DISQUS

AMERICAblog: Sixty percent of US bankruptcies due to medical bills

  • High Crimes & Misdemeanors · 6 months ago
    As I have said numerous times, when the American people begin to think of health care as a universal right and that NO medical agent, insurance or corporation should profit from YOUR GOT'DAMN illness, that's when we will get UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE. Until then we're just blowin' farts in the wind with these spineless politicians.

    And as I've said, it will take a Million citizen march to DC to make this change.

    Those who speak about morality and don't practice it should be run out of the village!!!
  • Jophus · 6 months ago
    Somehow I think it needs to be more drastic than a bunch of people walking where the government tells you it is ok for you to walk.
  • High Crimes & Misdemeanors · 6 months ago
    A million plus people is not just a "bunch of people walking"

    It would scare the pants off the gutless politicians!!!!
  • nicho · 6 months ago
    No it wouldn't. Jophus is right. The march will have to be where the government tells you it will be -- and they have developed methods to dissipate crowds and minimize the effects of the march.

    Also, we have had million-person marches before -- Million Man March, Million Mom March, just for openers -- and none of them have had any real effect on government. The idea of a bunch of people marching in DC and changing Congress is just a fantasy.

    The only thing that is going to save the US is getting corporate money out of elections. Until that happens, we are screwed. And, there's no sign it's going to happen.
  • High Crimes & Misdemeanors · 6 months ago
    Nicho, I WHOLE- heartedly disagree with you on this one. The Million Man March and the Million Mom March were all self-serving affairs, only two segments of people were really paying attention.

    UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE - affects EVERYONE!!!!!

    You can bet your ass if everyone jumped on a bus, car, train, plane to DC on one single issue, UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE FOR ALL!! Then you would see change!!!

    Yes, they are chicken shit to let this happen, thus the draconian laws like the Military Commissions Acts, Patriot Acts, etc. There are reasons why these laws are in place.
  • Jophus · 6 months ago
    I knew I'd get something right sooner or later. :-) That was exactly my point, protests are managed and therefor aren't very effective. Unless you had an inaugural sized crowd it won't do anything.
  • Jophus · 6 months ago
    What do you think they think of when they see a group of people gathering for a protest?
  • GoLiveWithSocialists · 6 months ago
    If they can't profit from it, they'll have to close all the labs and disband all the jobs of scientists doing research.

    Socialized healthcare is a mistake because I am a better judge of what healthcare is right for me than my government.

    I do believe it should be decoupled from employment however. That never made sense to me. It should be sold just like car insurance or auto insurance to individuals.
  • High Crimes & Misdemeanors · 6 months ago
    Yeah, there we go with the old lame meme: I can do it better then the government.

    That bullshit line is used by rightwinger fascists who think government should be drowned down the tub.

    The government does not dictate where you go no in providers, but Part B in the medicare program is the huge problem, which the right wingers added to that bill.

    Out country was founded on a socialist movement of the "greater good" - you dimwit.

    Non-profits make money but pour it back into the system not into the back pocket of the CEO.

    Take your rightwing garbage points of view and shove it.
  • nicho · 6 months ago
    No one is proposing socialized health care. They are proposing socialized health insurance. And that is a completely different thing.

    And the countries that do have socialized health insurance have much lower costs and much better health care than the crappy US system.

