U.S. Health Care Spending Highest Among Developed Countries

  • Thread starter Deleted member 77995
  • Start date
  • 40

What should be done about this


  • Total voters
    54
  • Poll closed .
D

Deleted member 77995

Unconfirmed Member
#1
Americans on average continue to spend much more for health care—while getting less care—than people in other developed countries

The United States, on a per capita basis, spends much more on health care than other developed countries; the chief reason is not greater health care utilization, but higher prices, according to a study from a team led by a Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health researcher.
The researchers determined that the higher overall health care spending in the U.S. was due mainly to higher prices—including higher drug prices, higher salaries for doctors and nurses, higher hospital administration costs and higher prices for many medical services.
The paper finds that the U.S. remains an outlier in terms of per capita health care spending, which was $9,892 in 2016. That amount was about 25 percent higher than second-place Switzerland’s $7,919. It was also 108 percent higher than Canada’s $4,753, and 145 percent higher than the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) median of $4,033. And it was more than double the $4,559 the U.S. spent per capita on health care in 2000—the year whose data the researchers analyzed for a 2003 study.
Anderson and his colleagues noticed one big difference between 2003 and 2016: a widening of the gap between what public insurers and private insurers pay for the same health care services. In order to lower per capita health care spending, the authors recommend that the U.S. should focus on what private insurers and self-insured corporations pay, since they pay significantly more than public insurers.
Overall U.S. health spending increased at an average rate of 2.8 percent annually between 2000 and 2016, which is greater than the OECD median annual increase of 2.6 percent. Per capita, inflation-adjusted spending on pharmaceuticals also increased much more quickly in the U.S.—at a rate of 3.8 percent per year, compared to just 1.1 percent for the OECD median.
During the same period, U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) per capita increased by only 0.9 percent annually, which means that health care continues to represent a larger share of GDP. U.S. health care spending in 2016 totaled 17.2 percent of GDP, compared to just 8.9 percent for the OECD median.
Not only does the U.S outspend other OECD countries, on the whole it has less access to many health care resources. The researchers found that in 2015, the most recent year for which data were available in the U.S., there were only 7.9 practicing nurses and 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 population, compared to the OECD medians of 9.9 nurses and 3.2 physicians. Similarly, the U.S. in 2015 had only 7.5 new medical school graduates per 100,000 population, compared to the OECD median of 12.1, and just 2.5 acute care hospital beds per 1,000 population compared to the OECD median of 3.4.
https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-rel...ending-highest-among-developed-countries.html

What can be done about this? Who is to blame? Is one party better suited to fight this or will it be solved through bipartisan efforts?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jan 14, 2015
2,310
153
325
Connecticut
#4
Private healthcare was always going to fail at some point especially with companies exaggerating prices and cost of food, gas and home multiplying several times more than previous generations, there's quality but whats the point if no one can buy it.
 
Sep 4, 2018
2,491
2,769
255
#5
neither party is suited. back when Obama did the ACA, it was behind closed doors, with private industry lobbyists writing the bill. the GOP does the same thing. this is how the two major parties do all legislation.

imo we need to be more open to third parties. there needs to be less voter shaming and more real democracy. if voters have more choices, they will have better options, they will be able to vote for more ideas. if people de-legitimize third parties, the increasing polarization will only worsen, competition will suffer, neither party will be pressed or threatened into delivering on anything.

at any rate there needs to be a push for universal health care. a Medicare 4 All or similar strategy. i don't care what it's called, i don't care where the money comes from, i don't care if point 48 of your 3,000 point plan is incorrectly budgeted. i just want health care before i die pls.
 
Last edited:
Nov 23, 2010
4,264
193
625
#6
A small minority are being paid more than they're worth. Their profits, lifestyle, and rent seeking comes at your expense. And by expense I don't mean just $$$. Lives are at stake as well because it's no secret a lot of people are dying in America because of who benefits from the system you have.

I'm not sure which party is better or if there's a bipartisan solution. But the framing of the issue has to get better.

In other words, what the hell are you paying all this money for? Why are you letting such an inefficient sector overwhelm your economy? The whole thing is just ridiculous when you compare US to the best in the world. People who don't like this have to figure out a way to break through.

As far as what to do concrete, I think step #1 has to be reducing the government's role in trying to induce innovation. The costs of IP are way too high in the US and you're not innovating at a high rate. Let the market reward innovation. The government shouldn't go out of its way to create monopolies which raises prices and stifles competition.
 
