Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (4204)	2/3/2008 8:32:54 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

You are just in denial man. Those are the prices they bill, it's in their computer. So, you DON'T actually know if anyone really pays those prices. You're just inferring from the fact that they have an MSRP in their computer. You can say "it can't be true because I don't want to believe it" but that doesn't change the facts. You are relying on your inference, not facts. Find a fact and I will award it appropriate outrage. If what you say is true, then I would be just as horrified as you are. Edit: Recognizing from experience that you will not actually go looking for facts to back up your bald assertions, I thought I'd give it a try. Found this: "The ratio between the amount hospitals charged self-pay patients (gross revenue) and the amount the hospitals actually collected (net revenue) was 2.57 in 2004. This means that hospitals collected only $0.39 for every dollar charged." jhsph.edu Now, if you look at my MRI, you will see that the provider collected 39.6% of what it charged my insured self. Hmmmm. Interestingly, that is totally consistent with what hospitals collect from the ininsured. Nothing outrageous about that. Seems to me that the message in this for the uninsured is to offer to pay the doctor 39% of any bill deemed predatory as payment in full. Should work.