15 in very expensive areas. So depending on you let salary you are left with 2 choices 1. Get tested if you have a severe flu or cold like symptoms and not eat and pay rent for a few weeks. 2. Tough it out , wait a few days/weeks and hope it goes away.
- pyuser583 7y ago
  It’s what the persons health insurance company would be charged. Except it wouldn’t. It’s really more of a starting point for the negotiations between the insurance company and the hospital. What’s paid at the end is anyone’s guess.
allovernow 7y ago
Looks like we can add healthcare reform to the list of potential geopolitical consequences to this virus. Time to see if the U.S. medical establishment is really as dire as many claim online. If what you're saying is true about prices, there really will be a full blown outbreak if people can't afford to be tested. I presume some sort of emergency order will be given Nationwide to make testing available for free.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
  > Looks like we can add healthcare reform to the list of potential geopolitical consequences to this virus. Only if someone takes action, which will likely only happen with public outcry, which will also only likely happen if a whole lot of people die or at least a few celebrities. I'd wager money against it.
  - cmurf 7y ago
    I agree, in particular with this puerile illness of celebrity worship and adoration. But part of why it would shock the conscience? Quite a lot of the serfs, spending upwards of $1000 a month for "health care", assume that they are not too far removed from the VIP health care celebrities have access to. If a celebrity dies, a true aristocrat and pinnacle of American greatness, then wow anyone could die! SHOCK! It's a total lack of imagination about reality, and using imagination for bullshit instead.
  - owenmarshall 7y ago
    > Only if someone takes action, which will likely only happen with public outcry, which will also only likely happen if a whole lot of people die or at least a few celebrities. I think your ultimate conclusion is far too cynical and pessimistic. The popularity of universal healthcare just in the last 15 years has gone from "herpes" to "acceptable as long as it is a business-driven solution that doesn't rock the boat too much" to "you're disqualified from running for the Democratic nomination for the presidency if this isn't at the heart of your campaign". It polls extremely well on a bipartisan basis, and why shouldn't it? Insurance companies are almost unanimously loathed. Seventy+ percent popularity for healthcare reform plus the possibility of a national crisis that could stretch our systems to the breaking point, damage the economy, and cause individual spending? This could be the push that finally brings a national health system to the US.
jacquesm 7y ago
And that assumes you only need the one test.
roywiggins 7y ago
And that was a flu test, not a coronavirus test.

pcr910303 7y ago

Hmm, I’m not really familiar with US’s medical system... so some questions: * Does that mean someone who gets minimum wage (which probably doesn’t have an additional health insurance except for a default one) needs to pay for $1400 to test? (If true, that’s insane - why does the government only take cares of $1700 and not something like $3000?) * Does people who come from Wuhan/other places where COVID-19 is spreading (lets say an american that comes from Daegu - the district with the most patients in Korea) also have to pay the high price to be tested?

