6 ms·

I hate the fact that I am being forced to do business with companies I don't trust (insurance companies) or face being penalized with fines.

jbooth 13y ago
Unless you have enough liquid cash to self-insure against high medical costs, then you're just hating the fact that you can't freeload on the rest of us who pay for insurance.
- nickpinkston 13y ago
  I think he wants better / more insurance options and for government policy to not favor incumbent firms / thinking.
  - joshontheweb 13y ago
    This. We need to focus on why the costs are so high, not how to pay for such high costs. I shouldn't NEED insurance. It should be an option if I'd like to spread out financial risk.
    - snowwrestler 13y ago
      The costs are so high because certain treatments are expensive; they are expensive because it took very large investments to create them; and it took such large investments because it's extremely difficult to treat many diseases and injuries. I'm in total agreement that standard, "old" services like a physical or strep test or penicillin should be paid out of pocket and subject to market forces, just like food and clothing are (two other "life-critical" industries). But it's a very big step from there to not needing health insurance at all. If you get hit by a car doing 30mph and survive, there is no getting around the fact that your treatment is going to be very expensive. IMO that exactly what insurance should be for.
      - joshontheweb 13y ago
        Perhaps in some cases. But $90 for a bag of saline seems to signify a pretty broken pricing model.
      - nickpinkston 13y ago
        Most things you're talking about are either end-of-life care type of stuff like cancer, or something rare like Cystic Fibrosis. - Typical procedures used for common infections, broken bones, etc. don't require anything much that wasn't around 50 years ago. - You might say: CT scanners, MRIs, etc, but the reason these are expensive is market structure (i.e. someone will pay for it...), not a fundamental engineering reason - i.e. the MRI isn't required to be made form gold. Also note that this is one of the few (only?) industries where the same device w/ same features increases in price over time - because of monopolistic shit from patents, FDA barriers, etc.
    - nickpinkston 13y ago
      For sure - this is my problem with Obamacare. It's reinforcing the cost structure, not trying to change it.
- fennecfoxen 13y ago
  That would be a fairer dig if: * he were free to actually purchase catastrophic health care coverage instead of the bureaucratic "minimum" politically-acceptable coverage * he was free to pay for said insurance at a rate approximating his actual risk, i.e. he's actually buying insurance, not something that's insurance plus a government-mandated wealth-transfer mechanism from the young and healthy to the elderly and infirm But even so, who's to say that people shouldn't be allowed to take risks with their own life and limb? Meh.
  - emperorcezar 13y ago
    > But even so, who's to say that people shouldn't be allowed to take risks with their own life and limb? Meh. That would be fair if he signed a waiver that stated he denied any care if they drop him off in the emergency room. If he's in an accident and unconscious, they are going to take him to the hospital where he'll be treating insurance or not. Without insurance that cost will more likely than not just be spread around.
    - fennecfoxen 13y ago
      ... and thank you for demonstrating exactly who's-to-say.
    - joshontheweb 13y ago
      Just because I don't have insurance doesn't mean I can't/won't pay for emergency care.
      - emperorcezar 13y ago
        Then the government should require you to post a bond for a reasonable amount to cover that eventuality. I don't think most people have over 100k sitting around. Many young people think it isn't a big deal, they'll just pay if something happens. Except when it does and now they owe over 100k in bills. Oh, and at the same time they are sick or injured. Now they can't pay, so everyone else does. Just because _you_ can or can't do something doesn't mean that on aggregate people can or can't. Society must use the situation as a whole. On the whole, many people can't pay and the costs have increased for everyone else.
- joshontheweb 13y ago
  For the record I have never left my medical bills unpaid.
- tomjen3 13y ago
  That is not fair on several points: Society as such is the one offering medical care to people who can't pay. You don't get then to blame the individuals who can't pay. He cannot obtain catastrophic coverage (the only medical coverage that makes sense), thanks to the new rules. He cannot pay a fair prize for that insurance, as he is forced to subsidize the old people who should have saved up when they were young and healthy.