    And, the government will not be deciding what's right for you. Even if it did, I would rather have the government deciding than some insurance company beancounter who gets a bonus for stalling you until you die.
  • condew · 6 months ago
    Yeh, like one person "negotiating" with a multi-billion dollar business and thousands of lawyers has a prayer of striking a good deal. Can you spell i-d-i-o-t?
  • condew · 6 months ago
    If you don't get an overwhelming turnout you prove THEIR point, not yours, and if the crowds act up, the argument will be "do you want to pay more taxes to give that rabble health insurance?". A march is a bad idea.
  • Paula · 6 months ago
    Unfortunately, Mr. Obama's administration is caving to conservatives on all this. The current proposal will leave the wealthy and insurance companies untouched while having the old, ill, disabled, and very poor--the beneficiaries of Medicare and Medicaid--receive less medical care in order to fund the proposed "basic" (second-tier) public coverage option, in effect pitting the helpless against the working poor. While campaigning, Obama came on as pro-singlepayer; soon after election, he was for a public "option" alonside current health insurance, with this public "option" to be paid in part (about one-third) by "trimming" Medicare and Medicaid. Now he is suggesting a "basic" public "option," to be funded entirely by cuts in Medicare and Medicaid. Such cuts are rationalized, by budget czar Peter Orszag, as not really harming anyone since the Dartmouth Health Atlas "shows" that "less intensive" medical care (measured by number of specialist visits, tests, etc.) does as well as "more intensive" care; however, the Dartmouth Health Atlas shows no such thing (and cannot, as it is a retrospective study of patients during their last two years of life). In brief, what the "compromise" to which Mr. Obama has caved will do is to use the same pool of monies now funding Medicare and Medicaid to also fund the new public option. And a beefed-up Medicare commission of "health economics experts" will oversee Medicare cuts--the administration has also yieled on this--probably without public or Congressional oversite. This is no "reform"; this is evisceration of Medicare/Medicaid and a step back from real universal, single-payer health coverage.
  • Fireblazes(cheetohsandcatfood) · 6 months ago
    The crazy Dems now want to tax the employer paid portion of your insurance benefits as income.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

    What would be the point of keeping it if it becomes even more expensive. I already pay a fortune for what the insurance does not cover.
  • Father_Time · 6 months ago
    They wouldn't need to had the republicans not driven our country into finacial ruin.
  • Fireblazes(cheetohsandcatfood) · 6 months ago
    They don't "need to". They are taxing me for money my employer gets a tax break on. They are taxing me for my employer's investment in its workers! What next, tax me again for the asphalt my tires ride on because that is to my personal benefit too?
    What would be the point of remaining on the work related health care?
  • jackb29 · 6 months ago
    Chris,

    When did your dad use the VA? If before aproximately 1993, then VA Medical care probably was substandard. A new chief Medical Officer took charge then and a complete reform of VA Health care has occurred. In preventive care and in medical care, the VA is excellent (Most complaints about the VA now are about the slow determination of disability benefits, ie payments, not the health care.

    I should know. I just got out of 6 days of VA hospital care. It was first rate, much better than the care I got for an extensive hospitalization in 2005, and I had good health insurance then. The best part was not worrying about the cost, or getting thrown out of the hospital before I was ready, which happen in '05 and caused an infection that could have killed me.

    Phillip Longman, who has written for the Washington Monthy, Atlantic Monthly, The New Republic, and Harvard Business Review wrote and article in Wash Monthly which became a book.., his fourth full-length book published by PoliPointPress. Titled
    Best Care Anywhere: Why VA Healthcare is Better Than Yours, it reflects on Longman's loss of his first wife to cancer and aims to show that in fact private health insurance is not superior to public health care as is often presumed. (wikipedia)

    I agree with the point of this post, just want to make the point that today's VA Health care is not what your Dad received.
  • Asterix · 6 months ago
    While single-payer is the answer, I'd like to propose something that might do quite a bit to help out.

    A bit of legislation is needed that elegantly and simply states that no physician, clinic or hospital is allowed to charge an uninsured patient more than the minimum billed to any insurer for the same procedure or service.

    In other words, if an insurer has negotiated a price of $100 for a routine physical, the hospital may not bill more than this to an uninsured patient. It would be allowed to charge other insurers more than this, however.

    This might encourage hospitals to establish a standard set of rates that everyone pays. As the situation now stands, large insurers pay a fraction of what an uninsured person does.

    That, at least would be a small step.

    Trying to reform the insurance industry is like treating a symptom, not a disease.
  • Father_Time · 6 months ago
    People with insurance are still going bankrupt from medical costs!

