Universal Health Care...

[Jeepster80125 0]

You can roll over your HSA and it continues to do so, and you don't have to pay taxes for withdrawal for non-med purposes if you've retired? Or am I reading all wrong....b/c that sounds better than any hsa i've seen.

Think of them as medical IRAs. You can deposit money into these accounts up to the yearly max. This year it's $2,900 for singles and $5,800 for families. If you're over 55 you can deposit an extra $1,000. This yearly max goes up by about a $100 per year.You can make withdrawals for purposes other than qualified medical expenses, but you should be aware that nonqualified withdrawals are taxed as regular income, and individuals under age 65 pay a 10% penalty on the amount of the non-qualified withdrawal.Once you reach age 65, you can withdraw money from your HSA for any purpose and simply pay income taxes on the amount of the withdrawal. No additional penalties apply after age 65.

the majority of health care costs are paid for by the company you are employed by...it is one of the biggest bargins out there. Unless you are the company paying the bill. At that point it ias cost of a good employee and part of your overhead. Either way it is better then most anything else i have read about or heard about. I personally can't wait to drop the 400k premium i pay right now for my company. I actually may get a raise out of all of this!! LOL i do realize how dumb that is. BHO will make sure the taxes sky rocket to offset any gains there.

I was just stating the minimum requirements. Of course some employers pay for more benefits in order to remain competitive or entice people to work there.

[Nimue1995 1]

Because it's the government's job to allow you to be too lazy to know what you are buying. And to treat adults like infants. And to give everyone the same crappy treatment whether they can afford better or not.

If you're in an accident on the way to the hospital I'm sure you'll regain consciousness long enough to be sure they take you to a hospital in the network, make sure the ambulance you're in is in the network, make sure that all the physicians that see you are in the network. Yeah, I'm sure that's what you're thinking instead of wondering if you're about to die. And you should be able to know what you're buying without a lawyer reading it over and interpreting it to you. Give me a break!

[Jeepster80125 0]

If you're in an accident on the way to the hospital I'm sure you'll regain consciousness long enough to be sure they take you to a hospital in the network, make sure the ambulance you're in is in the network, make sure that all the physicians that see you are in the network. Yeah, I'm sure that's what you're thinking instead of wondering if you're about to die. And you should be able to know what you're buying without a lawyer reading it over and interpreting it to you. Give me a break!

No.Emergencies are all covered under in-network benefits. That doesn't mean that ambulances won't charge huge rates, but they'll still be covered. Do you have any better alternative ideas? I see a lot of criticism of our insurance industry, but nobody seems to have any better ideas.

[hblask 1]

If you're in an accident on the way to the hospital I'm sure you'll regain consciousness long enough to be sure they take you to a hospital in the network, make sure the ambulance you're in is in the network, make sure that all the physicians that see you are in the network. Yeah, I'm sure that's what you're thinking instead of wondering if you're about to die. And you should be able to know what you're buying without a lawyer reading it over and interpreting it to you. Give me a break!

If there were not so many limitations on what must be covered and what may not be covered, how much can be charged, etc, then we would have a competitive market. Doctors and hospitals who hate insurance companies could just accept one insurance company with the least paperwork requirements, and pass the savings on to customers. If you buy that one, your insurance is cheaper, but in a pinch you may end up being not covered. If you buy the more expensive policies that allows you to go to ANY doctor or hospital, you pay more but don't have to worry about coverage.Unfortunately, state and federal laws do not allow this type of competition.

[Dr_Jeff 0]

If there were not so many limitations on what must be covered and what may not be covered, how much can be charged, etc, then we would have a competitive market. Doctors and hospitals who hate insurance companies could just accept one insurance company with the least paperwork requirements, and pass the savings on to customers. If you buy that one, your insurance is cheaper, but in a pinch you may end up being not covered. If you buy the more expensive policies that allows you to go to ANY doctor or hospital, you pay more but don't have to worry about coverage.Unfortunately, state and federal laws do not allow this type of competition.