jbooth 13y ago

Unless you have enough liquid cash to self-insure against high medical costs, then you're just hating the fact that you can't freeload on the rest of us who pay for insurance.

nickpinkston 13y ago
I think he wants better / more insurance options and for government policy to not favor incumbent firms / thinking.
- joshontheweb 13y ago
  This. We need to focus on why the costs are so high, not how to pay for such high costs. I shouldn't NEED insurance. It should be an option if I'd like to spread out financial risk.
  - snowwrestler 13y ago
    The costs are so high because certain treatments are expensive; they are expensive because it took very large investments to create them; and it took such large investments because it's extremely difficult to treat many diseases and injuries. I'm in total agreement that standard, "old" services like a physical or strep test or penicillin should be paid out of pocket and subject to market forces, just like food and clothing are (two other "life-critical" industries). But it's a very big step from there to not needing health insurance at all. If you get hit by a car doing 30mph and survive, there is no getting around the fact that your treatment is going to be very expensive. IMO that exactly what insurance should be for.
    - joshontheweb 13y ago
      Perhaps in some cases. But $90 for a bag of saline seems to signify a pretty broken pricing model.
    - nickpinkston 13y ago
      Most things you're talking about are either end-of-life care type of stuff like cancer, or something rare like Cystic Fibrosis. - Typical procedures used for common infections, broken bones, etc. don't require anything much that wasn't around 50 years ago. - You might say: CT scanners, MRIs, etc, but the reason these are expensive is market structure (i.e. someone will pay for it...), not a fundamental engineering reason - i.e. the MRI isn't required to be made form gold. Also note that this is one of the few (only?) industries where the same device w/ same features increases in price over time - because of monopolistic shit from patents, FDA barriers, etc.
  - nickpinkston 13y ago
    For sure - this is my problem with Obamacare. It's reinforcing the cost structure, not trying to change it.
fennecfoxen 13y ago
That would be a fairer dig if: * he were free to actually purchase catastrophic health care coverage instead of the bureaucratic "minimum" politically-acceptable coverage * he was free to pay for said insurance at a rate approximating his actual risk, i.e. he's actually buying insurance, not something that's insurance plus a government-mandated wealth-transfer mechanism from the young and healthy to the elderly and infirm But even so, who's to say that people shouldn't be allowed to take risks with their own life and limb? Meh.
- emperorcezar 13y ago
  > But even so, who's to say that people shouldn't be allowed to take risks with their own life and limb? Meh. That would be fair if he signed a waiver that stated he denied any care if they drop him off in the emergency room. If he's in an accident and unconscious, they are going to take him to the hospital where he'll be treating insurance or not. Without insurance that cost will more likely than not just be spread around.
  - fennecfoxen 13y ago
    ... and thank you for demonstrating exactly who's-to-say.
  - joshontheweb 13y ago
    Just because I don't have insurance doesn't mean I can't/won't pay for emergency care.
    - emperorcezar 13y ago
      Then the government should require you to post a bond for a reasonable amount to cover that eventuality. I don't think most people have over 100k sitting around. Many young people think it isn't a big deal, they'll just pay if something happens. Except when it does and now they owe over 100k in bills. Oh, and at the same time they are sick or injured. Now they can't pay, so everyone else does. Just because _you_ can or can't do something doesn't mean that on aggregate people can or can't. Society must use the situation as a whole. On the whole, many people can't pay and the costs have increased for everyone else.
joshontheweb 13y ago
For the record I have never left my medical bills unpaid.
tomjen3 13y ago
That is not fair on several points: Society as such is the one offering medical care to people who can't pay. You don't get then to blame the individuals who can't pay. He cannot obtain catastrophic coverage (the only medical coverage that makes sense), thanks to the new rules. He cannot pay a fair prize for that insurance, as he is forced to subsidize the old people who should have saved up when they were young and healthy.