    No, our problem is exactly the insurance industry as well as overpricing from a pure capitalist based system. We don't need insurance companies at all. Insurance will never solve our medical crisis.

    We need socialized medicine. Full cradle to grave national healthcare. Nothing else solves the problem. Anything less than national healthcare will not solve the problem simply because medical costs are out of control. Capitalism regulates costs based on demand and there will never be less demand for healthcare, always more. So costs will always go up. There cannot be enough hospitals to create a cost effective competitive market. Its an impossibility.
  • High Crimes & Misdemeanors · 6 months ago
    Excellent point!!!!
  • libertydan · 6 months ago
    There are some doctors out there who accept no insurance, so they can charge everyone the same low fees which are listed, like a restaurant menu! hehe
    Thats how medicine was practiced in the past and America had the best healthcare
  • Gorgonzola · 6 months ago
    The problem is that most middle class white males are hopelessly ingnorant and kept in that condition by politicians, bs preachers and the corporate media.
  • KerrynowCampau · 6 months ago
    Yep. They think people filing bankruptcy have all been living the high life on credit cards or losers who deserve it.
    Until it happens to them...
  • High Crimes & Misdemeanors · 6 months ago
    I think it has more to do with the reasoning mind, or to be clear, the lack of the reasoning mind. Discernment, logic, and analysis is something that should be learned at a young age, our educational system has failed in this endeavor for over 60 years... that's why we have really stupid people as leaders, I'm sorry to say.

    Let me add: Not so sure color has anything to do with it, we do have hopelessly dumb people in every color as leaders in our communities.
  • Gorgonzola · 6 months ago
    I just watched David Vitter speak on the Senate floor. His speaking manner is designed to appeal to the simple minded individual who relates well to time worn platitudes, conventional assumptions and ephemeral assertions that when examined have no substance whatever. This is the kind of guy that bonehead white middle class males vote for in droves.
  • gss99 · 6 months ago
    You know what really bugs me? People who think our leaders are stupid or incompetent. They aren't stupid or incompetent, they just aren't looking out for your best interests. They are doing things for the rich.

    Imagine you are a senator. Someone comes up to you and says, "i'll make you a very rich and powerful man...all you have to do is vote this way, this way and this way when you get into the white house". Are you saying that you won't do it? Well, guess what, if you turn that offer down, the corporations will find someone who will do their bidding. That's how the game works. No one turns down $30 million dollars and that's why all the presidents from the last 20 yrs or so left the white house as very very rich men because they were bought and paid for.
  • ndtovent · 6 months ago
    It *is* pathetic, no doubt about that. What the greedy health insurance industry has done to to our middle class is unforgivable. However, I'm optimistic that we *will* have something like universal health care for all....Eventually... Because of the insurance lobbies, it has to be done in increments. We'll probably have a MA-like plan at first, then move incrementally toward a more universal plan...
  • Jophus · 6 months ago
    It will take 50 years to move at that pace. I can nearly guarantee that everyone reading this will need it before then.
  • condew · 6 months ago
    Nonetheless, if you force change too fast, you engender fear in the 2/3 of Americans who have health insurance and don't know that, for half of them, if they get sick they will lose that insurance within a year, a quarter would lose it as soon as they got seriously sick.

    If they knew they only had a 50-50 chance their insurabce would stick with them thru a major illness, perhaps more would support single payer, or at least insist on a Medicare-for-all option.

    I think it is stories like the one on MSNBC today, where I got these figures, that is the best way to improve support for healthy care reform.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31103572/
  • Jophus · 6 months ago
    What can we do then? Other than writing our representatives?
  • nicho · 6 months ago
    If you write your representative, make sure you put the letter through your own shredder. It will save your rep the trouble of running it through his -- and you can put the price of the stamp toward health care costs.

