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: Lane3 who wrote (24328)	7/24/2012 3:34:01 PM
From: skinowski	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

I'm not reluctant to pull an unegalitarian string if there's one out there. In reality, the standards are already "unegalitarian". I know docs who do not take Medicaid patients. I know some who will see 1 in the course of the day, or a few, but only once a week. When I was in practice, I always had a few Medicaid patients, but I did not submit any bills. It was pro bono. It made no sense to fill out their endless papers, which very often were denied and had to be resubmitted, for the 9 bucks they would eventually pay. The fee is higher these days, but still low. The problem with Medicaid is that it is expensive. How much exactly it costs the taxpayers per beneficiary - that I was never able to find out. That's another example of the lack of transparency in these things. My guess is that it costs more than commercial insurance. True, it pays for things like nursing homes, so, it would be important to compare apples with apples.