magduf 7y ago
The US medical system is a complete disaster. Basically, the government doesn't pay for anything; only private insurers do. And they try to avoid paying for as much as they can get away with. On top of that, the actual cost of care is far, far higher than in other developed nations for the same procedures, due to many systemic problems.
- pmoriarty 7y ago
  "Basically, the government doesn't pay for anything; only private insurers do." That's not true. Poor people can get Medicaid, old people can get Medicare, and there are also various other ways of getting one's health care expenses subsidized by the government if you're poor or have medical reasons for not being able to work. Just to be clear: I'm for 100% state-funded medical care, but it's simply not true that "the government doesn't pay for anything; only private insurers do". The government does pay for quite a lot, even if many people in the US don't qualify for such aid. They absolutely should qualify for such aid, in my view, but my opinion doesn't change anything. Some people qualify, some don't, and the government does pay for some, and private insurance does not pay for absolutely everything in the US. These are just facts.
  - intortus 7y ago
    If you're poor and you live in the South (and certain other states), you can NOT get Medicaid. Unfortunately this decision was left up to each state. And even in states where you might be eligible, it's not going to help you (or the public) if you haven't enrolled.
  - karatestomp 7y ago
    Tricare for active and retired military and their families. Whatever the Federal government does for health care which I assume is some kind of government-managed insurance pool. Not sure how state, county, and city workers are covered (might be through private plans, might vary state to state). Lots and lots of people already have "government healthcare". Just not enough.
  - barretts 7y ago
    You're focused on the trees, not the forest. The prior commenter is right: Unless you are very poor (and get Medicaid) or old (and get Medicare), most Americans receive no government assistance for healthcare.
- MisterBastahrd 7y ago
  The US is a disaster. Even if everyone in the country caught the virus, and 2% of the population died from it as a result, we'd still be in the same exact situation because there's a majority of people who believe that reality is biased and that some people need to suffer. There would be a huge part of the population who would see the lack of government response (due to a lack of funding and leadership) as a fundamental reason for why we should reduce the role of government influence in these situations.
kittiepryde 7y ago
Most minimum wage workers also don't have health insurance ( at least in my hometown area ), and that means they'd be in the hook for the entire amount.
- pcr910303 7y ago
  > Most minimum wage workers also don't have health insurance Oh, I thought that the government provides a default one; realized that US doesn’t have a ‘default’ insurance from the sibling comment. > that means they'd be in the hook for the entire amount. Thats... insane and sad.
  - pmoriarty 7y ago
    From what I understand, under the so-called "Obamacare" legislation, everyone in the US has to have insurance, and if they can't afford it then it'll be subsidized to some extent by the government. You do have to be poor enough to qualify for such subsidies, though.
    - mminer237 7y ago
      "Poor enough" means you make less than ~$50,000 for a single person though. (Twice that for a family of four.) That puts you in the top 20% in the US and would be the top 10% in most of Europe.
      - nimish 7y ago
        It's up to 400% of the FPL and that only gets you a "credit", you're still liable for the premiums up to about 10% of your income. Plus any other "features" like deductibles, copays and coinsurance.
    - jsight 7y ago
      The requirement to have insurance has been dropped.
    - owenmarshall 7y ago
TomVDB 7y ago
> If true, that’s insane - why does the government only take cares of $1700 and not something like $3000?) Because a government that does healthcare is socialism that that's considered inherently evil by many. And you're right: the healthcare system is absolutely insane. If you can afford it (like I do), it's obviously world class in its medical abilities, but it's a disaster in terms of administrative overhead and its inability to serve the general population.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  The funny thing is that a government doing healthcare is not socialism at all. It's just good stewardship over something that is too much of a temptation for the capitalists to handle properly because 'life is priceless'.
  - dTal 7y ago
    >not socialism at all. It's just good stewardship over something that is too much of a temptation for the capitalists to handle properly That's what socialism is.
ryanmercer 7y ago
>needs to pay for $1400 to test? The individual in that article likely had reasonably good insurance, someone earning minimum wage likely would have insurance that would cover very little if anything and they'd likely owe the entire 3* amount. The countries doing lots of testing are basically countries with socialized medicine, the cost is being passed on to the tax payers. For the United States you are responsible for your medical costs, if you are fortunate you have good insurance that will cover varying percentages of your medical insurance. I have 'good' insurance, several years ago I required hospitalization and ended up incurring somewhere between 13 and 15k USD in bills for about 30 hours in the hospital and the ambulance ride. I ended up paying something like 12-13% of that. At a start I personally owed 100 USD for every single doctor that touched my case which ended up being 5 doctors if I recall correctly, only 3 of which I ever met. In this instance the hospital was very courteous and allowed me to set up a payment plan and repay them, interest free, over many months. I paid the debt off over a year and a half if I recall correctly. They then wanted more blood over the next several days and had to see a primary care physician to get my medical leave paperwork filled out and those two things cost me another 200-300 USD after insurance.
- pcr910303 7y ago
  > The individual in that article likely had reasonably good insurance, someone earning minimum wage likely would have insurance that would cover very little if anything and they'd likely owe the entire 3* amount. That’s worser than I thought :-( I was thinking that $1400 is too pricey to anybody — turns out that it was higher for people who don’t have insurance. > For the United States you are responsible for your medical costs Is this a culture/mind difference, or does everybody in the US doesn’t like this but has no time to fix it? Genuinely interested, as most people in our country almost everybody relies on only the default insurance — is this a cultural difference between the US(western world) and here? Are countries in the Europe similar?
  - ryanmercer 7y ago
    >Is this a culture/mind difference, or does everybody in the US doesn’t like this but has no time to fix it? This is just the way it is. We don't know anything else and when you start talking about changing it a lot of people lash out and can get quite heated. Our government is not the best at managing things efficiently, socialized medicine means it gets paid via taxes, the medical and drug companies have lobbyists and can largely get away with setting whatever prices they want right now, etc. Personally I'd be fairly hesitant to get on board with socialized medicine here in the United States purely for the fact I would fear it would be just as corrupt and I don't know if the increased taxes would be more than I pay for my insurance currently considering my employer pays more of the cost of my insurance than I do and I doubt that sudden savings would be passed on to me as increased pay.
