"[They] best not make any more threats to [us]. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. He has been very threatening beyond a normal state, and as I said, they will be met with fire and fury, and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before." First I thought Kim was talking about Trump. Then I realized Trump said it. This is why I voted for Hillary.
Those are definitely problems, but they are addressing two different things. When hospitals charge x amount for services and medicine it is usually because they have negotiated those amounts with insurance companies who have agreed to pay them no questions asked. It's why patients historically disputed those costs when not using insurance and have them reduced. It's the same nowadays; when I go for routine procedures I tell them I don't have insurance and pay $100 for services my insurance would approve for $1000 but I'd have to pay because of my ridiculous ACA deductible. Basically my insurance doesn't cover basic procedures anymore and is merely to have in case of catastrophe. Doctors charging for services that they don't personally provide is a different issue.
Just a question, not to say there is something to the Russian election bruhaha, but if they determine Trump was guilty of collusion, do they A. Boot him and bring in Pence, because wouldn't he be guilty by association B. Boot both and bring in Paul Ryan or C. Bring in Hellary
That would be Pence, then Ryan and then Orin Hatch. But if they came to the conclusion that there was collusion between the campaign and Russia would they be able to block Pence from taking over? I hadn't seen it brought up in the news anywhere so was wondering if anyone had read anything about it.
There is no such crime as "collusion", outside of antitrust , therefore it would be impossible to be found guilty of it.
Allow me to ask a couple questions, no agenda necessary, just curious what u think...... First, do you think practicing physicians set these prices?........ Second, if healthcare is a right, then should it be reserved for legal citizens?
For their own practices? Sure. Theoretically, no, but there needs to be some realism in how it gets paid for.
I wasn't speaking of a specific crime called collusion but there must be a crime they have in mind when pursuing this investigation.
Ok.....i cannot speak for the entire physician community but i do believe if that really was the case, our system would be much more efficient and folks would be paying much less for many, many services. Not quite a free market, but in some ways, yes. The individual and small group practice doesn't negotiate any of the prices. Rather they are dictated by the gov't - private insurance web that instead has captured most physicians. Lower reimbursements, increased insurance rates, and electronic record shifts have all caused many to close up shop and head to the larger, hospital sponsored physician groups. As a bandaid, the insurers and gov't make you cough up copays and deductibles to indirectly pay for the services. The entire complex from the insurance providers, congress, AMA, and all health related companies are to blame. Poorly written legislation allows rampant internal abuse that continually drives up costs which both the doctor and patient have to absorb. Full disclosure - i know its a pipe dream but i would fully support a partial free market, partial gov't sponsored system. Yes maybe a single payer/regulator (gov't) that is funneled down thru private companies that sell specific types of health insurance.
EMR was a disgraceful handout to the insurance industry. Doctors now work several hours a night at home after work to keep up with the transactional requirements the law requires. When the laws were passed they should have included a required employee hired and fully paid for by the insurance industry to handle that workload.
