Sounds like you go to a crappy doctor.  If you make an appointment with the doctor you should see the doctor.  If my doctor pulled that crap I would find a new one.

You have a point.. 

@Frederick:

@aadam101:

@raphjd:

When everyone has health cover for routine things, they (especially women) run to them every time they get the sniffles, of course waiting times are going to be extremely long.  When people have to pay for their routine care, they aren't as eager to run to the GP for the sniffles.

On the flip side of that if people wait to go to the doctor they may not go until they are really sick and it's too late to address their problem.  There are other ways to deal with issues like that though.  In the US there are programs that allow paramedics to make routine house calls.  They can treat certain ailments and make a determination as to whether the patient actually needs to see a doctor.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/health/older-patients-community-paramedics.html

Payers are also allowing nurse practitioners, physician assistants and other mid level practitioners to see patients instead of seeing a doctor.  The reason this isn't more common is because not all insurers allow it.

It shouldn't be allowed.  Far too often, someone is supposed to have a certain doctor as their physician.. but then when they go for an appointment, they get stuck with some other doctor that they never heard of, or some nurse practitioner.  That should be illegal.   You seem to think it's a great idea though.  What a surprise.. yawn…

That sounds like a customer service problem.  When I make an appointment with my doctor I see my doctor.  If I make an appointment with my nurse practitioner I see her instead.  I know ahead  of time who I am going to be seeing.

Your comment sounds like crap.  You are saying that you get to choose who you make an appointment with?  Why on earth would you make an appointment with a nurse practitioner instead of the doctor? 
Just yesterday… I took my dad to an appointment with his DOCTOR?  He never saw the doctor, he just heard his voice through the wall.  We spent 30 mins driving there.. 30 mins home.. sat in the doctor's office 40 mins waiting..  that is 100 mins.  All they did is have a nurse take my dad's weight.. that's all!  not even temp or blood pressure!  I was ready to strangle someone.  What got me the most was..  if all they were going to do is weigh him, WHY did we have to wait 40 minutes?  They should have weighed him as soon as we arrived, and let us go. 
Two weeks ago we went to his cardiologist...  all they did is have a nurse practitioner take his weight and blood pressure... and asked us what medications he is on because they are too lazy to ask the primary care physician's office.  The co-pay for that visit was $30.. and they bill the insurance company over $1000... just to take his blood pressure and weight.

@aadam101:

@raphjd:

When everyone has health cover for routine things, they (especially women) run to them every time they get the sniffles, of course waiting times are going to be extremely long.  When people have to pay for their routine care, they aren't as eager to run to the GP for the sniffles.

On the flip side of that if people wait to go to the doctor they may not go until they are really sick and it's too late to address their problem.  There are other ways to deal with issues like that though.  In the US there are programs that allow paramedics to make routine house calls.  They can treat certain ailments and make a determination as to whether the patient actually needs to see a doctor.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/health/older-patients-community-paramedics.html

Payers are also allowing nurse practitioners, physician assistants and other mid level practitioners to see patients instead of seeing a doctor.  The reason this isn't more common is because not all insurers allow it.

It shouldn't be allowed.  Far too often, someone is supposed to have a certain doctor as their physician.. but then when they go for an appointment, they get stuck with some other doctor that they never heard of, or some nurse practitioner.  That should be illegal.  You seem to think it's a great idea though.  What a surprise.. yawn…

That sounds like a customer service problem.  When I make an appointment with my doctor I see my doctor.  If I make an appointment with my nurse practitioner I see her instead.  I know ahead  of time who I am going to be seeing.

@raphjd:

When everyone has health cover for routine things, they (especially women) run to them every time they get the sniffles, of course waiting times are going to be extremely long.  When people have to pay for their routine care, they aren't as eager to run to the GP for the sniffles.

On the flip side of that if people wait to go to the doctor they may not go until they are really sick and it's too late to address their problem.  There are other ways to deal with issues like that though.  In the US there are programs that allow paramedics to make routine house calls.  They can treat certain ailments and make a determination as to whether the patient actually needs to see a doctor.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/health/older-patients-community-paramedics.html

Payers are also allowing nurse practitioners, physician assistants and other mid level practitioners to see patients instead of seeing a doctor.  The reason this isn't more common is because not all insurers allow it.

It shouldn't be allowed.  Far too often, someone is supposed to have a certain doctor as their physician.. but then when they go for an appointment, they get stuck with some other doctor that they never heard of, or some nurse practitioner.  That should be illegal.  You seem to think it's a great idea though.  What a surprise.. yawn…

When everyone has health cover for routine things, they (especially women) run to them every time they get the sniffles, of course waiting times are going to be extremely long.  When people have to pay for their routine care, they aren't as eager to run to the GP for the sniffles.

