U.S. Budget - OBBB | Medicare Part D premiums set to rise

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 47K
  • Politics 
I think this is a bit too strong. That was one of the points, not necessarily the main one. I mean, you're right; there was also more going on.

IIRC, Insured patients do not cost the system less than uninsured people. It's that their care is delivered at a fraction of the cost. So while we pay as much per insured as uninsured, we are delivering a lot more care in the first instance. It's the same way that Caleb Love scored about as many points as Tyler Hansbrough. One of them was a bit more efficient than the other . . .

Now, there are also distributional issues as to who pays in each case, and yes that was a significant issue under ACA and that's why some of the obscure financing provisions were in there.
Generally speaking, uninsured delay treatment (additional cost if the delay worsens the diagnosis), seek ambulatory and emergency care at a higher rate (additional cost), and either default on medical debt (additional cost) or just don't pay entirely (additional cost). They are also generally charged more which feeds into the previously noted issues. The cost to the system is when these debts and payments are defaulted as medical care cost increases for everyone. Yes - insured will seek more treatment, but that treatment tends to be preventative which is fairly inexpensive compared with hospitalization. The "unpaid care" component is really where the cost to the system becomes inflationary to the whole.

Hospitals charge more for unisured:

Unpaid debt is rolled into the healthcare system as a whole:

More:
 
Regardless, I think everyone agrees pulling insurance from patients is a net negative financially. The actual numbers are debatable.
 
I don't know why you guys bother with Zen. He's utterly irredeemable as a human being and willfully misinformed about every topic. His only goal is to play devil's advocate in defense of Trump, and he's completely nonplussed by the reality that no facts are ever on his side.

Fuck him. Seriously.
Practice for the outside world?
 
Generally speaking, uninsured delay treatment (additional cost if the delay worsens the diagnosis), seek ambulatory and emergency care at a higher rate (additional cost), and either default on medical debt (additional cost) or just don't pay entirely (additional cost). They are also generally charged more which feeds into the previously noted issues. The cost to the system is when these debts and payments are defaulted as medical care cost increases for everyone. Yes - insured will seek more treatment, but that treatment tends to be preventative which is fairly inexpensive compared with hospitalization. The "unpaid care" component is really where the cost to the system becomes inflationary to the whole.

Hospitals charge more for unisured:

Unpaid debt is rolled into the healthcare system as a whole:

More:
Interesting. My knowledge of the stats is a bit dated, as I mentioned. I agree with everything you've written there. I think it's just a question of comparing two numbers, empirically determined. It doesn't matter either way, of course. We all know that uninsured care costs a lot.

It also matters, I think, whether you count life expectancy. I don't remember if the stuff I read did or not. Life expectancy does weird things to calculations. For instance, smokers were wonderful for public finance because, even though they consumed a lot of costs treating their cancers, they died much earlier and thus collected less social security, had less treatment overall, didn't need long-term care as much, etc. etc.
 
Of course they know how many patients they will lose to a sufficient extent..and it doesn't need to be precise. If the facility is already struggling and is 70-80% Medicare/Medicaid, any distruption at all is enough.

Future prognostication of use based on past trends is pretty straightforward in the medical world.

Furthermore, you’re ignoring the fact that in many states (including and especially NC), almost EVERY practice and hospital in rural areas is owned by the same conglomerates. For example, you would have to look pretty hard to find a hospital or major practice east of I95 not owned by UNC Health or Vidant (formerly ECU Health). The same is true in the Triangle of UNC/Duke/Wake Med. Within an hour of Greensboro its all Moses Cone/Wake Forest. Everything west of GSO is Atrium Health.

They all know minute by minute what each practice, provider, and hospital is doing, where the patients come from, how they pay, and what their expected usage is.
There are two good things about living in Burlington. The first is an equal proximity to the beach and mountains. The second is being surrounded by some of the best health care options in the US.
 


IMG_7834.jpeg

IMG_7835.jpeg

 


IMG_7834.jpeg

IMG_7835.jpeg


IMG_7836.jpeg
 
I don't know why you guys bother with Zen. He's utterly irredeemable as a human being and willfully misinformed about every topic. His only goal is to play devil's advocate in defense of Trump, and he's completely nonplussed by the reality that no facts are ever on his side.

Fuck him. Seriously.
I know some people don't like to put others on ignore, but I'm not ashamed at all to say that I have put a handful on ignore and it has greatly improved my board reading experience, imo. And Zen is one of those I have on ignore, thank god. Posters like him just feed on the attention they get.
 
I know some people don't like to put others on ignore, but I'm not ashamed at all to say that I have put a handful on ignore and it has greatly improved my board reading experience, imo. And Zen is one of those I have on ignore, thank god. Posters like him just feed on the attention they get.
I super ignore a t a drop of a hat. I recommend everyone does it. Life is too short to give trolls erections.
 


IMG_7834.jpeg

IMG_7835.jpeg


It's so clear that their defense of these cuts - and they know damn well that there are going to be plenty of cuts - will be that it's only lazy, jobless people who are losing their benefits. Which is a flat-out lie, as this data and lots of other statistics indicate. And yet most of these cuts are going to affect Trump's base - it's MAGA Nation that's going to bear the brunt of this. FAFO indeed.
 
It's so clear that their defense of these cuts - and they know damn well that there are going to be plenty of cuts - will be that it's only lazy, jobless people who are losing their benefits. Which is a flat-out lie, as this data and lots of other statistics indicate. And yet most of these cuts are going to affect Trump's base - it's MAGA Nation that's going to bear the brunt of this. FAFO indeed.


 

To be blunt, $1,000 per kid isn't going to do shit to convince young parents to have kids, or have more kids. If Trumpers really wanted people to have more babies they'd go after ridiculous child care costs, high housing mortgage and apartment rental prices, exploding college costs, and all the rest. But no, giving a $1,000 benefit for a kid will fix everything. It's absurd, but fits the mindset of these people perfectly.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top