OT: Medical Expense

[Jim Thompson]

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

<http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf>

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Martin Riddle]

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:29:23 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

...Jim Thompson

The deductable would have not been met, so the whole 2K

I guess you have 5 chinese globes now? ;D


Cheers

 

[Tom Biasi]

On 12/16/2013 7:25 PM, Martin Riddle wrote:

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:29:23 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

...Jim Thompson

The deductable would have not been met, so the whole 2K

I guess you have 5 chinese globes now? ;D


Cheers

 

[P E Schoen]

"Martin Riddle" wrote in message
news:1c6va9t6r9c5npe169s8lravamd8im9m1m@4ax.com...

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:29:23 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

The deductable would have not been met, so the whole 2K

I guess you have 5 chinese globes now? ;D

Same here. I have $2600 deductible, followed by 80/20 up to $5800 max
yearly, and essentially 100% after that. I have an HSA so I can put the
deductible in it tax free. From what I gathered from my romp through the
healthcare.gov site to the MD site I should be able to get as good or better
for about half of the $430/month I pay now, but in April I'll be eligible
for Medicare and SSA benefits (which I paid for).

Remember, ObamaCare is not insurance. It just offers a choice among several
providers and sets minimum standards and affordable prices. It would have
been better with a single payer system but that had zero chance of passing
due to insurance company lobbying efforts. And those actual costs on the
bills are inflated because health care providers want to get the most money
from the system, and not really what is reasonable. Of course probably half
the cost is malpractice liability insurance, which would be much lower if
proper tort reform were enacted, and if we would "kill all the lawyers".

Give it time. It will work. If Romney had been elected and offered the same
thing you (JT) right-whiners would be fawning over how great it is and would
excuse the temporarily dysfunctional website. I think it was deliberately
sabotaged by well-paid right-wing hackers.

Paul
"I Love ObamaCare!"

 

[P E Schoen]

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message
news:a23va9l3se5se772vjdbb8403n2q9msod2@4ax.com...

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

Notice that MOST of the charges were actually paid by Medicare. Aren't you
glad that Uncle Sam is providing that for you? Be grateful for that! The
remaining pittance was paid by your "Medi-gap" optional coverage. How much
are you paying for that? And how much have you paid for Medicare?

Besides, you should know better than to try to make love to yourself with a
knife in your hand!

Paul

 

[P E Schoen]

"miso" wrote in message news:l8opv3$ugv$1@speranza.aioe.org...

You forgot the reality distortion field of insurance. There is the
price they want, and then there is the price the insurance allows.

Now I have always viewed this as money laundering or something
to that effect. The discount you get having insurance is just
ridiculous, especially on lab tests. The lab has to settle for
about 20% of what they want to charge. But I don't believe
for a minute anyone pays the ridiculous prices the lab
wants to charge.

So in theory, the schmuck on the street without insurance pays
the full price, except we damn well know those fuckers will
stiff the hospital most of the time. That is why ERs have been
closing down over the years. Having an ER is just a way for a
hospital to piss away money on freeloaders.

A few years ago I was going to physical therapy three times a week for my
back problems, and after a few weeks when I arrived they told me that the
insurance would not cover something like six sessions and I owed them the
"standard rate" of $150 each. What happened was that I had received several
therapy sessions earlier that year from another doctor, and they had a limit
of, say, 24 sessions. I showed them the bill where my insurance and copay
gave them $65 each, and asked if I could just pay that. Even though I had
assumed that I was covered, and it should have been incumbent on them to
determine how many sessions I was covered for, they refused to negotiate. I
finally had my lawyer contact them and they very reluctantly agreed to split
the difference and I still had to pay them about $600.

