> In all the data, cash prices were often lower than the negotiated prices. This is good for uninsured patients who may be offered cash prices, but it's not gre

> In all the data, cash prices were often lower than the negotiated prices. This is good for uninsured patients who may be offered cash prices, but it's not great for the insured. "One could argue that insured patients who are already paying insurance premiums should not pay more than cash prices," the authors wrote. Um, yes? If you were offered a choice of... - Work for $X/year, which is always 100% paid on time in cash - Work for $Y/year...which is probably mostly paid, within a year-ish, after you have re-re-re-submitted paperwork for that, and fought over whether the salary codes that you applied for payment under are actually covered, and endless other crap. ...then what ratio of X to Y would you consider reasonable? That is pretty much how modern American medical insurance works. And all the "medical" employees who spend their days fighting with insurance companies ain't working for free, either.