I'm not sure you are correct here, or else I'm misunderstanding you. As a doctor, I can can choose not to accept certain insurances that I feel don't pay well enough. Any patients with that insurance can file a claim themselves and get reimbursed for the cash they pay. Not all companies will reimburse, or limit how much they will reimburse in these cases. Patients are welcome to find a doctor who will take their insurance. Insurance companies are allowed to pick and choose the doctors in their networks, so it is a two way street in that reguard. There are a couple of insurance companies that I have dropped my contracts with because they have made it ridiculous to stay. Those patients I see for substantial discounts for cash. It is perfectly legit to offer a time of service discount, but I would have to accept the same payment if the insurance company wanted to pay me on the spot in cash as well. They never will, so I don't have to worry about it.Personally, I think insurance companies have ruined healthcare. And as a side note, I don't believe that companies have to health care to employees, hence the term benefit. Only required to pay taxes (unemp-oyment and half of social security and some other taxes) on employees.

[LincolnK 1]

I'm not sure you are correct here, or else I'm misunderstanding you. As a doctor, I can can choose not to accept certain insurances that I feel don't pay well enough. Any patients with that insurance can file a claim themselves and get reimbursed for the cash they pay. Not all companies will reimburse, or limit how much they will reimburse in these cases. Patients are welcome to find a doctor who will take their insurance. Insurance companies are allowed to pick and choose the doctors in their networks, so it is a two way street in that reguard. There are a couple of insurance companies that I have dropped my contracts with because they have made it ridiculous to stay. Those patients I see for substantial discounts for cash. It is perfectly legit to offer a time of service discount, but I would have to accept the same payment if the insurance company wanted to pay me on the spot in cash as well. They never will, so I don't have to worry about it.Personally, I think insurance companies have ruined healthcare. And as a side note, I don't believe that companies have to health care to employees, hence the term benefit. Only required to pay taxes (unemp-oyment and half of social security and some other taxes) on employees.

is this still profitable? why not run with it and drop your insurance contracts altogether? i've read about places that do this and save a bunch in overhead.

[Dr_Jeff 0]

The insurance companies that still pay well make it worth it. I don't make much profit off of cash patients, but make up for it from the other insurance companies. Some patients that I know can't afford it, I see for free or barter with them. I'm not greedy. I guess thats why I am one of the few docs that struggles some months to make ends meet at the office. I've gotten to the point where most of my personal income comes from other sources; investments, rental properties, flipping houses. I continue to run the practice because I like helping people. There were a couple of months last year when I didn't even take any pay from the practice. So, I basically worked two months for free. It makes me consider getting out of it all together. Now, if I really didn't suck at poker.....

[Zeatrix 0]

No.Emergencies are all covered under in-network benefits. That doesn't mean that ambulances won't charge huge rates, but they'll still be covered. Do you have any better alternative ideas? I see a lot of criticism of our insurance industry, but nobody seems to have any better ideas.

Yes, look towards France. They have the best healthcare system in the world. Guess who runs it?

[hblask 1]

Yes, look towards France. They have the best healthcare system in the world.

HahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahaLOLhahahahahahaha good one! You lefties are HILARIOUS!PS: In case you are serious, I am assuming you are referring to the study by the international organization that ranked France first. Did you know that one of the key criteria, in a study to determine which type of health care works best, was "having socialized medicine".So in a comparison of whether free markets or socialism is better, having socialism was scored as a key positive.No bias there.Question: when a billionaire Saudi prince gets sick, do they go to 1) The US, or 2) France.Hint: Don't try to BS me on this one, I live a short drive from the Mayo Clinic.

[85suited 0]

I can only pray the US doesnt turn into a Swedish style nanny state...

[Zeatrix 0]

Question: when a billionaire Saudi prince gets sick, do they go to 1) The US, or 2) France.

