IDBillzFan Posted December 28, 2015 Posted December 28, 2015 Cadillac plans. Place my wife used to work had that. Flu shot? $10 co-pay. Torn ACL? $10 co-pay. Skin grafts for third degree burns? $10 co-pay. Ebola? $10 co-pay. Heart-lung-liver transplant? $10 co-pay. It was awesome. We had them at my company when we first started up. My wife was on hospital bed rest for 6 weeks while pregnant with my son. That and his birth were each a $15 co-pay. Though I don't believe they weren't called Cadillac plans back then. I think they were just called health insurance plans.
DC Tom Posted December 28, 2015 Posted December 28, 2015 We had them at my company when we first started up. My wife was on hospital bed rest for 6 weeks while pregnant with my son. That and his birth were each a $15 co-pay. Though I don't believe they weren't called Cadillac plans back then. I think they were just called health insurance plans. No, they only started calling them Cadillac plans after the GM bailout. And without a shred of irony.
unbillievable Posted December 29, 2015 Posted December 29, 2015 Cadillac plans. Place my wife used to work had that. Flu shot? $10 co-pay. Torn ACL? $10 co-pay. Skin grafts for third degree burns? $10 co-pay. Ebola? $10 co-pay. Heart-lung-liver transplant? $10 co-pay. It was awesome. Already having meetings at work to prepare people for the tax in 2018. Some people are actually willing to lower their health benefits to avoid the tax because they hardly use it. I miss having free prescriptions too...
Keukasmallies Posted December 29, 2015 Posted December 29, 2015 My wife has an implanted defibrillator. Initial cost for surgery, device, hospital stay was over $30,000; however, she only had to pay for her telephone bill during the stay in the hospital. Of course, that was pre-ACA. No telling what the costs to us will be when the device needs replacing under today's ACA pricing guidelines. (With luck, she'll have an Obamaphone and can at least avoid the telephone bill this time.)
keepthefaith Posted December 29, 2015 Posted December 29, 2015 (edited) Already having meetings at work to prepare people for the tax in 2018. Some people are actually willing to lower their health benefits to avoid the tax because they hardly use it. I miss having free prescriptions too... Which is all part of the Obama plan. "Rich" people shouldn't be allowed to have or buy better coverage than poor and if they do then it should be taxed in the interest of fairness. Edited December 29, 2015 by keepthefaith
TPS Posted December 30, 2015 Posted December 30, 2015 Emergency room utilization has actually increased under Obamacare. When we were assured it would disappear. The difference is many are now insured. And one of the reasons the newly insured go to ER is the shortage of doctors caused by restricting supply.
/dev/null Posted December 30, 2015 Posted December 30, 2015 The difference is many are now insured. And one of the reasons the newly insured go to ER is the shortage of doctors caused by restricting supply. Now wait, so I'm confuzzled by all this economishical scienticians stuff Increasing demand doesn't also increase supply? I thought everybody had health care now
TPS Posted December 30, 2015 Posted December 30, 2015 Not when supply is controlled by a monopoly. Envision a vertical supply line...
DC Tom Posted December 30, 2015 Posted December 30, 2015 Not when supply is controlled by a monopoly. Envision a vertical supply line... There's a single group that controls the number of and access to doctors in the country?
keepthefaith Posted December 30, 2015 Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) The difference is many are now insured. And one of the reasons the newly insured go to ER is the shortage of doctors caused by restricting supply. Laziness and cluelessness are other reasons that more people go to the ER. So many people these days have very poor judgement on when to use the ER and when not to. So many others who have coverage, especially Medicaid users, don't even bother to have a primary care physician of record so when they have an issue it's simply easier to go to the ER and the ER welcomes the lazy and the hypochondriacs with open arms. Medicaid users may have a harder time finding doctors to take them in some areas, but so many don't bother to find one because the ER is easier. Like getting a haircut with no appointment. While there is some belt tightening going on in some facets of government paid healthcare (like denying some treatments or rehab for elderly), keeping idiots out of the ER does not appear to be a priority. Idiots includes over protective Mom's. Edited December 30, 2015 by keepthefaith
TPS Posted December 30, 2015 Posted December 30, 2015 There's a single group that controls the number of and access to doctors in the country? There is a very strong lobbying group that has helped restrict supply in this country for a long time.
keepthefaith Posted December 30, 2015 Posted December 30, 2015 There is a very strong lobbying group that has helped restrict supply in this country for a long time. Who are they? Insurance companies? The state line restriction continues to be dumb IMO.
