patrick.net

bob2356 says

It' would be nice to have, but it's not going to matter at all.

It would happen immediately if we had a single payer system. Every procedure or treatment would have a publicly published price. Sure providers would still charge whatever they wanted to, but the public price would let patients shop around damn easy. Hell, there would be an app for that. You would say "OK Google hysterectomy" and Google would tell you the cheapest prices and the patient ratings of the practices. It would be literally three seconds of your time to shop around.

False equivalency.
I was not boasting about some superior mental state. You were.
You see, that's what "in the pronouncement" refers to.
See following posts for details.

Dan8267 says

Finally, today's illustration of hypocrisy is brought to you by Shrek...

BlueSardine says

Misspelling a word in the pronouncement is confirmation (of stupidity).

BlueSardine says

deductables

The actual sequence of events
A. dan boasts of his supposed superior mental abilities

B. quigley points out that in dans boasting statement, he doesn't know the correct spelling of "too"

C. BlueSardine points out the fact that misspelling a word in a sentence where one is bragging about some imagined superior intellect is confirmation of actual stupidity.

D. dan can't comprehend "C", the idea that a misspelled word in a non-self-boasting sentence (bluesardine) does not carry the weight of spelling each word correctly, with a misspelled word in a sentence that boasts of the intellect of the poster (dan), which does carry the weight of spelling each word correctly.

Quigley says

Dan8267 says

Your mind is far to small to comprehend what goes on in mine.

Odd, because my mind knows that you misspelled "too" in that supremely arrogant statement.

BlueSardine says

BlueSardine says

Bragging about ones supposed intelligence on a public forum is a sure sign of stupidity.


Misspelling a word in the pronouncement is confirmation.

E . Because he likes to use false equivalencies...

bob2356 says

where the money in medical is going to?

30%, biggest revenue recipient = Hospital Association, based in Chicago, with creatively obfuscatory billing codes provided by AMA, also based in Chicago. A President from Chicago (coincidence, surely!) signs legislation entrenching the whole patronage network system. Physicians get 20% directly, plus kickbacks on testing labs, home services, and drugs. Around 10% goes to PhRMA, which provides lobbying and advertising and kickbacks to MDs to keep the whole machine going, and Medicare hospital emergencies tend to result from legal Rx drugs, so you can see how the entrenched players reinforce each other, one hand washing the other. Bob blames PhRMA for everything, ignoring the other 90% of the pie:

bob2356 says

How exactly will this matter when almost everyone is locked into their network doctors and hospitals that have pretty much the same charges anyway?

How do you know they have the same charges?

People will change networks to get better prices if they can save enough.

rando says

People will change networks to get better prices if they can save enough.

Really, how do they change networks if they have employer provided insurance? Which is where 49% people get their health insurance. There is 14% medicare, 20% medicaid, 7% uninsured. None of those can change anything. So the remaining 9% of the population shopping around for health care is going to drive costs down?

Dan8267 says

Evidence?

He told me so.

Dan8267 says

In any case, single payer is the solution to that

Probably. But how would the politicians get rich in office?

Dan8267 says

Onvacation says

My primary care Dr retired early because he did not want to spend the money upgrading his billing systems. A lot of private medical offices did the same.

Evidence?

Onvacation says

He told me so.

Even if we accept hearsay, which is generally not considered valid evidence, that still does not support the assertion that "a lot of private medical offices did the same".

Even if a few doctors close to retirement decide to retire early, that does not imply that the system as a whole is worse off. You cannot improve any real world system without some disruptions.

I agree that the ACA sucks, but it sucks at about the same level as the previous system and it sucks entirely due to the Republican agenda. Sure there are winners and losers in the ACA, but it's not a significant departure from the previous system.

