Reply With Quote
None whatsoever. Whats ed up is that while the rise in litigation payouts annually has increased by an average of 5% per year which is parallel to the 5% inflation rate, the rise in malpractice insurance premiums has gone up 25%.
Also legalize pot. That will save alot of money on doctor bills
None whatsoever. Whats ed up is that while the rise in litigation payouts annually has increased by an average of 5% per year which is parallel to the 5% inflation rate, the rise in malpractice insurance premiums has gone up 25%.
Actually profit is exactly the problem. Ina typical market you have a slanted demand curve such that the higher price you charge the less people you will get to pay for your goods/service.
HC isn't like that. The demand curve is pretty much vertical. IOW, they can charge whatever the they want and people will pay whatever it takes to get care.
If your arm is broken and you will lose partial function and risk osteomyalitis if you don't get care then your going to pay what it takes.
People will mortgage their homes sell everything they have and live out of their car to pay for their child's medical care.
We will pay whatever the they want, they have us by the balls and they know it.
THEY HAVE NO INCENTIVE WHATSOEVER TO CUT COSTS.
Tort reform as generally defined is...
"that sum of money which will put the party who has been injured in the same position as he would have been if he had not sustained the wrong for which he is now getting his compensation or reparation."
Malpractice is a separate en y that is between patient and physician, hospital or pharmeceutical and has nothing to do with compensation for the injury itself unless the physician, hospital or pharmeceutical is deemed neglegent in their treatment of said injury.
And your point is?
WTF do you think has happened when malpractice insurers payout? WTF do you think the insurance is for?
There is no accusation of malpractice without an accusation of negligence.
You act as if there aren't malpractice suits.
You can make the same inane comment about liability. Quite frankly your post is stupid.
My post is directed at your post regarding cost percentages in the medical industry as compared to cost of living and malpractice insurance premiums. It looked to me that you were saying Tort Reform doesn't work because of the cost of malpractice insurance premiums.
If so I was trying to explain...
Malpractice is the act of giving inaccurate treatment to a patient. Are physicians not liable for giving inaccurate treatment to a patient? If it is proven that the patient suffered due to the effect of inaccurate treatment should a physician, hospital, or pharmeceutical be exempt from the cost of correcting such procedure?
That's why malpractice insurance premiums are up. Not because of Tort Reform...but because there is more than just the treatment of the first problem...there is the treatment(s) of the insuing problems because of the mistake.
I never said anything about tort reform. If anything I think its funny that the insurance companies wasted so much lobby money to get it. At the end of the day, adjusted for inflation they are paying out the same as before.
The only issue is that in the case of what doctors have to pay to the insurers, they are paying out 5 times more than what can be explained by inflation. IOW, the insurers are jacking up the prices arbitrarily.
I'm not an expert in the nuances of malpractice insurance but let me interject a thought about that from a business owner perspective.
The 5 times the amount may be a figure that represents the average cost of having to correct a mistake that might be made.
As a business owner if my company were to create damage to a client while performing the service they hired me to do or even perform a task they did not authorize me to do...then the expense of fixing the damage could easily be 5 times the cost of what that client intended me to do in the first place.
The intent of the OP is to suggest fixes. In the context of the OP, quite frankly, your post is stupid.
Awww, you don't like me now. I am going to need a box of tissues. This line of discussion is in the context of a proposed fix. Given that it is perfectly germane.
Relax, little fella. It'll be ok. I like you just fine.
Fix something, will ya?
Oh I am fine.
Really what I feel is needed is some serious market intervention. I know that pure capitalists freak out at the idea but quite frankly the industry in general outside of pharmaceuticals to a degree has zero incentive to keep costs down.
The demand curve is as such that the consumer will pay any price regardless of supply or demand for that matter and as such something has to be done.
I am not overly fond of the public plan. Ideally, I feel that it would be a good tool to keep the honest but I know how it would really go. In Texas there is a state run auto insurance company. Most people don't know this because it is a steaming pile of because of the way the lobby force it legislated.
In the industry, there are what are called risk categories. If you get into an accident your rates auomatically go up by a percentage but it can also put you in a different risk category which increase your base rates that the multiplier applies to. This allows you to appropriately charge the consumer and still minimize risk.
The state run agency can only have one risk tier and its a flamin pile of that no one would be willing to pay so no one uses it. That is exactly what the lobby would try to do here. As such a public option isn't going to work
Instead the first thing I propose is simple. Open all insurance companies' actuarial tables annually and grandfather that for the last 25 years. Make them justify their bull .
Before people start clamoring about this keep in mind that this is exactly what happens for property and casualty insurance in all 50 states. AllState for example has to go to the Texas Insurance Commision with their actuarial tables and proposed rates and if the commission says its bull then they have to fix that and come back or they dont sell insurance in Texas.
(continued)
Malpractice would be beholden to these same ideas.
The collusion between the insurance companies and hospitals needs to end and the manner in which charging is done needs to stop. Prices need to be standardized. IOW, there is ONE COST and everyone who gets that good/service pays that one cost. Now different costs can be set at different hospitals and clinics but that is the limit. On an individual basis that would be illegal.
Additionally, pricing would have to be up front given and agreed to before the procedure/service/good is given. Obviously in the case of a medical emergency this would be waived but this bull of going to the hospital and having no idea what its going to cost until two weeks after you get home would be over.
You will be told what a private room costs total not just how much more it is than an alternative. If a CAT scan is to be administered then you will know how much it costs before they give it to you. You will know how much that tylenol costs or that morphine drip or that cast or WTFever BEFORE you get it. The worst are the leeches like OTs that go from room to room peddling wares you don't need/want only to ing bill you.
The hospital trust will go away. Currently most of the hospitals in the US are owned by 3 holding companies. Now it would be illegal to own or be part of an ownership group of more than one hospital. The collusion will end.
Doctors would get additional benefits in paying out their student loans if they go into general medicine for a period of time, say 10 years or until their loans are paid off whichever happens first. Subsidize them or lower the interest rate whatever.
Pharmaceutical companies can no longer advertise on TV and no longer can they send reps to doctors offices. You can send mail to them you can ship drugs whatever but prescriptions based on salesmanship rather than intelligence will end. IOW, if youre a doctor go read a ing medical journal.
Medical patents would not be privy to the same benefits as other goods. It would be reduced from 7 years to 2 years.
I think all of that would be a good start.
I knew if we banged around long enough we'd agree on something.
Good, solid points....all of 'em. I'm especially glad someone sees the larceny that is pharmaceutical pricing in the US. To further expound on your price point mods, I would abolish all GPOs...every single one of them. Their "negotiated" pricing is nothing more than subterfuge to enable the rebates pharma companies pay to them to list their products.
The thought that a bottle of Tylenol costs $5 at one hospital and $25 at another, by fiat of GPO contract pricing is ludicrous. I believe a fair price can be arrived at for any product once the bull of GPO manipulation is removed. Severly throttling back the advertising and marketing would throw millions if not billions, back into the mix.
I administered the VA pharmaceutical contracts for years. Like the DOD, you don't around with the VA. They demand the best GPO pricing, period. If Novation lists Tylenol at $4, and that is the best pricing of all the GPO contract prices, then that is what the VA demands....and woe be unto the pharma company that screws up that pricing. I watched the VA spank Bristol Meyers-Squibb once for that. The VA simply put the disputed item on contract for $1 until BMS corrected their mistake. It wasn't pretty.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