    One huge corporate donate to a congressman outweighs 100,000 constituent letters.
  • KerrynowCampau · 6 months ago
    LOL the first part of your comment.
    The last sentence not so much......
  • Jophus · 6 months ago
    I used to work for my state senate and most of the senators have their interns or LAs read them. 100,000 letters would definitely turn some heads and make the representatives question their next primary though. When has one issue gotten that many letters to one representative at once though? never.
  • nicho · 6 months ago
    I'm old enough to remember when 10 letters would get a rep or senator concerned. But that was when they were out whoring for your votes. Those were in the days when reps and senators were connected to their constituents.

    But now, as Al Gore pointed out in his book, the democratic process has turned into a one-way conversation with everything turning on 30-second commercials and the cable propaganda networks.

    Members of Congress know that they need to raise millions of dollars to orchestrate that one-way conversation. So, donors will always come ahead of voters, because those millions of dollars allow the voters to be manipulated.
  • ndtovent · 6 months ago
    I have the same question. I can't afford to give money right now, but would like to do something.
  • anastasjoy · 6 months ago
    I don't "see Democrats caving" at all. They may be so inclined, but people are getting angrier and angrier and just throwing up our hands and telling ourselves they're going to cave so why bother is incredibly counterproductive. Get in the phone NOW.
  • Jophus · 6 months ago
    Is the single payer option on the table?
  • miss skeptic · 6 months ago
    I have printed this article and others which are similar and I will be handing these out at various events over the summer. Regular readers of this blog understand and empathize with the impact of medical costs on citizens, but there are plenty of people who needed to be educated. Do your part and help get the message out, in a letter to the editor, in handouts, by volunteering with your local county Party, or any other way you can think of. It really helps.
  • Father_Time · 6 months ago
    I don't think there should be anything more then cursory "negotiations" with the medical industry. Create laws and they must comply. Or simply nationalize medicine, then create what is needed. I believe that the majority of Americans already want and need national healthcare. We have plenty of information from examples around the world in which to form a successful system. It is just a matter of ignoring that population minority that wield massive financial resources against the national healthcare system that our people must have.
  • libertydan · 6 months ago
    Universal healthcare should be up to the states not the federal level. Massachusetts did it. It will work better to since every state is different. The drug lobby cant lobby all 50 states can they?
  • nicho · 6 months ago
    That "Leaving it up to the States" argument is just corporatist propaganda. It will leave us with a horrendous patchwork of second-rate health-care systems.

    Also, it is much much easier to corrupt state-level officials. This is why the corporations love it.

    Only corporatists and goofy "libertarians" believe in this.
  • High Crimes & Misdemeanors · 6 months ago
    So right, can you imagine the State of Mississippi offering health care for all?

    They can barely piece together a broken educational system there!!!
  • nicho · 6 months ago
    Mississippi? Try California. Arnold is about to close 250 state parks and lay off all the rangers, etc. He's planning to cut all AIDS funding. He's going to toss 200,000 students out of college. Yeah, CA would have a splendid health-care plan.
  • Father_Time · 6 months ago
    Yes they can and they do. This is not a states issue, rather its a national problem.
  • David T · 6 months ago
    Remember, the Bush administration made it harder to file for bankruptcy, and lessened the benefits of doing so. Bush stated in a speech that he was supporting the new law because "people need to pay their bills."
  • KerrynowCampau · 6 months ago
    didn't Obama vote for that?
  • David T · 6 months ago
    Obama voted no on the bill. You must be getting him confused with John McCain.
  • KerrynowCampau · 6 months ago
    Thanks for making me look that up. I had heard that he did. Joe Biden did....
  • David T · 6 months ago
    True. Why don't you go ahead and list all the Republicans versus Democrats who voted for it. That way, you can post all the names at once, instead of going down the list one by one?
  • KerrynowCampau · 6 months ago
    I take my thank you back
  • frank · 6 months ago
    I go for test- I give ins. proof- ins. pays 80%- they bill me 20%- i say fuck you be glad you got 80%. vicious cycle
  • High Crimes & Misdemeanors · 6 months ago
    Does anyone else see the connection here?