On the flip side of that if people wait to go to the doctor they may not go until they are really sick and it's too late to address their problem.  There are other ways to deal with issues like that though.  In the US there are programs that allow paramedics to make routine house calls.  They can treat certain ailments and make a determination as to whether the patient actually needs to see a doctor.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/health/older-patients-community-paramedics.html

Payers are also allowing nurse practitioners, physician assistants and other mid level practitioners to see patients instead of seeing a doctor.  The reason this isn't more common is because not all insurers allow it.

GPs in the UK are like telemarketers, they have a script they have to stick to.

So your state wants it's citizens dead.   Ok.

Prescription pain killer addiction isn't as big an issue in the UK, but they'd still rather you destroy your kidneys by taking too much OTC pain killers for a tiny bit of relief, than prescribe proper stuff.

In the UK, it was the Labour party (democrats) who put in the law making it virtually impossible to sue for even the most blatant malpractice.

Oh, so you are advocating an NHS system where you end up with permanent nerve damage in both hands because the NHS (at the time) paid GPs not to refer patients to keep waiting times down.

Long wait times are a problem in the US too.

@raphjd:

Or to nearly kill people because GPs can't think out of the box.

Doctors don't think at all here.  They are only allowed to do what the insurers allow them to do.

@raphjd:

Or that you MUST have private insurance so you can get an immediate appointment with a specialist.  If you had to wait to see an NHS specialist, you'd be dead for about 6 months because your appointment.

My state makes this practice illegal.

@raphjd:

Or that they wouldn't prescribe appropriate pain killers knowing that you are doing serious harm to yourself by using massive doses of OTC drugs in an attempt to get a tiny bit of pain relief.

The same problem exists in the US.  We have a serious opioid problem caused in part by doctors prescribing too many pain killers.

@raphjd:

Or a system where it's virtually impossible to sue for malpractice, even in the most blatant cases.

This is a conservative idea.  The state of Texas recently put caps on malpractive lawsuits.

Adam, we want HSAs. We don't want Obamacare. That's it. It's simple.

What good is an HSA if you don't know what anything costs?

Even if you did know what things cost I still don't see how an HSA is much good.  Last year I had a gallbladder infection.  I spent 15 days in the hospital.  I have no idea what the bill was but it was certainly a lot more than I ever would have been able to save in an HSA.  Even if I did have enough it would be totally depleted at this point and I would have to start over.  What if I got sick again?  My HSA has $0 in it!

@raphjd:

By "freeloaders", I think he means the illegals who always go to the ER every time they get the sniffles because they know they won't have to pay for it.

Actually the freeloaders are people like Frederick who claim not to need insurance and shouldn't be forced to buy it.   It's the very people who are against ObamaCare because the fact is they were very happy paying $0 into the system and getting substandard, inappropriate care for free.

Oh, so you are advocating an NHS system where you end up with permanent nerve damage in both hands because the NHS (at the time) paid GPs not to refer patients to keep waiting times down.

Or to nearly kill people because GPs can't think out of the box.

Or that you MUST have private insurance so you can get an immediate appointment with a specialist.  If you had to wait to see an NHS specialist, you'd be dead for about 6 months because your appointment.

Or that they wouldn't prescribe appropriate pain killers knowing that you are doing serious harm to yourself by using massive doses of OTC drugs in an attempt to get a tiny bit of pain relief.

Or a system where it's virtually impossible to sue for malpractice, even in the most blatant cases.

By "freeloaders", I think he means the illegals who always go to the ER every time they get the sniffles because they know they won't have to pay for it.

Actually the freeloaders are people like Frederick who claim not to need insurance and shouldn't be forced to buy it.  It's the very people who are against ObamaCare because the fact is they were very happy paying $0 into the system and getting substandard, inappropriate care for free.

@Frederick:

You seem pleased that people who can't afford and don't want insurance are forced to pay for it.  That is twisted!

It's those same people who Romney referred to as "freeloaders" who opt out of the system by not paying anything but then they use the emergency room anyway and force those costs onto YOU.

You seem pleased to pay for people who choose not to be responsible and buy their own health coverage.  I'm tired of paying for freeloaders.  Pay for your own care.

How are you paying for "freeloaders"?  Are you saying that insurance companies are paying for healthcare given to people without insurance?  Which insurance company is being billed for that?

You seem pleased that people who can't afford and don't want insurance are forced to pay for it.  That is twisted!

It's those same people who Romney referred to as "freeloaders" who opt out of the system by not paying anything but then they use the emergency room anyway and force those costs onto YOU.

You seem pleased to pay for people who choose not to be responsible and buy their own health coverage.  I'm tired of paying for freeloaders.  Pay for your own care.

