Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related

2347 readers

374 users here now

Health: physical and mental, individual and public.

Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.

See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.

Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.

Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.

Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.

Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

153

Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

People with health insurance may now represent the majority of debtors American hospitals struggle to collect from, according to medical billing analysts.

This marks a sea change from just a few years ago, when people with health insurance represented only about one in 10 bills hospitals considered “bad debt”, analysts said.

“We always used to consider bad debt, especially bad debt write-offs from a hospital perspective, those [patients] that have the ability to pay but don’t,” said Colleen Hall, senior vice-president for Kodiak Solutions, a billing, accounting and consulting firm that works closely with hospitals and performed the analysis.

“Now, it’s not as if these patients across the board are even able to pay, because [out-of-pocket costs are] such an astronomical amount related to what their general income might be.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The broader point that I'm making is that incrementalism as a philosophy has resulted in us going backwards. The acceptance of it as a viable strategy when it consistently fails to yield results is a serious problem.

A majority of successful social programs in the US did so in broad sweeping reforms that dramatically changed the way people interacted with systems.

Arguing that 400k jobs in an industry that is basically parasitic to the process seems Stockholm syndrome ludicrous, and yet unsurprising, because this is about the best that branded, 'Democrat with a capital D' , Democrats seem to be able to come up with.

Incrementalism sounds great on paper, it fails for two primary reasons. The first is the opponents to a program have to do far less to dismantle it, so its easy to work against. The second is that it fails to create its own proof points for why something was necessary in the first place. Obamacare is a great example of this second kind of failure. We're still utterly fucked in terms of healthcare. Most people are more fucked than they've ever been in terms of healthcare. We're worse off than we were because at least in 2008, although I didn't have healthcare, I wasn't paying several hundred dollars a month to basically not have healthcare. Incrementalism fails to make enough of a difference in peoples lives to show them that a given project is worth investing in.