Their website appears to be up for sale and the only listing I found for
them was for another location. Maybe they have gone out of business? GOOD!
http://www.manta.com/c/mm2hdyl/henning-cole-therapy-assoc

Paul

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 19:25:03 -0500, Martin Riddle
<martin_rid@verizon.net> wrote:

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:29:23 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

...Jim Thompson

The deductable would have not been met, so the whole 2K

I guess you have 5 chinese globes now? ;D


Cheers

No globes involved... sliced hand while cutting up cardboard boxes...
NEVER look up to answer wife while you have a box knife in your hand
:-(

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[miso]

On 12/16/2013 4:25 PM, Martin Riddle wrote:

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:29:23 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

...Jim Thompson

The deductable would have not been met, so the whole 2K

I guess you have 5 chinese globes now? ;D


Cheers

You forgot the reality distortion field of insurance. There is the price
they want, and then there is the price the insurance allows.

Now I have always viewed this as money laundering or something to that
effect. The discount you get having insurance is just ridiculous,
especially on lab tests. The lab has to settle for about 20% of what
they want to charge. But I don't believe for a minute anyone pays the
ridiculous prices the lab wants to charge.

So in theory, the schmuck on the street without insurance pays the full
price, except we damn well know those fuckers will stiff the hospital
most of the time. That is why ERs have been closing down over the years.
Having an ER is just a way for a hospital to piss away money on freeloaders.

 

[miso]

On 12/16/2013 11:18 PM, P E Schoen wrote:

"miso" wrote in message news:l8opv3$ugv$1@speranza.aioe.org...

You forgot the reality distortion field of insurance. There is the
price they want, and then there is the price the insurance allows.

Now I have always viewed this as money laundering or something
to that effect. The discount you get having insurance is just
ridiculous, especially on lab tests. The lab has to settle for
about 20% of what they want to charge. But I don't believe
for a minute anyone pays the ridiculous prices the lab
wants to charge.

So in theory, the schmuck on the street without insurance pays
the full price, except we damn well know those fuckers will
stiff the hospital most of the time. That is why ERs have been
closing down over the years. Having an ER is just a way for a
hospital to piss away money on freeloaders.

A few years ago I was going to physical therapy three times a week for
my back problems, and after a few weeks when I arrived they told me that
the insurance would not cover something like six sessions and I owed
them the "standard rate" of $150 each. What happened was that I had
received several therapy sessions earlier that year from another doctor,
and they had a limit of, say, 24 sessions. I showed them the bill where
my insurance and copay gave them $65 each, and asked if I could just pay
that. Even though I had assumed that I was covered, and it should have
been incumbent on them to determine how many sessions I was covered for,
they refused to negotiate. I finally had my lawyer contact them and they
very reluctantly agreed to split the difference and I still had to pay
them about $600.

Their website appears to be up for sale and the only listing I found for
them was for another location. Maybe they have gone out of business? GOOD!
http://www.manta.com/c/mm2hdyl/henning-cole-therapy-assoc

Paul

Somebody convince me these factors of over two between the insurance
rate and the schmuck rate are legit. Use any legalize you can. It defies
all logic.

I wanted a single payer system. Medicare for all. Higher rates for those
of working age, but none of this bogus pricing nonsense.

You know the old joke about asking a woman to have sex with you for $20,
$100, $1000, etc. with the punchline being "we determined what you are,
now we are just haggling over the price."

Healthcare is just the opposite. The doctor "puts out" cheaply for the
insurance company, but the schmuck has to pay the retail price.

 

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:09:56 AM UTC-5, miso wrote:

On 12/16/2013 4:25 PM, Martin Riddle wrote:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:29:23 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:


Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}


The deductable would have not been met, so the whole 2K

I guess you have 5 chinese globes now? ;D

You forgot the reality distortion field of insurance. There is the price
they want, and then there is the price the insurance allows.

Yep. That's the gamesmanship to charge 125% of what they want, so
that when insurance pays 80% they get what they wanted in the first
place, iterated over decades.

Now I have always viewed this as money laundering or something to that
effect. The discount you get having insurance is just ridiculous,
especially on lab tests. The lab has to settle for about 20% of what
they want to charge. But I don't believe for a minute anyone pays the
ridiculous prices the lab wants to charge.

So in theory, the schmuck on the street without insurance pays the full
price, except we damn well know those fuckers will stiff the hospital
most of the time.