    We went from a power house industrial building nation where cars, engines, and all kinds of things were built here - to a service industry, servicing the goods others make....

    And wal-mart is right in the midst of this bullshit.

    -------------------

    Wal-Mart says it will create 22,000 jobs in 2009

    BENTONVILLE, Ark. – As Wal-Mart Stores Inc. opens about 150 new or expanded stores in the U.S. in 2009, the company expects to hire about 22,000 people for new positions.

    Those positions include plenty of cashiers and stock clerks, but the world's largest retailer will also be adding store managers, pharmacists and personnel workers.
  • Zorba · 6 months ago
    Health care is a basic human right. We need universal health care, socialized medicine, Medicare for All, I don't care what you call it. It's insane to depend on for-profit insurance companies for our health care costs. By their very natures, their purpose is to make a profit. The only way they can do that (besides paying health-care providers less and less, until more and more of them opt out of accepting insurance, or even out of medicine entirely) is to make us pay more and more in monthly fees, co-pays and deductibles, and by denying us the care and medicine we need when we are sick, because it cuts into their profits.
    And this doesn't even begin to address the problems of the uninsured, which are ever-increasing because of unemployment, and because many employers are cutting down on or eliminating health care benefits because they're getting too expensive. And private pay is out of reach for far too many people who are just over the Medicaid cut-off. And Medicaid is being cut back in most states, anyway.
  • Brad · 6 months ago
    We need more disease prevention information made available, but the FDA keeps using it's tax-powered bureaucratic might for driving a wedge between consumers and information about natural products and their benefits.

    Often the FDA doesn't even disagree with the veracity of producers claims (cherries, Cheerios,) but instead insists that attaching FDA accepted health information to natural products is to make a drug claim.

    This waste of tax money fuels more financial devastation, and bolsters profits of their pharma-buddies.
  • Nancy in Indiana · 6 months ago
    Sorry if I'm jumping in late, but a wrinkle in the issue of medical bankruptcies is that hospitals, physicians, and others who provide services to insured patients, and then cannot co-pays and deductibles, are also impacted. I'm very afraid that unless affordable, full-coverage insurance is not available soon, doctors will start turning away people based on credit reports. Offices who file insurance are already considered creditors for purposes of identity theft regulations, so why not check up on people? I already know general surgeons who insist on being paid up front for deductibles and coinsurance for non-urgent procedures. Until single-payor is reality, everyone is screwed.
  • E · 6 months ago
    Here is the problem as I see it. Medical Insurance should be used like home insurance. If you break a window in your house or crack a toilet you don't call your insurance. You just fork over the $100.00. However, people today think that coughing up $50.00 to see a doc is way too much. They want to pay $15.00. Well, that comes at a price. Imagine if your doctor simply didn't take insurance. He doesn't give two shits if you have it or not. The price to see him is $30.00 no matter what. Now he can fire half of his office staff because he doesn't have to bill insurance companies, he doesn't have to wait 90 days to be paid, he gets paid what he bills not what the insurance company will pay him. You see this is much simpler and cheaper in the long run. You call your insurance man when your house burns down.
  • M.Michaels · 2 months ago
    My husband has had diabeties since he was 25 years old. He worked for 27 years at Ball Metal Corp. in VA. His doctors ask and wrote many times to his employer to please put him on a regular 12 hour work schedule days or nights, it did not matter. Ball refused to do this. My husband now is 100% disabled due to the the diabeties.
    I work full time and have for 35 years, paid my taxes, raised our child, and carry the insurance for my entire family. My husband has Medicare. He is on 16 pills a day. Recently I had a colonosopy in which the doctor put 2 holes in my colon, had emergency surgery now stuck with thousand of dollars of medical debt. We can not pay them..so what do we do?? True hard working Americans, always pay our bills but even with inusrance can;t pay them. Should we just dump the insurance and start going to the emergency room for free care?