- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Zeke Emanuel and Rand Paul should talk subscription based health care
Posted on 2/22/17 at 4:28 pm to Hopeful Doc
Posted on 2/22/17 at 4:28 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
Got a link there? Costs are far from fixed and highly variable on the number of patients present at any one time, which fluctuates week to week, month to month and year to year. Staffing is constantly moved to attempt to match costs and revenues, and you're talking about an industry that currently operates at about a 1% profit margin.
All of that is BS.
Anyone that can read financial statements can recognize a hospital's cost are mostly fixed. But here is a link even a doctor can understand.
LINK
quote:
Your stance: the government currently sets the floor for pricing and doesn't do a good job of it, so the government should mandate that you can't pay for only what you use anymore, and an entire third party industry should be dissolved...Am I understanding you correctly?
No you are not.
All of those things have been conjured up in your mind. BUT it would be wonderful if the cost of an entire industry were dissolved but that is not the case.
quote:
If you're going to make radical government-centric change,
What are you talking about?
1
Posted on 2/22/17 at 6:00 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
Anyone that can read financial statements can recognize a hospital's cost are mostly fixed. But here is a link even a doctor can understand.
Good use of the word "mostly". That article, if correct, points to about a 60/40 split, roughly in favor of fixed costs. The point I'm making is that costs vary more than you seem to acknowledge, and there is a fair amount of unpredictability.
The only way your proposed system works is for hospitals to make drastically more than they currently do.- again, they already operate at a 1-3% gain by accepting money for what they bill.
How do the hospitals get more/adequate money for operation without an increase in cost to the patient? And if it does increase cost to the patient, what's the point?
quote:
No you are not.
All of those things have been conjured up in your mind.
Then I'm misunderstanding your point. Are you suggesting legislation moving toward your new proposed model or simply encouragement of hospital systems to move to such a scheme?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News