FWIW: The bill wasn't $69,000, it was $2,500. People need to stop quoting bills before insurance discounts. Hospitals always use ridiculous numbers. They do th

FWIW: The bill wasn't $69,000, it was $2,500. People need to stop quoting bills before insurance discounts. Hospitals always use ridiculous numbers. They do this for the insurance, not for you. For the example in the article, NOBODY pays that much, uninsured included. If you are uninsured, a simple phone call would get this particular bill reduced to $5,000 or so. Sure, it is still a lot, but it's not $69,000. Note that some/many states REQUIRE hospitals to have financial assistance, and those that don't typically have judges that frown upon absurd costs, especially considering the insured/uninsured data becomes factual information in the lawsuit should the defendant hire a competent lawyer. (Translation: if the average person + insurance pays less than you are being sued for out of pocket, the hospital will win a judgement, but not for the amount they are demanding, that is provided you fight it and either make smart arguments or get a lawyer) Note that I'm not advocating for "paid" or "for-profit" healthcare here, rather, I'd like to see people use factual information for the basis of an argument against an unpopular subject. I am socialist, and I've been trying to get Bernie and others elected to office for years.