[nradov]

That part of the article makes no sense at all and appears to be pushing a biased political narrative. Private commercial insurers already pay more than Medicare / Medicaid for the same treatments. Patients with private insurance are effectively already subsidizing those on public plans.

Why should the burden of keeping small rural hospitals open fall entirely on private health plans? Perhaps hospitals should advocate for higher Medicare reimbursement rates.

[hotpotamus]

> Why should the burden of keeping small rural hospitals open fall entirely on private health plans?

Because that's how the majority of Americans get their healthcare? I assume that's the case, but I don't actually know - as mentioned there are multiple single-payer health plans (lol) that cover those we have deemed worthy of them. The paper linked says that rural hospitals need to bill higher because their unit costs to deliver healthcare are higher (which makes basic economic sense). Therefore it would seem like the market solution would be to charge people who live in rural areas more for healthcare/insurance.

I can never tell whether the US is a nation or an economy.

[oaktrout]

I found it odd also, I was under the impression that hospitals made their money on private insurance and lost on medicare/Medicaid. I do recall hearing that rural hospitals are reimbursed at a higher rate from the government, perhaps that explains the discrepancy.