highwaystar101 said:
Kasz216 said:
highwaystar101 said:
Don't most private healthcare have to accommodate your needs, even if they are extremely frivolous? Because if so, then this is expected.
On another note, as far as I'm aware medicaid is only geared towards serving 60% of the US population. In which case I imagine that some people who belong in the 40% who have not been served have tried to use the system, only to be turned away because they don't qualify. A system that will accommodate everyone would overcome having to turn away this 40%.
Either way I can't say I'm surprised by this result, but if anything it just seems to justify to me that the USA needs a healthcare overhaul (running a healthcare service for just 60% seem a bit wasteful to me).
I don't know though, this is just an external view of Medicaid as I'm British. |
1) No. Private healthcare doens't have to accomadate to your needs even if they're frivelous.
In fact the exact opposite argument is the one that's usually made. Private Insurance comapnies use every trick they can to deny you healthcare coverage.
In reality, in the US you are given a choice of many different plans that spell out exactly what is and what won't be used.
2) Medicaid only covers about 20% of the people in the US. You can't submit a claim to medicare unless you've been approved for Medicare. Furthermore the AMA report card actually lists the reasons for denial and their percentages. Medicare's denial reasons don't really deviate much from other plans. One of the things I was looking over because I thought there might be something there.
|
"Private healthcare companies use every trick they can to deny you healthcare coverage"... Oooh, goody, I really want to go on private healthcare please. J/k I think you meant to phrase that differently Kasz 
I think maybe things are a bit different here in Britain, because we have a hybrid system covered largely by the NHS, the only private system are usually very high quality so they can compete with the national system. Maybe this leads them to attempt to accommodate the customers needs more.
Come to think of it, because the USA has low national coverage then the private systems can have much wider quality gradations in comparison to Britain. So yeah, you're right, I'm using the British system as a model which is a flawed comparison.
|
No, i actually don't want to phrase it differently.
That's the arguement used against them. That doesn't mean it's true.
In reality our public system as you can see... denies more people.
The problem in our healthcare isn't lack of a public option. It's that insruance laws are crafted to give an advantage to big companies. If we had a legion of smaller private insurers our costs would drop rapidly.
