Hospitals shutting down, unable to stay financially afloat

And who pays the tab?

 

Have a look at the infographic

what is the difference between your employer paying for your insurance and therefore paying a lower wage Ofer the tax man taking a cut?

You pay either way

 

Because they’re the size of a knat and just as powerless. China could take them over tomorrow if it wasn’t for us. They can’t protect themselves. Everything they have is mostly centered around not having to spend a dime on defense. That’s a big deal.

As we also have an excellent system. It’s just expensive and massive. I can see a doctor as quickly as we type this message. I can make a call and schedule a Physical therapy Zoom session the same day, because I just did. My in laws just made an appt. to see a cardiologist the next morning.

Its not the cheapest but the quality is

 

way off topic. there was a govt mandate to put off electives - but thats been dropped now. so empty hospitals can start up again

 

Are you sure that is a valid question?

Remember that with for-profit coverage, everyone is paying that tab. Being for-profit coverage didn't change that.

And, if people can't afford it, we're not going to just let them die. Death pannels is bad enough even when not predicated on net personal wealth.


Today, we have a monumentally inefficient mish mash of coverage companies, all doing the same thing while every care provider has to have professionals whose job it is to try to get payment from the various coverage companies, negotiating their mazes of stipulations and exceptions. Plus, they have to figure out what to do when the patient they just saved doesn't actually have any money.

I'm thinking it would be good to fire almost ALL those people and also stop requiring businesses to be healthcare insurance companies. They should be allowed to just focus on their businesses.

If we're going to save cost, we're going to need to lose a whole lot of employees.

And, firing the actual care providers is an obvious fail - we need those people.

 

Are you sure that wasn't a state by state issue?

I'm pretty sure that at least some of our larger hospitals here in WA set their own policy on elective surgery, stopping elective procedures during the period of signifiant COVID patient count. Our governor set policy on that, too.

Here in Seattle we had no elective procedures for a time when when I'm pretty sure those on the east side of the Cascades were quite COVID free and had open hospitals.

Now, we're pretty much stabilized here, but the east side has places that have been spiking to some extent.

The federal government has little to add to that. It's not as if they ever gave a hot crap about what was happening here.

 

Because the taxman taking a cut reduces the amount going into the system, and while doing that, the tax man contributes nothing to the program, he's a burden, not an asset, which all of government is, and he has no incentive to get a better price for the coverage and truthfully he will follow the guidance that he is given from above to cut deals, in other words deal with those who pay the best bribes to politicians to get the contract.

No thanks, I as an employer will deal directly with the carrier to get the best deal for my employee's, making my company more desirable to work for, versus relying on a faceless government bureaucrat, who could give a rats fanny about the people he is making decisions for.

If you have government managed healthcare too bad for you, I don't need or want a government bureaucrat who is willing to pay $600 of taxpayers money for a toilet seat managing my healthcare.

 

Why are you happy about being required to deal with employee healthcare coverage in ANY WAY?

Don't you as an employer have anything better to do with your time?

 

Because I care abut my employee's and it's part of my job to get the best of anything I can for them, I guess you no clue how to run a company and keep the turnover rate as low as possible.

Based on your comment my guess is you have never run a company or even worked as an upper manager.

 

There is a good reason this fairy story is posted from 2002 and that is because this load of bull even 18 years ago!

This monumental fraud from the Republican administration at that time was the way tge Republicans went all out to wipe out care for Americans and to drive up profits for the insurance companies, with a juicy bone for the medical societies.

At that point, much of the USA had made heavy limits of jury awards for anyone who had a drunken doctor chop off the wrong leg.

Even then, the TOTAL costs for ALL liability costs were less than 2.4% for EVERYTHING! The lawsuit costs, the money taken, expenses for all, win or lose. Even the constan whining of "defensive medicne, tests, etc.", all was LESS than 2.4% in ALL costs. It NEVER was a real problem, and now its hone crazy the other way! Of course, now getting any medical care at all is the problem in the USA, when EVERY other 1st world medical system paid every citizen from before death to death!

So if an employer pays an extra $2.40 out a $100 premum to allow the possibility of getting some kind of survival when a drunken doctor screws up, that is worth it, I'd say. Otherwise, a patient could end up living homeless when the drunken doctor laughs at him on his way to the golf course.

Harvard School of Public Health is dedicated to advancing the public’s health through learning, discovery, and communication. More than 400 faculty members are engaged in teaching and training the 1,000-plus student body in a broad spectrum of disciplines crucial to the health and well being of individuals and populations around the world.

 

Medicare.

 

Ypu make no sense

surely a small country would struggle more and as for China - you have NO idea do you? Do you even know where Singapore is and why it can afford the best health care?


As for seeing a cardiologist - I can see one just as quickly as you and not only that but I am assured the same level of care no matter where I live and it is equitable.

Tell me - do any of your hospitals have a system called “Ryan’s Rule”? This is where anyone can escalate if they feel a loved one is getting inadequate care and it guarantees that an independent medical officer will review the case. Do you have a healthcare ombudsman to review how you have been treated to ensure the care is always the highest quality? Is everyone assured of getting seen in a timely manner dependent on thier illness? (Hospitals are penalised if you have to wait more than four hours between presentation and discharge/admission)

We also have “Coroners inquests” which investigates deaths under certain circumstances (ie within 24 hours of surgery) a relative can request if they feel the death was unwarranted

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coroner

These inquests are tremendously powerful as they often guide statewide care. The Patient observation forms were redesigned so as to catch deterioration earlier, sepsis pathways have been written with antibiotic guidelines etc etc etc

 

What’s the problem? That’s capitalism. Businesses sink or swim.

 

You hear what you want to hear. In reality very few hospitals are receiving large amounts of covid patients. The vast majority have few if any and were going broke because they cancelled elective procedures due to the expected influx of covid patients that never materialized. Fortunately most have recently resumed normal operations. If you watch our media though you are led to believe hospitals country wide are full of covid patients which simply isnt true. My local hospital sat empty for months and has since resumed elective procedures because they never did get a single covid patient.



https://www.inlander.com/spokane/ma...ns-from-seattle-were-key/Content?oid=19651003

 

Yes they recently started up again but the topic is many went broke waiting for the covid surge that never happened.
By the way the feds never forced hospitals to shut down. They did so based on state mandates.

 

No our hospitals also shut down prepping for the covid surge that never happened

 

Yea right, I guess you are not on Medicare or have looked at their budget lately.

 

Just show me a policy with similar coverage for a 64 year old. You can't

 

Never suggested it was Trump or feds.

 

It was a state government mandate - I didn't suggest it was federal or Trump.

I'm afraid I have little concern for privately owned hospitals crying poor mouth at this time.

 

In BOLD above, 'elective' surgeries are extreme short term issues...like 1 to 5 days max. From a local perspective, knowing the local Covid-19 trends, if there was no compelling reason to 'hold' a certain amount of beds for Covid, I don't see any reason why all of them could not continue elective surgeries?? The 'only' time elective surgeries would be reduced is if Covid required the beds, which means there would be income from all Covid patients. Can someone enlighten me?

 

Seems like you did with this all encompassing remark

 

May I ask why? They were told to shut down elective procedures to ensure room for the mass of covid patients that never happened. Do you just hate private hospitals so screw em?

 

Hospitals were told to clear their dockets for the swarm of covid patients that would soon inundate and overwhelm them. It was all hands on deck for covid.

 

I understand the impetus but I don't understand why elective surgeries cannot continue to be scheduled based on local Covid trends?