DC Tom Posted December 30, 2015 Posted December 30, 2015 Who are they? Insurance companies? The state line restriction continues to be dumb IMO. The AMA, I imagine. Although I think calling them a monopoly that restricts supply is a bit of an overstatement.
Doc Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 Laziness and cluelessness are other reasons that more people go to the ER. So many people these days have very poor judgement on when to use the ER and when not to. So many others who have coverage, especially Medicaid users, don't even bother to have a primary care physician of record so when they have an issue it's simply easier to go to the ER and the ER welcomes the lazy and the hypochondriacs with open arms. Medicaid users may have a harder time finding doctors to take them in some areas, but so many don't bother to find one because the ER is easier. Like getting a haircut with no appointment. While there is some belt tightening going on in some facets of government paid healthcare (like denying some treatments or rehab for elderly), keeping idiots out of the ER does not appear to be a priority. Idiots includes over protective Mom's. Yup. Making an appointment and having to wait a week or four is unacceptable, especially when you can go to the ER and expect to be seen within six hours. I said/predicted this years ago. And again, we were assured that despite more people having coverage, ER utilization, which costs more, would be all but eliminated.
/dev/null Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 Yup. Making an appointment and having to wait a week or four is unacceptable, especially when you can go to the ER and expect to be seen within six hours. I said/predicted this years ago. And again, we were assured that despite more people having coverage, ER utilization, which costs more, would be all but eliminated. Yeah but why would anybody listen to you. I mean what do you know about the Health Care industry. Why should we have listened to you over such learned experts such as Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, or Jonathan Gruber?
TPS Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 The AMA, I imagine. Although I think calling them a monopoly that restricts supply is a bit of an overstatement. I stated "that has helped restrict supply for a long time" for a reason. Certainly, "they" don't own the monopoly on the problem, but their efforts over the years are a major contributing factor. Ironic that one of the "liberals" is making the case for letting the market work...
Observer Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 Yup. Making an appointment and having to wait a week or four is unacceptable, especially when you can go to the ER and expect to be seen within six hours. I said/predicted this years ago. And again, we were assured that despite more people having coverage, ER utilization, which costs more, would be all but eliminated. Urgent care centers are fixing this in cities.
keepthefaith Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 (edited) Urgent care centers are fixing this in cities. And even Walgreens. Couple years ago I had a rotten sore throat for days. On a Saturday afternoon I had had enough. Went to Walgreens. Nurse Practitioner there was busy so I left my name an number. She called me an hour later. I drove over and she took a culture and had a result in about 5 minutes. Positive. She wrote a script for an antibiotic and 15 minutes later I was out of there. Literally Monday of this week someone I know took their kid in the afternoon to the ER for a suspected ear ache. Turned out not to be, but they went to the ER. Walgreens could have looked in the ear. Edited December 31, 2015 by keepthefaith
Keukasmallies Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 Urgent care centers are fixing this in cities. Urgent care centers in the Rochester area are only open during normal business hours. Where does one go between early evening and 8:00 AM but to an emergency room?
TPS Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 Yup. Making an appointment and having to wait a week or four is unacceptable, especially when you can go to the ER and expect to be seen within six hours. I said/predicted this years ago. And again, we were assured that despite more people having coverage, ER utilization, which costs more, would be all but eliminated. I see this happening, but it needs to expand rapidly--increasing the number of PAs, as they can handle the majority of visits. The problem is they are tied to specific drs who limit the total number of patients they will take. If you can't get an appt for several days, then er is the option.
Recommended Posts