[Esophagus4]

[if the article’s analysis is true] cost controls would reduce the supply of ambulances, since the article claims Medicare actually is a loss.

You have claimed it isn’t, but you haven’t really provided much evidence other than “there’s no way that’s true, trust me, I used to work somewhere in healthcare finance”

[conductr]

Thats fine, I'm a passerby making a comment on their work on a platform that they may not even be aware of. If you look closer I’ve done more than they have by simply raising the concern and I’m not authoring an article attempting to educate people on the industry. I think it’s perfectly fine to question someone’s assertion based on experience alone. Basically you’ll have to do more to convince me what you’re saying is true is what I’m saying. That’s the same feedback a teacher would give a student on their homework. It takes data that I don’t have to do the analysis which is probably also why they didn’t do it. But I don’t think it’s completely off the mark to mention that I’ve been an insider at multiple healthcare service companies that like to claim they lose money on Medicare yet they opt to accept Medicare patients. When we consider denying Medicare we realize they are such a large part of the mix that they allow us to be as profitable as we are. It’s almost always a misconception of what “losing money” means. Price gouging the few patients that can afford it, is only profitable if all your expenses are already covered and economies of scale are at play, which is what Medicare is good for.