I'm sure you have a very particular case in mind when you ask this so I'm not even going to bother answering. Don't you see the difference between the care you get if you have infinite amounts of money and if you have an average income. I'm sure the best treatment money can buy in the US is up at the very top. But that's not what we are talking about, we're talking about the overall system, not a particular clinic. Does every single person in the US go to the Mayo clinic? No.And your example is pretty lame. When Yassir Arafat became ill he was sent to a French hospital. He's not as rich as a saudi prince, but I'm fairly sure he could afford American hospitals.But to reiterate, my point was about the whole system, not a single clinic.Also you think it's bias that having "social" medicine (I prefer the term "public" since everything that can be even remotely linked to socialism is a negative in your minds).Well if I did a survey and I saw that in place X you get medicine free or cheap and in place Y you have to fork out money for it, then I'd say it's a plus for place X, but maybe you just love paying

[hblask 1]

I'm sure you have a very particular case in mind when you ask this so I'm not even going to bother answering. Don't you see the difference between the care you get if you have infinite amounts of money and if you have an average income. I'm sure the best treatment money can buy in the US is up at the very top. But that's not what we are talking about, we're talking about the overall system, not a particular clinic. Does every single person in the US go to the Mayo clinic? No.

I have at least 8 relatives whose insurance has paid for them to go to the Mayo Clinic, from out of state, within the last 3 years. None of them are rich or famous, just regular middle class folk.Any other questions?

[hblask 1]

Well if I did a survey and I saw that in place X you get medicine free or cheap and in place Y you have to fork out money for it, then I'd say it's a plus for place X, but maybe you just love paying

You would have a point in Fantasyland, where taxes are not an expense, and where doctors work for free, and hospitals build themselves without using natural resources and labor.The rest of us live in the real world. It's an important to consider it when devising policies.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Yeah, I have no idea what the answer is here.All I know is that I get pretty fantastic health care with my job. It's nice working for a major university that has a major medical component, owns hospitals, etc. Every regular check-up and minor test that I've had has been 100% free, no questions asked. I barely have to fill out paperwork, I just give them my name and number.

[Zeatrix 0]

I have at least 8 relatives whose insurance has paid for them to go to the Mayo Clinic, from out of state, within the last 3 years. None of them are rich or famous, just regular middle class folk.Any other questions?

So you have to travel out of state to get good care? That seems like a great system!And your comment about fantasyland was great. Get back to me when you get a grasp of how it really works...

[hblask 1]

So you have to travel out of state to get good care? That seems like a great system!And your comment about fantasyland was great. Get back to me when you get a grasp of how it really works...

As opposed to having to leave the country? Seems quite a bit better to me.At any rate, no you don't have to leave the state for 99% of great health care, but there are a few institutions that specialize in rare and exotic maladies, and my family has the misfortune to have a couple of them. But there are a series of clinics around the country that specialize in the rare stuff; here in the midwest it's Mayo Clinic; out east it's Johns Hopkins, and many university hospitals are on the cutting edge of other specific obscure things.It's not really practical to have a clinic that specializes in familial paraganglioma in every city, because there just aren't that many cases in the country. But for even a lower middle class person -- mechanics, sales clerks, etc -- access to the best clinics in the country is just a phone call away. Yes, these are the clinics that princes and kings of other countries come to because there is nothing in those countries that is comparable.So, would you rather have to travel across state lines to have your rare malady treated; or would you rather have to be a multi-millionaire who can afford to travel overseas and pay for the costs out of pocket?Hmm, tough choice. Can I get back to you on that?

[El Guapo 8]

So you have to travel out of state to get good care? That seems like a great system!

Now that is just a ridiculous statement and you know it. If someone needs to see a specialist for a particular ailment or disease, some times the best person for the job does not reside near you, so you need to possibly go to them. Remember the U.S. is 3,537,441 square miles. Sweden is only 173,732 square miles. That is roughly the size of California. I would not think twice about driving from northern to southern California to see a specialist. Would you drive across you country to see one?

[Speedy Petey 0]

Sorry if this has been mentioned, I have not read through this entire thread, but after reading Daniel's latest blog about how he just realized how bad the care for his mother was in Canada, I am dreading something like that here in the US.