Onvacation says

Probably. But how would the politicians get rich in office?

www.youtube.com/embed/9V-O5YaWOR4?showinfo=0

curious2 says

30%, biggest revenue recipient = Hospital Association, based in Chicago, with creatively obfuscatory billing codes provided by AMA, also based in Chicago. A President from Chicago (coincidence, surely!) signs legislation entrenching the whole patronage network system. Physicians get 20% directly, plus kickbacks on testing labs, home services, and drugs. Around 10% goes to PhRMA, which provides lobbying and advertising and kickbacks to MDs to keep the whole machine going, and Medicare hospital emergencies tend to result from legal Rx drugs, so you can see how the entrenched players reinforce each other, one hand washing the other. Bob blames PhRMA for everything, ignoring the other 90% of the pie:

Your dementia is just getting worse and worse. I've posted literally hundreds of times about where the costs of health care lie. Corporate profits, costs of the health insurance companies, costs of billing, pay by procedure, doctors referring to facilities they own, etc. etc.. Yet somehow in your demented warped mind that is blaming everything on pharma.

Very curious about one thing though. You continually rant and rave how everything in medicine is a rip off and helps no one with one exception. Never a single word about health insurance companies. Very odd since a huge amount of health care dollars is going to run health insurance and the insurance billing process is one of the biggest money sinks in the health industry. Your chart doesn't even have health insurance listed. Why the weaselly revenue recipient bullshit. The billions it costs to run them and the billions spent by hospitals and doctors dealing with them is a good chunk of health care spending and contributes exactly zero to patient care. Not a peep. Very hard to figure.

curious2 says

30%, biggest revenue recipient = Hospital Association, based in Chicago, with creatively obfuscatory billing codes provided by AMA, also based in Chicago.

This chart is interesting. But, whenever I see a chart like that I wonder how things are categorized. Do all doctor salaries get put in the physicians bucket, or do the salaries of doctors employed by hospitals go into the hospital bucket? Same question for Hospital buildings. How does the hospital bucket get broken down? What portion is staff, and how does that break down? What portion is corporate profit, and is that profit in line with typical investment income? That is, are hospitals making a killing or basically paying investors what they would have to pay a bank if they were borrowing money from that type of source? So, out of context, the chart tends to bring up as many questions as it answers.

Very curious about one thing though. You continually rant and rave how everything in medicine is a rip off and helps no one with one exception. Never a single word about health insurance companies. Very odd since a huge amount of health care dollars is going to run health insurance and the insurance billing process is one of the biggest money sinks in the health industry. Your chart doesn't even have health insurance listed. Why the weaselly revenue recipient bullshit. The billions it costs to run them and the billions spent by hospitals and doctors dealing with them is a good chunk of health care spending and contributes exactly zero to patient care. Not a peep. Very hard to figure.

--------------

I wondered the same thing looking over the pie chart.

I'm closing in on six figures lifetime spending on "healthcare ", and over 99% of that is on health insurance.

Dan8267 says

. Sure there are winners and losers in the ACA, but it's not a significant departure from the previous system.

The previous system did not require you to be a part of it under penalty of fine or imprisonment.

Onvacation says

The previous system did not require you to be a part of it under penalty of fine or imprisonment.

Agreed, and that is terrible. It is also purely the Republican's fault. The individual mandate was their demand that they advocated ever since Hillarycare.

No matter how you slice it, everything bad about the ACA comes from the Republican Party. The only thing bad about the Democrats in this matter is that they are such pussies and gave the Republicans just about everything they wanted. The only reason the Republicans hate Obmacare is because it's a win for Blackie McBlackass, and they hate Democrats, especially black ones, getting a win. That's also why they repeatedly sabotaged the economy during Obama's eight years.

everything bad about the ACA comes from the Republican Party.

------------

Of course. It was written by The Heritage Foundation

What did you expect

bob2356 says

Your chart doesn't even have health insurance listed.

LOL, it lists administration as more than 7%. Your eyes are going, in addition to your memory, or maybe it was your integrity if ever you had any; your history of opiates and opioids is catching up with you. You need help, but if you would prefer a different chart, try these:

https://healthcareexchangenc.wordpress.com/2014/04/30/the-medical-cost-problem-whats-happening-and-why-its-getting-worse/

Here's a chart from AMA, which separates physician and clinical services to make each look smaller; they're still 20%, compared to 10% on drugs and less than 10% on administration:

Every. Single. Dollar. Spent on Health Insurance is a dollar lost into a black hole of waste.

