Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

glowing

(12,233 posts)
12. It was abandoned primarily because the gov is an asshole....
Sun Jun 12, 2016, 07:30 AM
Jun 2016

But beyond that, they are a state that has 650,000 people. When half the facilities that patients will use for major medical care are going to happen out of state, it would make VT incredibly liable for a lot of costs. The state is just too small to handle single-payer on its own. NOW, what they should have done to stream-line "single-payer" would be to essentially use an insurance company like they were a large employer, and work out a model of payments per person, then figure out the tax base from that number. They are just too small to handle the "switch", but abandoning it completely is an asshat move in my book... My Mom likes that idea, and has been making it a conversation to see how other people feel about that type of delivery system. Who knows, it might actually happen if they work on it, maybe by 2018?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Odds are Blue Cross approved $10 or less. If hospital is in network, they'd write off the rest. Hoyt Jun 2016 #1
So the insurer pays $10 and the insured is on the hook for $269 on top of their monthly premium? bluesbassman Jun 2016 #2
No. If it's an in network hospital, $269 is written off as a contractual adjustment. Hoyt Jun 2016 #10
It was abandoned primarily because the gov is an asshole.... glowing Jun 2016 #12
It'll happen nationally with a Public Option faster and with less fight. Hoyt Jun 2016 #13
Yes, and its needed now more than ever since the insurance companies are anything but affordable glowing Jun 2016 #16
I agree with that. But, even with public option or single payer, it won't be cheap. Hoyt Jun 2016 #21
My primary doc littlebit Jun 2016 #3
Same with drug pricing............ mrmpa Jun 2016 #4
Exactly. We have few medication and doctor bills so Hortensis Jun 2016 #20
Healthcare should be... ReRe Jun 2016 #5
The real question is why does Blue shield tolerate such over pricing practices? UCmeNdc Jun 2016 #6
It causes people to defer care. bemildred Jun 2016 #7
I think you are wrong about that last thing... ljm2002 Jun 2016 #17
I think you are right, but they would if they could. bemildred Jun 2016 #19
I wonder what Medicare or Medicaid would pay for the same test. n/t PoliticAverse Jun 2016 #8
I'm on Medicare, it paid 100%! B Calm Jun 2016 #15
100% of the allowable Sgent Jun 2016 #18
insurers don't want customers to use thier insurances, so KG Jun 2016 #9
It's a damn shame we were not allowed a public option on the ACA! B Calm Jun 2016 #11
Not to worry, the presumptive nominee is gonna fix all this with some pragmatic centrism Fumesucker Jun 2016 #14
This is why Clinton doesn't want single payer... TheProgressive Jun 2016 #22
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»LA Times: Even if you hav...»Reply #12