That's assuming. But you've missed another cost-shifting on a
grand scale by the government--Medicare and Medicaid. They pay
80% and 60% of the doctor's cost, respectively, which the
doctors have to make up by charging more to people with insurance.

Obamacare makes cost-shifting standard. Up to 400% of federal
poverty level, it gives almost everyone some level of welfare
subsidy. It's illegal on healthcare.gov--the handouts are only
authorized for section 1311 state-exchanges--but, as we all know
Obama doesn't give a damsel about laws.

> That is why ERs have been closing down over the years.

That (eager takers, reduced supply, and cost-shifting) is what you
get when the federal government declares something's free.

> Having an ER is just a way for a hospital to piss away money on freeloaders.

Obamacare makes freeloading fun.
If we all freeload off each other, then it's freeeee!

(It's like O's recent tweet about minimum wage. It amounts
to "Workers producing five pumpkins a day must be paid at least
six, which will boost the economy, wages, and employment!")

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Monday, December 16, 2013 8:08:08 PM UTC-5, P E Schoen wrote:

"Martin Riddle" wrote:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:29:23 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

The deductable would have not been met, so the whole 2K
I guess you have 5 chinese globes now? ;D

Same here. I have $2600 deductible, followed by 80/20 up to $5800 max
yearly, and essentially 100% after that. I have an HSA so I can put the
deductible in it tax free.

The combo of HSAs and major medical policies would let people
save and pay for ordinary medical expense, would encourage
competition and frugal consuming, and cover disasters. That
removes the middlemen for most transactions too, saving tons
of paperwork, time, labor, and cost.

Obamacare pretty well outlaws all the above.

From what I gathered from my romp through the
healthcare.gov site to the MD site I should be able to get as good or better
for about half of the $430/month I pay now,

O-care costs more. If your premium is lower it's because you're
getting the welfare payments. It's a sad statement when Obama
thinks engineers need welfare, and that subsidies make something
"affordable" rather than more expensive in the long run.

but in April I'll be eligible
for Medicare and SSA benefits (which I paid for).

You didn't pay for either one. You paid for the previous lot
of retirees--you paid a tax, and the money you paid was spent
the moment you sent it in, long ago.

And, the average Medicare beneficiary receives $3 in benefits
for every $1 they put in--you definitely didn't pay for that.

Remember, ObamaCare is not insurance. It just offers a choice among several
providers and sets minimum standards and affordable prices.

Obamacare is a federal takeover of insurance by brain-dead federal
bureaucrats, turning insurance companies into brain-dead feds.

There's nothing affordable about it. On average, Obamacare was
estimated to cost 32% more.[1] That figure has come down a bit as
Obama scrambles to (illegally) hedge and hide the cost hit until
after the 2014 election. The lying is appalling.

[1] http://www.soa.org/Research/Research-Projects/Health/Cost-of-the-Newly-Insured.aspx

That's why O's waiving all sorts of provisions for a year, like
the out-of-pocket-caps

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/13/yet-another-white-house-obamacare-delay-out-of-pocket-caps-waived-until-2015/

and the employer mandate, and SHOP, and others.

It would have
been better with a single payer system but that had zero chance of passing
due to insurance company lobbying efforts.

And those actual costs on the
bills are inflated because health care providers want to get the most money
from the system, and not really what is reasonable.

Which Obamacare now sets in stone by simply giving everyone an
insurance policy to cover outrageously inflated prices, thereby
reducing said fees. Not.

Of course probably half
the cost is malpractice liability insurance, which would be much lower if
proper tort reform were enacted, and if we would "kill all the lawyers".

Estimates are a lot lower--more like 20%--but I think you're right.
I think the combo of malpractice insurance and "defensive medicine"
is a lot bigger than the estimates, maybe even half. Paperwork and
middlemen are huge too.

Obamacare's solution is more of all the above.

> Give it time. It will work.

There's zero chance of it working. It inherently costs more,
eliminates competition, and replaces the wisdom of people who
know with people who don't. It's far less efficient, less
caring, less compassionate, and less affordable.

If Romney had been elected and offered the same
thing you (JT) right-whiners would be fawning over how great it is and would
excuse the temporarily dysfunctional website. I think it was deliberately
sabotaged by well-paid right-wing hackers.

