BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

HK

wrote:
On Tue, 12 May 2009 23:53:07 -0700, jps wrote:

That 2% is a questionable number, very narrowly defined and does not
include the doctor's side of the billing
We have doctors here who discourage medicare customers because the
government paperwork is onerous and they are "slow pay".
That is not saying the insurance companies are any better but I am not
sure the government will be an improvement.

BTW that "administrative cost" is "jobs". What will we do for them if
we put all of those insurance people out of work?
I'd like to know the tradeoff before answering.

In any case, the system needs to become more efficient. Such is the
case that jobs are lost when processes are automated.

I just fear that we will simply roll all of that bureaucracy out of
the insurance industry and into government where bureaucracy was
invented and make a cumbersome process worse.
Nobody has ever given me a convincing argument that it will be more
affordable.
On the one hand they say there are lots of healthy, working, young
adults who don't have insurance and who would put money into the
system and then they say the people without insurance are mostly kids
and people who are already very ill. (the pre-existing condition
folks). Obama has finally started saying this won't be "free" medical
care. I am just not sure how many uninsured are prepared for a $500+ a
month medical insurance bill. (assuming the government actually wants
"pay as you go") Medicare is bankrupt and still going.
Until we get a better grip on the facts here we don't have a clue what
it will ultimately cost. I do not believe streamlining the billing
process will save enough to make this revenue neutral.
I suppose at this point, what is another trillion in deficit
spending?

I wonder what the impact would be if we removed the "caps" on salary for
Social Security and Medicare taxes, and added "all income" to the pool
of funds that should be taxable for purposes of Social Security,
Medicare, and a national health insurance program.

In other words, the rate you are paying for Social Security and Medicare
would not change, but you'd pay that rate on *all* income, instead of it
being capped as it is now.

My health insurance is via a PPO program, and I use a fairly large local
practice for just about everything except dental and opthamology. Every
time I go to one of the practice's offices, I see at least four young
ladies doing nothing but playing footsie on the phone with private
insurance companies, who apparently do everything they to make doctors'
offices jump through hoops to get coverage for their patients.