I'm calling bullshit on those graphics.

curious2 says

LOL, it lists administration as more than 7%. Your eyes are going, in addition to your memory, or maybe it was your integrity if ever you had any; your history of opiates and opioids is catching up with you.

Administration? Is this a joke? The net cost of health insurance? More weaselling. What about the cost of insurance billing in the average doctors office or hospital. Where is that broken out? The average office spends 9-14% of revenue on medical billing. http://www.grouponehealthsource.com/blog/bid/41853/Cost-of-Medical-Practice-Billing-Functions-Internal-vs-Outsource Hospitals spend more. Want to revise the chart and move that money from doctors and hospitals to "administration"? Billions for profits, billions lobbying for more profits, billions for executives, billions for advertising and selling policies, billions for managing/collecting on policies, billions negotiating with doctors and hospitals, billions on paying and denying claims doesn't treat one single patient. Doctors and hospitals see patients and treats them. Almost all the money should be in those 2 categories.

You've trotted out the tired stupidity that I took oxycontin for 2 whole days 9 years ago, so I know you are just throwing out total bullshit at this point. Isn't it about time for you to log off patnet and go sell some more health insurance policies?

bob2356 says

I took oxycontin for 2 whole days 9 years ago.... Isn't it about time for you to log off patnet and go sell some more health insurance policies?

LOL - that's at least the third and most absurd contradictory biography you've misattributed to me: your hallucinatory projections remind me of Walter Mitty. Now you can only remember two days of OxyContin? Your other comments have acknowledged piecemeal your history with opiates and opioids, though never all in one comment; denial isn't just a river in Egypt. Sad for you that you're reduced to hallucinations, but do as you will with the charts: I didn't create any of them. They come from AMA and official state medical exchanges. Please go rant and rave at the authors and demand recalculation to suit your preferred numbers.

curious2 says

LOL - that's at least the third and most absurd contradictory biography you've misattributed to me:

I don't see any explanation of why in all of your non stop deranged ranting about medical spending the black hole of health insurance costs is never mentioned. Very, very strange.

Like I said when you trot out the oxy bullshit it means you're out of arguments as usual. Want to move onto your theory of cat litter sniffing next?

curious2 says

I didn't create any of them. They come from AMA and official state medical exchanges.

The AMA isn't using the charts for political arguments ( your words: kickback, patronage,creatively obfuscatory, etc., etc.) like you are so it doesn't matter if they break out the cost of insurance or not. The real question is why less than half of health care spending goes to doctors and hospitals who actually treat the patients. Somehow you see that as a good thing, if anything far too generous. Pretty nutty even for you.

bob2356 says

The real question is why less than half of health care spending goes to doctors and hospitals who actually treat the patients

Bob, your eyes are going again, or you're hallucinating and/or lying again. The exchange chart says physicians and hospitals get 68%. The AMA chart attributes similarly more than 60% to physicians, hospitals, nursing, clinical services, and home health care. Both attribute more than 10% to drugs, at least some of which do actually treat patients. You've also as usual raised various straw men, accusing me of saying things I never said, etc. Apparently, you can't remember who said what, so you attribute everything in your imagination and failing memory to whomever you're mad at. The cat litter, opiates, and/or opioids have sadly robbed you. Please try not to drive sideways at 80MPH, in fact it might be time to turn in your keys, as you persist in seeing things that aren't there.

bob2356 says

goes to doctors and hospitals who actually treat the patients

curious2 says

The AMA chart attributes similarly more than 60% to

I remember just fine. I said doctors and hospitals. I quoted it here since you don't seem to have the ability to retain information from post to post. In my world 32.3+15.7 is less than 50. From your chart you posted. Looks like it might be time to turn in your keys if you are so demented you can't do that math. Don't project your very serious mental problems onto me.