mtalantikite 7y ago
The healthcare system in the US is a shameful mess, but for someone that makes minimum wage they'll likely be on Medicaid, which is one of the US government's health programs. It's complicated, but likely in that case a person getting a blood test won't have to pay anywhere near the $3000 or $1700 amount. It'd probably be free, but I say probably because it's possible that your blood test gets sent to a lab that isn't Medicaid approved and who pays for it gets complicated at that point. In the example case given from the article, that person likely made too much money to qualify for Medicaid, so they probably have a bad health insurance plan that has a high deductible. Which is why they're getting stuck with a huge bill for something that really shouldn't cost anywhere near $3000. Anyone that pretends that the way the US health care system functions right now is good is either lying or an idiot. Edit: As another person pointed out, to complicate things even more every state has a different implementation of Medicaid. If you're in one of those states that believes your poverty is your own fault, you probably have no health coverage at all.
- pcr910303 7y ago
  > in that case a person getting a blood test won't have to pay anywhere near the $3000 or $1700 amount. It'd probably be free Oh, that’s much, much more assuring to know. Looks like > Anyone that pretends that the way the US health care system functions right now is good is either lying or an idiot. Looks like the general consensus of HN agrees; I hope the US decides to overhaul the healthcare system to provide better care if everything I’m hearing in this thread is true, it’s a topic that’s saddening to hear about.
- mnm1 7y ago
  Someone making the federal minimum wage working full time makes $15,080 a year. For an individual to be eligible for Medicaid, they have to make (for 2019) less than $17236.20 a year (138% * Federal Policy Level $12,490). So yes, in states that don't have a higher minimum wage, they would just barely be covered, but millions of people making minimum wage in states that have raised the minimum wage or making just above minimum wage are not covered by Medicaid. In such a case, it's better to make less money by working less rather than lose that insurance because Medicaid is great insurance while what is available at such jobs is likely garbage. And of course, there are the asshole states that did not expand Medicaid coverage. In those states, people making such little money are fucked. The ACA may help with discounts but I doubt any reasonable insurance can be had. Hell, I can't find decent insurance through the ACA in my state and I'm willing to pay anything. Super fucked up. I totally agree that people who defend this system are assholes or idiots. No other way around it.
alistairSH 7y ago
All the sibling comments touch on valid points. I'm going to try and summarize them for clarity. - The US has a few nationalized (single-payer) insurance programs... TriCare for military, Medicare for retirees, and Medicaid for the indigent. - Obtaining Medicaid is not easy - you have to be truly indigent in many states (it's federally funded, but states manage their own programs) - Everybody else is left to buy their own insurance policy. Sometimes this is partially funded by an employer, but not always. - Due to the high cost of insurance (and health care in general), many plans have very high copays and deductibles. So, even with an average health instance policy, a person could be stuck with the full cost of that test because of a deductible. In the past, I've had deductibles as high as $5000/individual, $12,000/family (note: I don't know, we're back on a PPO with a $2000 deductible). When I use a medical service, I usually receive a statement that lists retail prices for services rendered, negotiated fees (between MD and insurance), and sometimes an excess amount that I owe. If the hospital is "out of network" (no contract between insurance and hospital), I could be due a larger chunk of the bill personally (up to 100%, depending on insurance plan). This is called "balance billing" - google will give you all sorts of insane results from $50,000 helicopter rides to entire hospital centers that don't work with a single insurance provider so they can bill whatever they want. As noted elsewhere, it's a complete mess and embarrassment for one of the wealthiest nations on the planet.
- FalconSensei 7y ago
  That's crazy. But what I think is: considering that's an epidemic that is dangerous and quickly spreading, shouldn't the government just decide to test people coming from places with a lot of cases already? And pay for it?
  - alistairSH 7y ago
    One would think that was obvious. But, we elected a deranged sociopath who placed a religious zealot with a poor history of dealing with public health issues in charge of managing the government's response to the emerging pandemic, so here we are.
  - mrguyorama 7y ago
FalconSensei 7y ago
What's crazy about this is that, by "saving money" on asking people to pay for their tests, people won't get tested, spreading it more, causing more deaths and cases. Which I think is more expensive than the tests...
cmurf 7y ago
Medicaid covers poor people and children, and is the largest single way people are covered in the entire U.S. It is managed by each state, with some federal subsidies. Someone who makes the minimum wage, working full time, will make ~$22,000 per year, and that is above the income limit in my state. Therefore they will not qualify for state Medicaid. They will have to pay out of pocket for this test, whatever their private for-profit health care plan does not pay. And whether they get their own health care plan, or the employer pays some of it through an employer provided health care plan, depends on how many employees the company has. And in fact it's no longer compulsory that individuals even have a health care plan, the individual mandate no longer exists. And there is no such thing as an option to buy into a public plan, either Medicaid or Medicare (people over 65). If this person worked part time instead, they'd actually be in a better position in terms of health care, where Medicaid would pretty much cover the cost of this test.
- heavyset_go 7y ago
  > Medicaid covers poor people Only in states that expanded Medicaid under the ACA. The entire South and much of the mid-West didn't expand Medicaid.
ab_testing 7y ago
The government does not take care of anything. Almost all health insurance for working age adults is private - provided either by their employer or bought on a government run exchange. Among those private insurances, usually the insurance pays around 1/2 and the worker pays half. So you are stuck with a $1700 if you get tested. Also minimum wage in the Us ranges from $7 to about $15 in very expensive areas. So depending on you let salary you are left with 2 choices 1. Get tested if you have a severe flu or cold like symptoms and not eat and pay rent for a few weeks. 2. Tough it out , wait a few days/weeks and hope it goes away.
pyuser583 7y ago
It’s what the persons health insurance company would be charged. Except it wouldn’t. It’s really more of a starting point for the negotiations between the insurance company and the hospital. What’s paid at the end is anyone’s guess.

