• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

About that "World's Best Healthcare System" the U.S. is supposed to have...

tjcmd said:
I don't think it is that challenging to compare the cost of an uncomplicated normal spontaneous vaginal delivery in 1963 with an uncomplicated normal spontaneous vaginal delivery in 2015. It would be challenging to compare a normal spontaneous vaginal delivery in 1963 with an octamommy in 2015. But I am not contending that NSVDs were cheaper in 1963 than octamommies are today.
Click to expand...

What do you want to compare? All costs of the delivery? Hospital stay for the mom? The child? Just the professional fee for the ob? Are you going to exclude the cost of meds, since there is the potential for a completely different set of meds to be used? Epidurals were rarely used back then. I assume you're going to account for location within the U.S., since charges vary based on that. Are you going to look at the bill, the negotiated charge, the out of pocket costs, or some combination of these amounts?

If this comparison is so easy and important, then I assume it's readily available. If so, could you provide a link as I would be interested to read it.
 
In the 1960s before massive government disruption of health care when you went to a hospital they gave you an honest bill when you left and then you paid the bill. Here's a bill for what seems to be an uncomplicated NSVD and normal newborn care. It was maybe 2-4 weeks wages for the baby daddy:

Hospital_Bill.jpg


Of course there are some differences in the care after 55 years, the biggest probably being that they kick you out after a day or so today whereas back them moms and babies hung out in the hospital for four or five days for some TLC. If you were to look at a hospital bill from the Hartford Hospital for a similar case including newborn care today, it would probably be a lot more complicated with all the high jinks they have to do to maximize their take due the government fucking up the system and nobody paying an honest bill with honest money. However, I don't see why that would not reasonably compare the financial burden of a normal delivery then with now.
 
does anecdotes doe

Average income in 1960 was $5,600. Average income in 2005 was $46,242. I use 2005 because that's when my first child was born and I remember pretty clearly that my total out of pocket for the birth was $1,900. That included the pre-natal care (which was probably nonexistent in 1960) and all the hospital stuff (which included some narcotics, an epidural, and some emergency post-birth services because the kid wasn't breathing when he was born - all fine now though thank God). That hospital bill from 1960 doesn't include the doctor's fee.

Some simple math: 230/5600 = 4.1% (understated due to no doctor's fee)
1900/46242 = 4.1%

And I got a lot more for my money.
 
Last edited:
Deacon923 said:
does anecdotes doe

Average income in 1960 was $5,600. Average income in 2005 was $46,242. I use 2005 because that's when my first child was born and I remember pretty clearly that my total out of pocket for the birth was $1,900. That included the pre-natal care (which was probably nonexistent in 1960) and all the hospital stuff (which included some narcotics, an epidural, and some emergency post-birth services because the kid wasn't breathing when he was born - all fine now though thank God). That hospital bill from 1960 doesn't include the doctor's fee.

Some simple math: 230/5600 = 4.1% (understated due to no doctor's fee)
1900/46242 = 4.1%

And I got a lot more for my money.
Click to expand...

That's not an apples to apples comparison with the above bill. What was the total cost of the birth before your insurance covered a large chunk of it?

I know for our 2nd child in 2006 it was almost 60k because of a couple days in the NICU. Basic childbirth services (prenatal, delivery, etc) were somewhere around 15k I believe. Our out of pocket was somewhere in the neighborhood of 2k.
 
Liquid Karma said:
That's not an apples to apples comparison with the above bill. What was the total cost of the birth before your insurance covered a large chunk of it?

I know for our 2nd child in 2006 it was almost 60k because of a couple days in the NICU. Basic childbirth services (prenatal, delivery, etc) were somewhere around 15k I believe. Our out of pocket was somewhere in the neighborhood of 2k.
Click to expand...

I understand that, and wasn't intentionally trying to hide it. Risk sharing through insurance (private and governmental) enables all of us to access a much higher level of care in 2005 than was available in 1960 at a similar out of pocket cost.

That's not to say that costs in the US healthcare system aren't insanely inflated, clearly they are, and the only reason Americans put up with it is because the costs are so distributed through the system - and unlike in most other western countries, there is no governmental actor with the power to put downward pressure on pricing. In a functioning market, competition provides that pressure. As I have opined many times on this thread there is no real "market" for most forms of healthcare, especially the most critical and expensive forms, and no model anywhere in the world for how to develop one.
 
First baby 2011 was NICU for 15 days, total bill was $62k, paid max out of pocket $2500.
Second baby was normal delivery, just under $10k, paid $0.
 
TownieDeac said:
You see "oxygen" on your hospital bill from the 60s? Back then, they were oxygenating babies to the point that they straight up died.

But let's go back to the 60s!
Click to expand...

I like that their standard form has a line item for "shock therapy".
 
The good old days when all hospital services could be summarized to 28 line items, and 3 were barber, telephone and guest meals.
 
Apparently TJ is so threatened by Townie, of all people, that he has decided to go full personal attack mode. Nice way to defend your points.
 
dumb argument all around; inflation and level of care are vastly different from the 60s. tj is trolling and/or is an idiot. i don't think hospital bills are less honest; they're just more opaque b/c of the ridiculous health insurance situation we ahve and the lack of consumer education about heathcare practices/costs.

i'm sure a mechanic's bill was 'more honest' in the 60's, too, since a lot more people understood engine repair and werent' as easily confused.
 
TownieDeac said:
So no babies must have ever gotten it! Babies went blind from the oxygen they received in incubators, etc. Consider the other toxic items on that list as well that we've moved well beyond.

There are some ways that delivery has gotten more complicated since the 60s, like the average birth weight/BMI of the mothers has increased almost 10%! Also we don't really do episiotomies or use forceps anymore, and guess what, that means it takes longer, which leads to unnecessary C-sections which cost more!
Click to expand...

I guess that explains for everyone why hospitals charged so much less then than they do now. Forcing one person to pay another person's bills has had nothing to do with it. Keep your head up your ass, fool.
 
Deacon923 said:
Apparently TJ is so threatened by Townie, of all people, that he has decided to go full personal attack mode. Nice way to defend your points.
Click to expand...

TownieDeac and I have a gentleman's agreement to curse one another. Would you like to enter into a similar agreement?
 
TownieDeac said:
You're just so narrowly focused on one of a hundred drivers of health care cost. You act as though ACA was implemented in 1960 and it has driven up costs for 55 years.

You could fit "forcing one person to pay another person's bills" into the old, pre-mandate version of health care too when we all paid for the uninsured emergency room bills.
Click to expand...

The major factor in driving up costs is the government adding trillions of taxpayer $ to the system, just as in education and housing.
 
i thought it was lawsuits; i thought tort reform was one of the most important drivers? i haven't heard about that for a while now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top