[Zeatrix 0]

Now that is just a ridiculous statement and you know it. If someone needs to see a specialist for a particular ailment or disease, some times the best person for the job does not reside near you, so you need to possibly go to them. Remember the U.S. is 3,537,441 square miles. Sweden is only 173,732 square miles. That is roughly the size of California. I would not think twice about driving from northern to southern California to see a specialist. Would you drive across you country to see one?

He did not mention at all that they got care for very special conditions. Had I known that it would have made more sense. I agree that it isn't anything special for rare conditions. See, I can acknowledge when I'm wrong

[Loismustdie 0]

Sorry if this has been mentioned, I have not read through this entire thread, but after reading Daniel's latest blog about how he just realized how bad the care for his mother was in Canada, I am dreading something like that here in the US.

Yeah, out of respect for Daniel I think most of us just weren't planning on going there for now.

[hblask 1]

In further news of how the government protects our health care from that nasty free market. I sure hope the federal government takes over the half of health care spending they have left alone so far so that we can get more results like this:http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20090304/FREE/903049985NY regulators frown on doctor's flat-fee systemDr. John Muney is negotiating with state insurance regulators to maintain the system he arranged with patients who pay $79 a month for unlimited office visits.(AP) - A New York City doctor's flat-fee, $79-a-month medical practice has run afoul of state insurance regulators who have told him to shut it down.Dr. John Muney said Wednesday he's negotiating to try to keep the arrangement at his AMG Medical Group centers. The fee includes unlimited office visits, some tests and in-office surgeries. It doesn't cover treatment requiring hospitalization or specialized care.Dr. Muney sees it as a formula for making health care affordable and patient-friendly at a time when many people are losing jobs and medical benefits.But the state Insurance Department says Dr. Muney's system amounts to insurance and requires a license.

[El Guapo 8]

I was talking to my mother in law last night, and medical (California's welfare insurance for lack of a better term) has gotten to the point where most clinics and hospital groups will see their patients. Lack of payment, underpayment, the people in the system who are drug seekers, demanding treatment, etc. have gotten so bad that they have opened up medical clinics and the doctors there are literally treating them like sheep. They get them in and out, barely talk to them, and if they do its in a condescending degrading way. Almost subhuman. Even though we keep hearing more and more stuff like this, people are still pushing for government controlled health care. It is mind boggling.

[CaneBrain 95]

I was talking to my mother in law last night, and medical (California's welfare insurance for lack of a better term) has gotten to the point where most clinics and hospital groups will see their patients. Lack of payment, underpayment, the people in the system who are drug seekers, demanding treatment, etc. have gotten so bad that they have opened up medical clinics and the doctors there are literally treating them like sheep. They get them in and out, barely talk to them, and if they do its in a condescending degrading way. Almost subhuman. Even though we keep hearing more and more stuff like this, people are still pushing for government controlled health care. It is mind boggling.

thats because for every govt run health scary story you post.....someone else can post a scary private insurance company ****ed me in the a$$ story.no one wants to admit this but there is NO way to provide the kind of health care we think people deserve to everyone. govt run health care would just be a different kind of suck.

[Jeepster80125 0]

thats because for every govt run health scary story you post.....someone else can post a scary private insurance company ****ed me in the a$$ story.no one wants to admit this but there is NO way to provide the kind of health care we think people deserve to everyone. govt run health care would just be a different kind of suck.

Any ideas on how it would be paid for? Don't say increased taxes. Come up with a non bullshit explanation on how to pay for something that consumes 1/6th of our economy.

[CaneBrain 95]

Any ideas on how it would be paid for? Don't say increased taxes. Come up with a non bullshit explanation on how to pay for something that consumes 1/6th of our economy.

get everyone to take the money they spend on private health insurance now and send it to medicaid instead? Bill Maher's show talked at length last week about how Medicaid is better at keeping costs down than private insurance companies.