New Study: Health Care Costs Fall When Poor Get Health Care Coverage
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/new-study-health-care-costs-fall-whenThe concept of support for universal health care is taboo among Republicans who scrutinize the Affordable Care Act -- dubbing it the "Job-Killing Health Care Law Act" -- and call for its repeal. But a new UC Irvine study challenges the GOP argument that the health care law is too costly, with data illustrating that health care costs on the whole fall when poorer, uninsured patients are provided with insurance.
"In a case study involving low-income people enrolled in a community-based health insurance program, we found that use of primary care increased but use of emergency services fell, and -- over time -- total health care costs declined," David Neumark, a co-author of the study, said in a release accompanying the findings.
The study -- which focused on uninsured people in Richmond, Virginia who fell 200 percent below the poverty line -- found that over three years, health care costs fell by almost 50 percent per participant, from $8,899 in the first year to $4,569 in the third after they received insurance. Participants who enrolled in health coverage made fewer trips to the emergency room, which are notorious for running up patient bills. Instead, insured participants went for more primary care visits.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)MarkCharles
(2,261 posts)Just want us all to know. What European nations have been teaching us for 25-50 years... if you take care of the health of your nation's people, you are more productive, and your health care costs you less, up to 60% less than what it costs in the USA, a place where over 15% of her people can't afford to see a doctor before Obama became President.
I know, Obama is not a perfect President, but neither was Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Johnson.
Somehow, all the faults of all those folks are not remembered after a few years.
Remember, 15-30% of Americans could not afford good health care before Obama.
Sort of like so many people in slavery, or so many people unable to pay the bills for their family even tho they worked full time, or all folks who have skin color darker than white where not able to eat or drink at the same places as the rest of us. Etc.
Figure it out, folks, Obama made a difference.
CAPHAVOC
(1,138 posts)With a 10k deduct. But they would not because of minor prior conditions. The agent told me he was quitting because 8 of ten applications were turned down by Aetna. And they do not pay him enough to cover his gas to ride around and enroll people. We ought to change to Medicare for everybody and get the Insurance Companies out of the mix.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)Bill USA
(6,436 posts)to hospitals to cover these costs --- thus saving the Fed Government money. This contradicts the GOP propaganda.
good info to link to in comments on corporate media sites (so it can be seen by some of the lumpen proletariate).
recommended.
Javaman
(62,534 posts)If a person doesn't have a health plan, could this person still go to a doctor for a physical and not be charged?
CAPHAVOC
(1,138 posts)I can not afford insurance. But my Doc gives me a discount for cash. He only charges me 40 bucks.
Under HCR, you must have health insurance. There are a few exceptions for a class of low income people, about 8% of the population. If you fall into that 8%, you don't have a right to basic health care, only life saving care. A small caveat is that if you are fortunate enough to live near a CHC which will be built under HCR, you'll be able to get exams and some treatments there. These may actually be as important to the insured as the uninsured. Basic exams are covered at 100%, but if they actually find something.....
CHC will be useful for people who can't afford to actually use their health insurance once something is actually found.
Javaman
(62,534 posts)it's really sad that the poor still get the short stick.
really disgraceful.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)If the mandate were really more a responsibility of government, I'd hate it less. If basically they had established income levels above which you were responsible for some insurance payment, even if subsidized, and then admitted that below some levels, the government would be totally responsible, I'd been vastly more accepting of the mandate. But quite the opposite, they established just who wouldn't be getting coverage, and then basically declaring that these people had no right to health CARE. Heck, it is bad enough that those with coverage may not be able to afford to actually get health CARE, but here the government was basically declaring health INSURANCE to be an individual responsibility, and letting the government off the hook for health CARE as any sort of right.
It's just so wrong.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)3 weeks ago I had my tubes tied and was supposed to have a Nova Sure (endometrial ablation) for horribly painful chunky periods, but doc discovered fibroids so just did a D&C instead. I went back and forth between the dr and insurance trying to plot out all the costs ahead of time to make sure I knew what I was getting into. Apparently, departments don't EVER communicate.
Got billed $1300 for his services and $9000 for FOUR HOURS in outpatient care.
My insurance (single coverage) has a $3000/yr deductible, plus I pay 20% for everything over that.
So this little 4 hour event is going to cost me $4460 out of pocket.
Oh, and I had my normal crampy chunky period last week - so the D&C did nothing.