You have remarkable faith in the wisdom of the same geniuses who
o couldn't make a website
o with all the money on the planet
o in three years--who gave
- no end of lame excuses and outright lies about why--

to run everyone's lives, doctors, manage their care, and their
finances.

Paul

"I Love ObamaCare!"

Cheers,
James Arthur
---

"It is amazing that people who think we cannot afford to
pay for doctors, hospitals, and medication somehow think
that we can afford to pay for doctors, hospitals,
medication and a government bureaucracy to administer it."
--Thomas Sowell

 

On Monday, December 16, 2013 8:08:08 PM UTC-5, P E Schoen wrote:

It would have
been better with a single payer system but that had zero chance of passing
due to insurance company lobbying efforts.

Obamacare passed, barely, because people thought it would cost less
and they could keep their plans. Neither is true.

That's why the President lied.

"YOU CAN KEEP YOUR PLAN" is PolitiFact's Lie of the Year
http://twitchy.com/2013/12/12/not-even-politifact-can-overlook-this-years-obvious-lie-of-the-year/
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2013/12/12/lead-politifact-top-lie-of-the-year.cnn&hpt=hp_t3&video_referrer=
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/12/and-the-top-lie-of-2013-goes-to/?iref=allsearch

Democrats knew too; Obama wasn't alone. It's the biggest insurance
fraud in world history.

Cheers,
James Arthur

And those actual costs on the

bills are inflated because health care providers want to get the most money

from the system, and not really what is reasonable. Of course probably half

the cost is malpractice liability insurance, which would be much lower if

proper tort reform were enacted, and if we would "kill all the lawyers".



Give it time. It will work. If Romney had been elected and offered the same

thing you (JT) right-whiners would be fawning over how great it is and would

excuse the temporarily dysfunctional website. I think it was deliberately

sabotaged by well-paid right-wing hackers.



Paul

"I Love ObamaCare!"

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 12/17/2013 2:56 AM, miso wrote:

On 12/16/2013 11:18 PM, P E Schoen wrote:
"miso" wrote in message news:l8opv3$ugv$1@speranza.aioe.org...

You forgot the reality distortion field of insurance. There is the
price they want, and then there is the price the insurance allows.

Now I have always viewed this as money laundering or something
to that effect. The discount you get having insurance is just
ridiculous, especially on lab tests. The lab has to settle for
about 20% of what they want to charge. But I don't believe
for a minute anyone pays the ridiculous prices the lab
wants to charge.

So in theory, the schmuck on the street without insurance pays
the full price, except we damn well know those fuckers will
stiff the hospital most of the time. That is why ERs have been
closing down over the years. Having an ER is just a way for a
hospital to piss away money on freeloaders.

A few years ago I was going to physical therapy three times a week for
my back problems, and after a few weeks when I arrived they told me that
the insurance would not cover something like six sessions and I owed
them the "standard rate" of $150 each. What happened was that I had
received several therapy sessions earlier that year from another doctor,
and they had a limit of, say, 24 sessions. I showed them the bill where
my insurance and copay gave them $65 each, and asked if I could just pay
that. Even though I had assumed that I was covered, and it should have
been incumbent on them to determine how many sessions I was covered for,
they refused to negotiate. I finally had my lawyer contact them and they
very reluctantly agreed to split the difference and I still had to pay
them about $600.

Their website appears to be up for sale and the only listing I found for
them was for another location. Maybe they have gone out of business?
GOOD!
http://www.manta.com/c/mm2hdyl/henning-cole-therapy-assoc

Paul

Somebody convince me these factors of over two between the insurance
rate and the schmuck rate are legit. Use any legalize you can. It defies
all logic.

I wanted a single payer system. Medicare for all. Higher rates for those
of working age, but none of this bogus pricing nonsense.

You know the old joke about asking a woman to have sex with you for $20,
$100, $1000, etc. with the punchline being "we determined what you are,
now we are just haggling over the price."

Healthcare is just the opposite. The doctor "puts out" cheaply for the
insurance company, but the schmuck has to pay the retail price.