@raphjd:

Maybe we should force everyone to buy car insurance too.   After all, it's not about need according to leftists.

Why does my anti abortion Christian uncle have to subsidize abortions?     He's not against subsidizing preventatives like "the pill" and implants, but he is totally against paying for abortions.   In fact, my dad's entire side of the family is like this.

Because that's how insurance works.  I have to subsidize a guy who drives his car 110 miles per hour for fun and for some asshole who builds his house in a flood zone.

Once again, you are making the case for single payer.

Are you saying we should have single payer for car insurance?

The Supreme Court has upheld that the Obamacare individual mandate is a tax, not insurance.

I completely forgot about that!  Thanks for the reminder!
Obamacare is essentially a poll tax.

@raphjd:

Maybe we should force everyone to buy car insurance too.   After all, it's not about need according to leftists.

Why does my anti abortion Christian uncle have to subsidize abortions?     He's not against subsidizing preventatives like "the pill" and implants, but he is totally against paying for abortions.   In fact, my dad's entire side of the family is like this.

Because that's how insurance works.  I have to subsidize a guy who drives his car 110 miles per hour for fun and for some asshole who builds his house in a flood zone.

Once again, you are making the case for single payer.

You seem pleased that people who can't afford and don't want insurance are forced to pay for it.  That is twisted!

As for the guy who drives his car fast and the asshole in a flood zone.. they pay MUCH higher insurance premiums.  In healthcare.. everyone pays the same for the same coverage.  Imagine paying the same insurance premiums as the auto maniac or floodzone guy!

Maybe we should force everyone to buy car insurance too.  After all, it's not about need according to leftists.

Why does my anti abortion Christian uncle have to subsidize abortions?    He's not against subsidizing preventatives like "the pill" and implants, but he is totally against paying for abortions.  In fact, my dad's entire side of the family is like this.

Because that's how insurance works.  I have to subsidize a guy who drives his car 110 miles per hour for fun and for some asshole who builds his house in a flood zone.

Once again, you are making the case for single payer.

Same way you make other insurance affordable.. such as home, life, and auto.

So then you do agree!  Everyone should have to buy insurance!  The reason that the system works with home and auto insurance is that every home and auto (in most states) must be insured

Life insurance is a little different but the payouts are set to a fixed amount so it's fairly predictable as to how much will be paid out.

You keep talking about these  astronomical prices but they don't really matter because nobody pays those prices.  The insurers and providers negotiate rates that are MUCH lower.

Why does my anti abortion Christian uncle have to subsidize abortions?    He's not against subsidizing preventatives like "the pill" and implants, but he is totally against paying for abortions.  In fact, my dad's entire side of the family is like this.

But how do you make it affordable if you expect people to only buy it when they need it?  We already had that in this country.  We had high risk pools in all 50 states.  They were extremely unpopular and extremely expensive.

Once again you are making the case for socialized medicine.  If you want to know if it will work just look at Medicare.  Your father has the choice between traditional Medicare that is run by the government  (pat A and B) or he can choose a private Medicare Advantage (part C) plan.  Over 85% of seniors have chosen the government option.  They don't want the bureaucracy of insurance companies.  They choose the government option because it is simple.  I'm going to guess your father is in the 85%.

We should have a system like this for all Americans where they can choose between a government option and a private one.  I actually think there is a lot of value in Medicare Advantage plans for some people.  It's nice to have choice.

Same way you make other insurance affordable.. such as home, life, and auto.  
The main thing you keep ignoring is that the healthcare itself costs at least 10 times as much as it should.  Of course the insurance is going to cost a fortune when the insurance company is paying out $25,000 per day just to share a tiny room in a hospital ($50,000 per day per room).  An hour long procedure costs $28,000?  OMG!    Running a 1 liter bag of a saline and anesthetic solution for 1 hour is $5000?   Shift that decimal point to the left, and THEN insurance costs will plummet.

My current computer has 16,000,000,000 bytes of RAM,  a 500 billion byte Solid State Drive.. a 2000 billion (2 TB) mechanical SATA hard drive,  an i7 7th gen quad core 2.7 ghz cpu… a 4k ultra high resolution NVIDIA Geoforce 950m video,  15.6" touchscreen, ultra audio including an external woofer, HDMI output, Bluetooth, ultra high speed wifi, USB C thunderbolt which is so fast that you can't even find accessories that can fully utilize it (50 times faster than USB 3.0)      If that was a product being sold to the government, it would easily cost MILLIONS!   That one liter bag of 99% salt water cost $5000.  One hour of labor for that doctor to perform the procedure $28,000.   So.. how much did my computer cost.. including shipping?   Perhaps a billion dollars?  No.. $850!