Health Insurance Sometimes Borders on a Racket
Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 3 months ago to Economics
We took our kid to a doctor for a minor but persistent respiratory problems. The doc suggested two possible diagnostic tests. We asked some questions about whether the results would affect which interventions we used. I thought the results may or may not be of some use, so I asked what it would cost. He said something like, “Oh no, do you have to pay for medicine [outside of health plan premiums]?” We told him yes, but the cost would not be a burden for us at all. We talked through it and we all decided the tests wouldn't affect the treatment and would only be worthwhile if someone else were paying for it.
This is the THIRD TIME in the past four years a doctor has suggested something that costs several thousand dollars and withdrew the suggestion after we took a moment to work through a quick-and-dirty cost/benefit analysis.
There was an opposite example with my wife's pregnancy. The doc started to say we could have so many ultrasound tests and then said, “oh wait, you're private pay. Nevermind. You can have them every day if you want. They're $183 each.”
These insurance plans that insure against every little trifling expenditure are a gravy train for providers. They start with people wanting to turn over responsibility for managing expenses to a company or gov't.
People should be free to make stupid health decisions, like my decision to indulge in Taco Bell and other unhealthful habits.
This is the THIRD TIME in the past four years a doctor has suggested something that costs several thousand dollars and withdrew the suggestion after we took a moment to work through a quick-and-dirty cost/benefit analysis.
There was an opposite example with my wife's pregnancy. The doc started to say we could have so many ultrasound tests and then said, “oh wait, you're private pay. Nevermind. You can have them every day if you want. They're $183 each.”
These insurance plans that insure against every little trifling expenditure are a gravy train for providers. They start with people wanting to turn over responsibility for managing expenses to a company or gov't.
People should be free to make stupid health decisions, like my decision to indulge in Taco Bell and other unhealthful habits.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 7.
CG believes its ok to take from one man to give to another if he approves of the reasons.Neither Ayn Rand, nor I, nor most of the people on this site,would ever sanction that evil.
You read my mind...this was the norm while I was growing up.
I have always felt that the introduction of HMOs started the spiraling down. Suddenly there was no reason not to go to the doctor for a sniffle. The attitude became "why not see a doctor? I have unlimited visits, and I've already paid for it."
RP was certainly the best one for the job every time he ran.
I wish the people here would quit voting him down...I like seeing his comments, and I wouldn't blame him for leaving!
Are your goals to have bigger more intrusive government?
That is the only result of the DemRep Party of the past 100 years.
The strike was a literary device, that's all. Even AR said so. She didn't believe that "stopping the motor of the world" could ever work in the real world. We must take positive action to bring about the change that is needed. Inaction is only going to allow the tyrants to become permanently in charge.
FACT: third party votes have no positive impact.
FACT: third party votes CAN have negative impact (e.g.: Ross Perot).
FACT: third party votes are a waste of time.
If we had catastrophic insurance and folks paid for their routine care needs, things would be rational. The only thing worse will be gov't paid healthcare.
I often see the argument that a little poison is just as bad as a lot, it just takes longer to kill you. That's the wrong analogy. We have a system where the momentum is in one direction. That cannot be changed all at once (not even by stopping the engine of the world). In fact, the only outcome of such a drastic change would be tyranny - which I doubt that many of us here are looking to implement. To change the momentum is going to take small but persistent movements over a long time. I fear that anymore we don't have the time nor fortitude of national leadership to do what is necessary.
Load more comments...