It's certainly annoying, and maybe excessive, but the amount of agita
they get from an insurance company is probably a lot less than they
would from a collection of retail customers, especially uninsured ones.

(Another example of charging more to the people who actually pay, to
make up for the ones that don't.)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

 

[Lawrance A. Schneider]

In article <a23va9l3se5se772vjdbb8403n2q9msod2@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com>
wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

...Jim Thompson

The same!

Larry

 

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 2:56:34 AM UTC-5, miso wrote:

Somebody convince me these factors of over two between the insurance

rate and the schmuck rate are legit. Use any legalize you can. It defies

all logic.

It's typically 1/3 by contractual agreement between hospital group and insurance company. Health care provider accepts 1/3 of billed amount as payment in full.

 

On Monday, December 16, 2013 6:29:23 PM UTC-5, Jim Thompson wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three

pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...



http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf



Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}



...Jim Thompson

--

| James E.Thompson | mens |

| Analog Innovations | et |

| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |

| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |

| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |

| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |



I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

I'm seeing about $1000 not covered by Medicare, statement says nothing about your private insurance coverage, that's why they have "This is not a bill" stamped on there. You can chalk all those exorbitant charges up to liability insurance, hospital waste and mismanagement, overpaid people. Next time try SuperGlue

 

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 2:15:47 PM UTC-5, bloggs.fred...@gmail.com wrote:

On Monday, December 16, 2013 6:29:23 PM UTC-5, Jim Thompson wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf



Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

I'm seeing about $1000 not covered by Medicare, statement says nothing about your private insurance coverage, that's why they have "This is not a bill" stamped on there. You can chalk all those exorbitant charges up to liability insurance, hospital waste and mismanagement, overpaid people. Next time try SuperGlue

If it were just one doctor and one nurse for half an hour (like it
should be) then it oughtn't cost more than a couple bills.

It's the twenty-seven other people in the feed bin that account
for (literally) the other 90%.

Obamacare's pushing every tiny thing onto insurance is part of
its insanity.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Nico Coesel]

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 19:25:03 -0500, Martin Riddle
martin_rid@verizon.net> wrote:

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:29:23 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

Medical expense for cut on palm of hand, requiring cleaning and three
pieces of (very nice) tape to close the wound...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/CutOnPalmOfHand.pdf

Wonder what it'd cost _you_ under Obamacare ?>:-}

...Jim Thompson

The deductable would have not been met, so the whole 2K

I guess you have 5 chinese globes now? ;D


Cheers

No globes involved... sliced hand while cutting up cardboard boxes...
NEVER look up to answer wife while you have a box knife in your hand
:-(

Tell her to shut up politely: Be quiet!

--
Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
indicates you are not using the right tools...
nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
--------------------------------------------------------------

 

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 2:48:25 PM UTC-5, Jim Thompson wrote:

You're not reading very carefully, see notes 1 & 2 on the first page.

On the second page Medicare basically excluded the double billing.

Okay, I saw that, did not realize it was a double meaning. That usually means the hospital strongly supports EEO hiring, staffing and promotions.

The

"benefit" is what my supplemental policy, Mutual of Omaha, paid. I owe

Well that "benefit" was practically nothing.

nothing... in fact, in the 11 years I've had Medicare, I've only had

to cough up about $60 for a PSA test that got scheduled sooner than

the allowed once annually.



Now Part D is a different story... $4 to $21 dollar co-pays... but

still only about $100 out-of-pocket... plus the $28/month premium :-(

That's not too bad.

 

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 2:38:29 PM UTC-5, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

If it were just one doctor and one nurse for half an hour (like it

should be) then it oughtn't cost more than a couple bills.



It's the twenty-seven other people in the feed bin that account

for (literally) the other 90%.

Haha- probably the "double"-billing department adds 25-50% overhead.

Obamacare's pushing every tiny thing onto insurance is part of

its insanity.

I don't see where PPACA has contributed anything to the costs listed. It's the exorbitant cost of doing business and the hospital bureaucracy.

Cheers,

James Arthur