Healthcare better worse or same

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Wondering general opinion… we used to have high end great healthcare and access to really good networks.  Then our corporation seemed to use ACA as an excuse to Reduce quality and increase employee cost. 

Edited March 2, 2023 by Over 29 years of fanhood

[TSOL]

Health care? That's for rich people 

[Biden is Mentally Fit]

It’s Trumps fault!

[SoCal Deek]

55 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

It’s Trumps fault!

Obviously. 😉

[US Egg]

It’s a no brainer it’s worse due to Covid.

 

Trying to stay healthy is imperative, now more than ever. 
 

My hospital stays of recent were unlike my many previous to the outbreak.

[Joe Ferguson forever]

Corporate medicine has destroyed quality.  You're probably more likely to see a mid level than an MD in an ER or primary care office.  Then get referred all over the place for simple stuff that they should be able to take care of.  And tested to bankruptcy cuz tests are a money maker and the way they now usually make diagnoses.  Oh, and your "provider" might look up from the keyboard once or twice in a visit.  What do I know?...I'm a dinosaur.

[Tommy Callahan]

Welp. when the ACA was sold as a way to drive down cost, but ended up being a huge handout to the industry, wrote by the industry. 

 

Good luck even seeing one's doctor or nurse practitioner. seems more and more insurance companies are pushing free/low cost teledock as the first  line of care.  

 

How hard would it be to just allow people to purchase Medicaid.   

 

they current system sucks and isnt getting better any time soon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 2, 2023 by Chris farley

[SoCal Deek]

9 hours ago, redtail hawk said:

Corporate medicine has destroyed quality.  You're probably more likely to see a mid level than an MD in an ER or primary care office.  Then get referred all over the place for simple stuff that they should be able to take care of.  And tested to bankruptcy cuz tests are a money maker and the way they now usually make diagnoses.  Oh, and your "provider" might look up from the keyboard once or twice in a visit.  What do I know?...I'm a dinosaur.

Morning Hawk. I’ve always said I’m not a healthcare voter (knock on wood, and thanks be to God), but I’m curious where you see the service quality log jam to be. Is it the insurance companies? The hospitals? Both? 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

41 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

Welp. when the ACA was sold as a way to drive down cost, but ended up being a huge handout to the industry, wrote by the industry. 

 

Good luck even seeing one's doctor or nurse practitioner. seems more and more insurance companies are pushing free/low cost teledock as the first  line of care.  

 

How hard would it be to just allow people to purchase Medicaid.   

 

they current system sucks and isnt getting better any time soon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It’s more complicated than that imo.

 

Health insurance companies are part of the problem to be sure.  Personally, I’d prefer Teladoc for many interactions, though I’m generally pretty healthy and that shapes my opinion on things. 
 

However, legislation has perpetually been an issue as well.  Prior to ACA, each state had its own fiefdom, rules and regulations that contributed to cost and benefit decisions.  While the care associated with one’s health is an emotional and personal issue, the costs associated with delivery is a financial one.  At the regulation level, it’s generally treated as a political issue, and that complicates things greatly. 
 

Many doctors operate on a for-profit model, where $$ are an integral part of the system.  That can result in a mill-type process of health care. 
 

When it comes right down to it, people frequently prioritize other things in life over their health and health care.  A person who has no concerns about perpetually upgrading their iPhone, or dropping $7 a day on specialty coffee, or $482 a month to lease a car, balk at the notion of out of pocket costs, co-pays and high deductible health plans that might actually save their lives one day. 
 

As for Medicare, sobering financial reality is it’s solvent through 2026 according to this recent projection from trustees.   The argument is that resources directed to private health care would recaptured.  Of course, that would lead to the potential for government to do government things, blowing up cost and leading to declarations like “….projected to be solvent through 2029.”. 
 

Also, let’s not forget that Medicare operates on a fee schedule approach not all that different than insurance companies use, but typically at a much lower rate.  That begs the question, would Medicare for all be a popular option for the for-profit medical profession?  

https://www.aha.org/news/headline/2021-09-01-medicare-trustees-project-trust-fund-solvent-until-2026

[SoCal Deek]

3 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

It’s more complicated than that imo.

 

Health insurance companies are part of the problem to be sure.  Personally, I’d prefer Teladoc for many interactions, though I’m generally pretty healthy and that shapes my opinion on things. 
 

However, legislation has perpetually been an issue as well.  Prior to ACA, each state had its own fiefdom, rules and regulations that contributed to cost and benefit decisions.  While the care associated with one’s health is an emotional and personal issue, the costs associated with delivery is a financial one.  At the regulation level, it’s generally treated as a political issue, and that complicates things greatly. 
 

Many doctors operate on a for-profit model, where $$ are an integral part of the system.  That can result in a mill-type process of health care. 
 

When it comes right down to it, people frequently prioritize other things in life over their health and health care.  A person who has no concerns about perpetually upgrading their iPhone, or dropping $7 a day on specialty coffee, or $482 a month to lease a car, balk at the notion of out of pocket costs, co-pays and high deductible health plans that might actually save their lives one day. 
 

