What is a reasonable cost for health insurance?

L

Larry T. Spider

1,000+ Posts
Everybody is talking about the rapidly rising cost of health insurance. Obviously nobody is happy with that situation. So, what should the cost be? Between the district and myself, we pay about 900/month for basic insurance for two people. Is that too much, too little, or OK? I understand that different plans offer different things but this is the lowest plan available. If we are all going to ***** about the cost (myself included), we should at least have some idea of what a reasonable cost should be.
 
I'm not sure we'll ever agree on that because that depends on our individual needs and risk comfort.

In my mind, one of the reasons for our very expensive healthcare system is that we subsidize medical innovation for the rest of the world. Medical equipment and drug research is a large part of the egregious costs we pay that aren't borne by other countries. This means jobs her in the US but is also means $25k overnight hospital stays. Unfortunately, Obamacare or Medicare Prescription D attacked that source of cost escalation.
 
It's about the same cost for me, over $10 grand annually. If I didn't have insurance and had a medical problem I guess I could negotiate with a medical provider as to the cost they would charge me. I don't know the numbers of people who do this since they don't have insurance, but it is a good chunk of my annual income as an educator. I'm like you, not sure what a reasonable cost is. I can look at the unreasonable costs for services rendered, like $5 for a Tylenol, and get plenty aggravated over that.
 
The government got involved in medicine with Medicare in the mid-60's (not an indictment on the program) and the cost/reimbursements have been skewed and there is no real free market. The physicians and companies that do well find ways to game the system that often have very little to do with efficient effective care. I don't think it leads to negligent malpractice but we aren't doing anyone any favors for their health or their wallets. With ever increasing hands in the pie for healthcare, the costs get higher and delivery gets more confusing.

There are mechanisms in place (quality measures, outcome based reimbursements) to try and change the way medical providers are paid but until you get special interest (pharm, medical device manufacturers, procedural oriented doctors) away from the decision makers on who gets paid what, then we will never have anything resembling a free market system.

That said, we still must have guarantees of quality medicine in a free market. Maybe it can be covered by state medical boards because you can't just open it up to low bid medicine. I wouldn't want to be a patient at some Wal-Mart style clinic with the lowest paid staff using the lowest quality equipment with very little choice on health care options.
 
NewDoc. I value your opinions because I think you know what you are talking about. So how do you think a single-payer system, which is where we are headed, will effect care? Most of the doctors I know are nearing retirement and are not terribly optimistic, so I'd like a younger doctor's take.
 
It would greatly simplify healthcare delivery for most Americans but I don't know at what cost. When I say cost I mean efficiency and quality.

I have spoken with patients and physicians in the Canadian and British systems and it's not the horror show that American insurance companies and pharm companies make it out to be. A majority of patients get timely treatment and doctors make out pretty well.

There are disadvantages though. In most industries, desirable variables include speed (efficiency), costs and quality of product. The adage is that you can pick two of those three. That's what drives me crazy about some posters on this website. They assume the ACA will provide all three.

As much as I am a free market person, the same principles for a lot of industry cannot be applied universally to health care delivery. I think the ACA was a giant job of trying to please everyone in the system besides patients and direct care providers. We just layered in a bunch more complexity into a completely inefficient maze of a system. No way this reduces overall cost.

This is long way of saying that a two tiered system (like England) would have been much simpler and much cheaper but I think it will be at the expense of quality or efficiency for those who currently have access to the system.

We have allowed greed and a declining base of morals and virtue to infiltrate the US health care system and it shows on how expensive it is to deliver care. Everyone wants a piece of the frickin pie because it's a big pie and there is no cost containment. Physicians still drive the health care dollar but are now manipulated into gaming the system just to keep their doors open. Many players in the system are able to grab a bigger chunk of the pie and it does not translate into better outcomes for patients.

I just don't trust either political party with the ability to oversee a single payer system and allow fair competition in a free market. I also don't see the current administration allowing a separate free market system for another tier of medicine to exist, although that would be consistent with a democracy and a country built on constrained free market principles and capitalism.

If you see what a primary care doctor's office deals with day in and out with prior authorizations, referral hoops and mountains of paperwork, you would understand why many are tempted to throw in the towel and quit or just give it up to a single payer system.
 
I'll look up all of that when I have a chance. I just looked up the difference in what is coming outt of my check. Its going from $332/month to $467/month. The service that I am getting is staying the same.
 
Remember. This is not about healthcare or healthcare costs. It is about redistribution of wealth. Nothing more.
 
When the president proclaims he is for wealth redistribution then there is only one wat to interpret this law. The problem is he is taking from people already living living pay check to pay check. Since becoming president the average medium income has dropped over 3: thousand dollars per family. That in itself is enough to stagnate the economy take anoter 2 or 3 hundred bucks a month away and you eliminate the bare boned spending power of the middle class even more. He made promises that were impossible to keep and now he and his cohorts are spinning to try and change a lie to a misunderstanding. I cant believe that anyone can still support this legislation that was passed in the middle of the night on Christmas eve and was all predicated by the biggest whopper in history. This bill would never have passed had he told the truth. You propably will not keep you insurance ; it will cost more ; everyone has maternity and psycho care whether you need it or not ; you may not keep your doctor; you will be limited on hospitals. Can one staunch supporter honestly say this would have passed had he told the truth. I await a response. -
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top