Like I said when the opiate/cat litter comes out it means your bullshit is exposed and you are reduced to jumping around with non stop shape shifting bogus strawman arguments like the cost of drugs is patient care. Funny,how both your charts lists drugs separately. Why was that if it's part of doctors and hospitals? Contradict yourself much?

Still no explanation of why the huge amount of money syphoned off by the health insurance system is never ever a part of your constant nonsensical ranting about health care.

Quick answer the phone, someone wants to buy health insurance.

bob2356 says

health insurance system is never

That's ludicrous. I've written so much about that some PatNetters thought I couldn't write about anything else and started calling me autistic. Dr. Howard Dean said insurance companies "wrote" Obamneycare.

You do have patterns though. You harangue people with sarcasm and rhetorical questions, and if you get a literal answer then you rage and rant and rave. In this thread, you asked Patrick (maybe rhetorically/sarcastically) where the money was going, and I answered with charts. You seem especially to hate data that disprove your assumptions.

What I've objected to most is the tremendous waste, fraud, and abuse: 30% per Institute of Medicine, more than 50% IMO. Obamneycare entrenched the existing industry including insurance, and anyone can see my comments on that topic.

At this point you're just mad because I answered your question, so you're making up stuff.

curious2 says

That's ludicrous. I've written so much about that some PatNetters thought I couldn't write about anything else and started calling me autistic. Dr. Howard Dean said insurance companies "wrote" Obamneycare.

Funny, not a singe one of the articles talks about the cost of the health insurance system. Not one. One talks a little about them being involved in legislating ACA. That's it. Where is all the writing on the subject that you are referring to?

curious2 says

You do have an odd pattern though. You harangue people with sarcasm and rhetorical questions, and if you get a literal answer then you rage and rant and rave. In this thread, you asked Patrick (maybe rhetorically/sarcastically) where the money was going, and I answered with charts. You seem especially to hate data that disprove your assumptions.

Your charts show where the money is being distributed to. I asked where the money was going to, meaning what it was being spent on, not who was getting the checks. What health care dollars are spent on that makes the system so expensive is all that matters. Like profits, lobbying, billing costs, insurance as well as fru. Everyone else seems to have figured out what I was talking about. .

curious2 says

What I've objected to most is the tremendous waste, fraud, and abuse: 30% per Institute of Medicine, m

You never seem object to profits, lobbying, billing costs, insurance costs, etc. Or are you saying the health insurance industry is part of waste and fraud?

The insurance industry is driving doctors out of the healthcare industry, or at least into truly private practices where insurance isn't a factor, like concierge medicine.
Now the typical PCP has to submit care reports to the insurance company which detail tests run and medications prescribed. If any of that differs from the best practices program concocted by the insurance honchos, they issue the doctor a warning via a poor review. Too many warnings and they may revoke coverage with that doctor. This means that physicians have to do around twice as much paperwork as time spent seeing patients. If they want to keep up with patient load, they'll have to stay late at the office filling out paperwork.
It's enough to drive many into a strict "cash only" or concierge medicine practice where patients pay a retainer fee of $1000 or more to gain access to care.

bob2356 says

as well as fru.

Now you're mad at fire rescue units? They do help people, you know. Somehow, in your mind, doctors are omnipresent with magical faith healing powers and don't need medicine. You refuse to see that some patients need emergency responders, medicine, and nurses. You must have a really weird medical and billing practice if you don't use any medicine, and it's obviously hypocritical of you to take opiates and opioids yourself while saying medicine has no role in helping patients.

bob2356 says

Where is all the writing on the subject that you are referring to?

Here on the WWW, you can find links. If you click a link to a thread, you can find many comments there, e.g. this one. I saw several articles about insurance.

Ooh, hey, check this insurance sales pitch, from 2012:

"Newspaper "journalists" accept speaking fees from AHIP and even the tobacco companies. (What do these companies have in common? They both kill their customers for profit.)"

Now how much would you pay?

www.youtube.com/embed/9BX56syrmWQ