As for Medicare, sobering financial reality is it’s solvent through 2026 according to this recent projection from trustees.   The argument is that resources directed to private health care would recaptured.  Of course, that would lead to the potential for government to do government things, blowing up cost and leading to declarations like “….projected to be solvent through 2029.”. 
 

Also, let’s not forget that Medicare operates on a fee schedule approach not all that different than insurance companies use, but typically at a much lower rate.  That begs the question, would Medicare for all be a popular option for the for-profit medical profession?  

https://www.aha.org/news/headline/2021-09-01-medicare-trustees-project-trust-fund-solvent-until-2026

Is it a coincidence that Medicare goes insolvent the same year the Bills new stadium is scheduled to open? Hmmm?

 

In all seriousness, they’ve been projecting the insolvency of these entitlement programs for decades. Now, I’m not saying they’re wrong, but what happens then? We just pay a higher copay or premium for it? We add more to the national debt? 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

Is it a coincidence that Medicare goes insolvent the same year the Bills new stadium is scheduled to open? Hmmm?

 

In all seriousness, they’ve been projecting the insolvency of these entitlement programs for decades. Now, I’m not saying they’re wrong, but what happens then? We just pay a higher copay or premium for it? We add more to the national debt? 

I think ultimately smoke, mirrors and political maneuvering provide a short term fix.  Long term?  Debt, hand-wringing, fair share, etc.  Nothing really changes.

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I think ultimately smoke, mirrors and political maneuvering provide a short term fix.  Long term?  Debt, hand-wringing, fair share, etc.  Nothing really changes.

Well if insolvency is real, then you can’t stay ahead of the bill collector forever. Someone must have a plan. I’ve often wondered whether at some point the cost simply outpaces American’s ability to pay for it, and the seemingly unlimited level of care rapidly declines. Let’s face it, our standard of care looks nothing like what it did just a few decades ago. When you see a photo of hospital back then, it was pretty much just a bed and a nurse standing by.

[Joe Ferguson forever]

33 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Morning Hawk. I’ve always said I’m not a healthcare voter (knock on wood, and thanks be to God), but I’m curious where you see the service quality log jam to be. Is it the insurance companies? The hospitals? Both? 

Good morning, Deek.  It's all of the above. And drug companies.  They all have massive lobbying power.  And they use it mostly for profit and not to benefit patients.  They all answer to shareholders.  Taking care of people and getting rich in medicine are not compatible.  doctors can make a very good living the good old fashioned way - running from room to room, seeing thousands of patients and retiring early😀.  But it's more difficult today because private practice is almost dead, by design.  the suits are in control and wringing every penny they can from a broken system.  btw, if I were to go back to work, part time teledoc work would be appealing (I sent a resume to Amazons new venture just for giggles) but it's generally not the best way to take care of patients.  Long term, face to face relationships are, imo.  

Edited March 2, 2023 by redtail hawk

[SoCal Deek]

8 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

Good morning, Deek.  It's all of the above. And drug companies.  They all have massive lobbying power.  And they use it mostly for profit and not to benefit patients.  They all answer to shareholders.  Taking care of people and getting rich in medicine are not compatible.  doctors can make a very good living the good old fashioned way - running from room to room, seeing thousands of patients and retiring early😀.  But it's more difficult today because private practice is almost dead, by design.  the suits are in control and wringing every penny they can from a broken system.  btw, if I were to go back to work, part time teledoc work would be appealing (I sent a resume to Amazons new venture just for giggles) but it's generally not the best way to take care of patients.  Long term, face to face relationships are, imo.  

So given all of that, are you then a proponent of universal healthcare? Or does that just bring with it a new and different set of problems? 

[Tiberius]

Obamacare sure has helped a lot of people. 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

22 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

So given all of that, are you then a proponent of universal healthcare? Or does that just bring with it a new and different set of problems? 

realistically, I think it must be done incrementally.  Start with negotiating drug prices.  Then make insurance companies liable for malpractice suits. Then legislate that Hospital systems C level execs must be clinicians (Hell, if Desantis can run Disney...).  then see what happens.

Edited March 2, 2023 by redtail hawk

[B-Man]

 

 

As a Registered Nurse for over 40 years I can tell you it is (unfortunately) worse.

 

Medications and diagnostics have improved, but the care a person receives is much worse.

 

I would recommend to anyone that has a loved one in the hospital to have someone stay with them to advocate.

 

 

.

[SoCal Deek]

20 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

realistically, I think it must be done incrementally.  Start with negotiating drug prices.  Then make insurance companies liable for malpractice suits. Then legislate that Hospital systems C level execs must be clinicians (Hell, if Desantis can run Disney...).  then see what happens.

Thanks. Who would negotiate the drug prices? I've considered drug prices to be somewhat of a side issue to the core healthcare debate. My personal opinion is that we are way, way over-medicated.

[US Egg]

28 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Obamacare sure has helped a lot of people. 

Care to elaborate or validate why you imagine this?

[Tiberius]

Just now, I am the egg man said:

Care to elaborate or validate why you imagine this?

more people covered by insurance, you know, the obvious thing