this post was submitted on 30 May 2025
123 points (99.2% liked)
United States | News & Politics
2929 readers
767 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
Post anything related to the United States.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You have zero control over if the ambulance is in or out of network. Hence it being a surprise cost.
Yep, and the ambulance companies often don’t join many networks, because they can go after the full amount from out of network patients rather than a network discount that plan members would get.
Yeah, but that's not what I'm saying. On average, does an out-of-network ambulance ride happen to a family of four more than once every 30 years? If it does, $100 per year to avoid that is a good deal; otherwise it's not.
But that's not the point of insurance, which is a cost-sharing practice (presumably, ideally) designed so that the person who DOES get the ambulance ride doesn't have to pay for the whole thing themselves and go into financial ruin because of it.
Your argument is profoundly selfish and it's logical conclusion is the abolishment of insurance altogether.
I have a feeling you've never been in a major health situation.