allovernow 7y ago

Looks like we can add healthcare reform to the list of potential geopolitical consequences to this virus. Time to see if the U.S. medical establishment is really as dire as many claim online. If what you're saying is true about prices, there really will be a full blown outbreak if people can't afford to be tested. I presume some sort of emergency order will be given Nationwide to make testing available for free.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
> Looks like we can add healthcare reform to the list of potential geopolitical consequences to this virus. Only if someone takes action, which will likely only happen with public outcry, which will also only likely happen if a whole lot of people die or at least a few celebrities. I'd wager money against it.
- cmurf 7y ago
  I agree, in particular with this puerile illness of celebrity worship and adoration. But part of why it would shock the conscience? Quite a lot of the serfs, spending upwards of $1000 a month for "health care", assume that they are not too far removed from the VIP health care celebrities have access to. If a celebrity dies, a true aristocrat and pinnacle of American greatness, then wow anyone could die! SHOCK! It's a total lack of imagination about reality, and using imagination for bullshit instead.
- owenmarshall 7y ago
  > Only if someone takes action, which will likely only happen with public outcry, which will also only likely happen if a whole lot of people die or at least a few celebrities. I think your ultimate conclusion is far too cynical and pessimistic. The popularity of universal healthcare just in the last 15 years has gone from "herpes" to "acceptable as long as it is a business-driven solution that doesn't rock the boat too much" to "you're disqualified from running for the Democratic nomination for the presidency if this isn't at the heart of your campaign". It polls extremely well on a bipartisan basis, and why shouldn't it? Insurance companies are almost unanimously loathed. Seventy+ percent popularity for healthcare reform plus the possibility of a national crisis that could stretch our systems to the breaking point, damage the economy, and cause individual spending? This could be the push that finally brings a national health system to the US.

jacquesm 7y ago

And that assumes you only need the one test.

roywiggins 7y ago

And that was a flu test, not a coronavirus test.