Skip to main content

View Diary: Consumer Reports destroys 'rate shock' horror story (109 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They ought to let people keep their policies (0+ / 0-)

    I think that they ought to let those idiots keep their crappy insurance policies. Then, when they get ill and have to foot the bill personally maybe they'll behave in a less ideologically deranged fashion, swallow their tea pride and go get some real coverage. Just make them buy good policies for any minors under their care.

    "Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for a real Republican every time." Harry Truman

    by MargaretPOA on Fri Nov 01, 2013 at 03:25:37 PM PDT

    •  YOU foot their bill, MargaretPOA. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KenBee, ferg, sotiredofusernames

      This is the essential fact that all of us must understand. Someone with junk insurance is essentially uninsured. So when they get sick, their unpaid bills result in cost shifting. The hospital charges YOU $40 for a Tylenol, which you pay, via your good insurance for which you paid higher premiums to make up the difference for all these uninsured and underinsured people. Or via your tax dollars, when they end up on Medicaid, or other social programs, because they have to declare bankruptcy.

      Junk insurance is part of a vicious cycle that has devastating effects throughout our health care economy, and American society. It is a scam that actually cheats far more than the individual victim. The time to end it is now.

      Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

      by earicicle on Fri Nov 01, 2013 at 03:37:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Great news (0+ / 0-)

        So, are you saying that now with Obamacare enacted, I will no longer pay $40 for that Tylenol? Because we all have wonderful insurance now.

        •  'Wonderful insurance' would be nonprofit (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sotiredofusernames

          single payer, with zero uninsured Americans remaining in the country. Is that what the Republicans allowed Obamacare to be? Is that what our Citizens United, money-fueled political system encourages our two corrupt political parties to pass, against the multi-bazillion dollar lobbying efforts of for-profit insurance companies, Big Pharma, and every other monied interest that feeds off the current system?

          Answer your own question. Acknowledge the first step as a FIRST STEP. And ask yourself what you need to do to get our country moving toward the next step, and the next one after that, until we finally reach the end goal.

          Instead of just fucking complaining that the Black Man didn't give you everything you wanted on a silver platter like a good servant should.

          Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

          by earicicle on Fri Nov 01, 2013 at 05:16:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Really? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Fiddler On A Hot Tin Roof

            You're dragging race crap? Unbelievable. Have you got any thoughts in your head that aren't attached to preprogrammed buttons?

            Allow me, though, to explain your initial post to you. That was where you claimed that outsized hospital charges are due to cost shifting, which is due to good insurance having to pay for junk insurance, itself part of a vicious cycle. Therefore, now that there will be no more junk insurance (or medical bankruptcy) or vicious cycle, it seemed reasonable to ask about cost containment.

            But you didn't answer that query, probably because, as you might know (I generously assume), Obamacare is notably vague on cost containment. So, instead, you give me some BS about, what? civic participation? the onward march to some goal? How thrilling! Then, just to further muddy the already-opaque waters, also some stupendously offensive blather about "the Black Man," for which you ought to hang your foolish head in embarrassment.

            •  ACA has cost shifting. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              earicicle

              CBO estimated savings of $20 billion because no more ER reimbursement as it phases in.

              http://www.cbo.gov/...

              Disproportionate Share Hospitals
              Both Medicare and Medicaid provide additional payments to hospitals that serve a disproportionate number of low-income patients. PPACA and the Reconciliation Act modified the formulas used to calculate such payments under Medicare and the state- specific allotments that determine such payments under Medicaid. On the basis of CBO’s February 2011 estimate, last year’s legislation is projected to reduce direct spending for Medicare’s and Medicaid’s payments to disproportionate share hospitals by $57 billion over the 2012–2021 period.
        •  $40 tylenol a thing of the past (0+ / 0-)

          Ending hospital reimbursement is part of ACA reform, as junk policies cease, and everyone is covered.

          My hubby once had a $2.50 bandaid in ER.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (165)
  • Community (66)
  • Baltimore (49)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • Bernie Sanders (37)
  • Culture (32)
  • Law (25)
  • Elections (25)
  • Economy (23)
  • Freddie Gray (23)
  • Education (22)
  • Hillary Clinton (22)
  • Racism (20)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Texas (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • 2016 (19)
  • Environment (19)
  • Politics (18)
  • Media (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site