Double Your Spending, Double Your Fun
The Hill's Sam Baker points out yet another delightful fun fact from yesterday's Congressional Budget Office report on the Budgepocalypse: spending on Medicare, Medicaid, and other government health care programs is expected to double in the next decade, rapidly outpacing GDP. By 2022, the CBO predicts it will eat up about seven percent of the country's total economic output and cost the nation about $1.8 trillion annually. And that's only if Congress fails to prevent Medicare payments to physicians from falling by nearly 30 percent—which almost no one thinks is going to happen. Fixing the doc fix will add another $316 billion or so to the tab.
Lots more on the 2012 Budgepocalypse here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
They only have to allow as many who want to practice medicine to so -fixed
Huh?
She's saying that the problem can be fixed by getting rid of quotas on medical licenses.
She's absolutely right.
You got that meaning out of that sentence? Even with your context, I am re-reading the sentence, and it still makes no sense.
EDG reppin' LBC, I guess you missed the code in it too 🙁
I think she meant to write "They only have to allow as many people who want to practice medicine to do so."
Except that physician reimbursements are only a small part of USA medical costs, somewhere between 10-20%. So how exactly would increasing the doctor supply reduce the cost of government health care significantly?
Taking power from the AMA would result in the price of care slueing.
The costs are the result of a medical code monopoly and restrictions on the number of physicians.
Sure.......
The AMA (which less than 15% of docs belong to and even less respect) only owns the copyright on the ICD coding system, it doesn't have any control over what the government pays for each code. They are just paid a fee for the use of the coding system.
What you are suggesting is like saying the publisher of the phone book is the cause of what salary each person in the phone book receives.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
"physician reimbursements are only a small part of USA medical costs, somewhere between 10-20%"
A. Not true in all fields and such statements are inherently BS. If the cost is over-inflated, 10-20% can be anywhere from a few thousand to tens of thousands, and you fail to include bonuses in your semantics game
B. Independence from insurance monopolies and the AMA is the devil in the detail
"The AMA (which less than 15% of docs belong to and even less respect) only owns the copyright on the ICD coding system"
Let me take a wild guess:
Ya never owned a business in your life.
Actually, owned several, including two presently. Not sure what the ad hominem has to do with the question at hand, though.
The AMA is unlike any other product, and has government protection of its license; If you made printers, then consumers have the choice of off brand ink, or refilling cartridges. The AMA is a fiefdom thiefdom
I'm sure the AMA would love to have the power you seem to believe they have. Are they in league with the Masons and the Trilateral Commission? deedeedeedee...
Insurance companies, another story. You are correct there.
Can you let me know how to get these Medicare/Medicaid "bonuses"? That would sure help pay for the 30% of care we give every day which is not reimbursed by anyone. I've sure never gotten a "bonus."
Of course, that wouldn't fit very well in your narrative about greedy doctors, would it?
First Medicare/Medicaid doesn't give bonuses but the connection is though payment rates from insurance. Videlicet, doctors payments are based on (ex. M/Mpayment x 2.5) Medicare/Medicaid for a procedure.
The pressure is then on the system itself
I don't know of any insurer who pays 2.5x Medicare rates, we are often lucky just to get the Medicare rates from private insurers. Medicaid pays far less than Medicare.
If indeed the system is the problem, it is the federal CMS who determines the rates, not the woefully impotent AMA.
what field?
When did you start making this much sense?!
Spence, how many times do I have to repeat 90% of my posts are sugarfrees et al?
And for fuck sake, use an interabang
*a*!!!
http://par8o.com/wordpress/doc.....-ama-does/
A physician's POV
Shhhh! You'll pop the needle out of the groove again.
http://cdn.trendhunterstatic.c.....klace.jpeg
What's wrong with a broken record?
All the trillions they've spent... and they can't send me a measly billion?
I demand more men in the pictures Suderman, and make them naked to make up for the lack of quantity and your discrimination against female pleasure
Re: rather,
You can always turn lesbian, like Anna Heche.
I suspect that she is actually a he, so he can hardly turn into a lesbian.
I am almost a virgin
http://rctlfy.wordpress.com/20.....dma-wrong/
Tell me is your web page your only source of income, it that why you have to incessantly advertise here ?
lol
Not my only source of income....I fart in jars too!
It's on my bucket list; how about your wife? You can watch
doublemint trivia: the twins are Katy Segal's sisters Jean & Liz.
More trivia: According to the Reason/Rupe Poll, 89% of Hit & Run viewers get a boner when they view that image.
We are the 89%!
onetime I found a gum in my pants but it tasted awful because it was a baby frog instead.
It's a good thing this is a big campaign issue, and all the candidates are talking about it a lot.
Suddenly death panels aren't looking so bad, now are they?
They had 65 years warning to figure out a solution to this problem. Apparently the solution was to bankrupt the whole thing.
well, it's a solution - just the worst one.
What are you worried about? We've still got checks!
I am an ER physician. Yesterday I read a new article in a well-respected, major medical journal that reported that more than 50% of Medicaid patients who deliberately harm themselves (read: suicide attempts) are discharged from the emergency room with no mental health evaluation! There was much hand-wringing and the intimation that racism and minority disparities in health care were the reason.
This data seemed ridiculous to me, as I have worked in emergency for >25 years, and have never heard of an ER anywhere in the USA that wouldn't get some sort of mental health eval for virtually all such patients. So I read the study closely. It appears they are basing this major assertion solely on Medicaid billing data.
In other words, they assumed that if such cases did not have a separate Medicaid billing for mental health, no evaluation happened!
There are many reasons one wouldn't bill Medicaid separately for a mental health eval during an ED visit. Some states only let you bill for one type of service per day. Some providers are not eligible to bill Medicaid. If the patient had any other insurance, that would be billed instead. And probably most commonly, it is often not worth the time and enormous paperwork to bill Medicaid for the whopping $18 reimbursement for ED mental health consultation.
In our highly-regulated and high-liability profession, it is almost unthinkable that there would be no mental health eval of such patients. And it is unbelievable to me that this could get through several layers of peer review when I picked up the data flaw in a few minutes. But this fits the narrative that everyone wants to believe -- people aren't getting quality health care and we need to budget more and do more government involvement to fix it.
I will send a letter to their editor challenging this, but of course, it is too late. The story is out there and now it is "officially the truth."
The ER lied! Poor people died!
Or something.
Some stories are just too good to check, you know?
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
Wait, if you're down here as an ER physician, who the hell have I been singing to?
Monopolist rent-seeker wants more money. Film at eleven.
We are beyond screwed. Ron Paul is the only candidate seriously talking about cutting spending instead of starting new wars, but we'll be forced to watch in horror over the next 9 months as millions of Americans go to the voting booth and participate in their own destruction. It's depressing as hell.
This is like the worst chat room ever.
Kinda makes you wonder sometimes dude.
http://www.puter-privacy.tk