Jul 20, 2018
321
272
200
#7
As I see it there are really two primary reasons American healthcare is so expensive.

1) We make it arbitrarily difficult to become a doctor, propping up the wages of those with degrees and the by extension the cost of the degree.

2) All other countries are essentially stealing IP from the US by making generics legal, while in the US copyright makes drugs absurdly expensive.

Unfortunately neither of those things will be directly addressed by universal healthcare.
 
Nov 12, 2016
752
767
250
#8
Private healthcare was always going to fail at some point especially with companies exaggerating prices and cost of food, gas and home multiplying several times more than previous generations, there's quality but whats the point if no one can buy it.
False. Nearly every other industry has flourish by being privatized. That is the scapegoat of the liberal media to get you thinking about single-payer.

It can't be stated enough how much agendas have made up brainless drones. Basic rudimentary thinking would have taught us that if we are paying the most, we need to find ways to drive down the costs. You don't cut the costs magically by spreading them around. That is a grass is always greener thinking. Costs need to come down. Government needs to be out of it
 
Jan 14, 2015
2,310
153
325
Connecticut
#10
False. Nearly every other industry has flourish by being privatized. That is the scapegoat of the liberal media to get you thinking about single-payer.

It can't be stated enough how much agendas have made up brainless drones. Basic rudimentary thinking would have taught us that if we are paying the most, we need to find ways to drive down the costs. You don't cut the costs magically by spreading them around. That is a grass is always greener thinking. Costs need to come down. Government needs to be out of it
Not false, Republican mythology demands that you believe corporations dont get greedy all the while cutting costs and corners.
 
Last edited:
Mar 1, 2017
597
351
255
#11
Yup, that's the name of the game. Everything in the US health care system is designed to make money. You'll get the best care possible, but you're going to pay for it. Doctors will throw everything at you but the kitchen sink to get you "better". Ironically Americans pay way more but have nothing to show for it. Theres just no incentive to keep the cost down.
 
Last edited:
Feb 22, 2018
1,731
1,926
325
#12
The reason spending is out of control is obvious.

Private healthcare providers are siphoning public funds due to corruption and lobbying. The right people in the right places. US tried to have the best of both worlds, and in the end it can't work. You either go full private with trinket public spending (eg india, china) or you go full public with trinket private industry (eg Australia). Obviously the larger the populace the harder it is to manage public funds. You can't emulate smaller countries. Best outcome for US would be to criminalize corporate lobbying and commodization of medicine. Step 1 would be to ban tv commercials of medicines. There is a reason they are banned almost everywhere else on the planet.
 
Last edited:
Jul 26, 2009
1,292
288
650
#14
Oct 26, 2018
1,730
1,178
230
#15
The US system is the only one (I think) that doesn't have universal healthcare among rich countries. Heck, even Cuba has universal care and that country has been hit with sanctions so bad it resembles a country from the 1950s.

What US people don't realize though is that though US care costs a lot (and many have to buy supplemental coverage even beyond what their company offers), US taxes as a whole (income tax and buying stuff (state tax), is low. And lots of essentials for people (smokes, gas and booze) are riduculously cheap as the government taxes are some reason really low.

So as long as the average American takes some of those tax savings and doesn't go around buying shit, they should have enough to cover typical healthcare coverage.

Here in Ontario, I'd estimate that my income tax deductions (taxes and pensions and UI) is probably a solid 40% of my pay cheque. And buying shit is 13% tax for most stuff. Some things are tax free and some are only hit with one tax, but most things you buy, you add another 13% to the price. Most provinces are similar except Alberta which I think is only 5% (federal part only).

So basically I'd say at least 50% of my wages go to taxes right off the bat. So in return, I better get some free doctor and hospital visits if I need it.
 
Last edited:
Nov 5, 2013
445
87
320
#17
Thanks Obamacare. My premiums are up 250% since the "affordable care act" was passed. Same coverage.

Repeal the "UN-affordable care act" and remove the regulations from the market. Let me buy the health insurance I want from the company of my choosing. The rates will drop dramatically if this is done and the coverage will be what one chooses.
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
3,934
3,895
460
#18
Thanks Obamacare. My premiums are up 250% since the "affordable care act" was passed. Same coverage.

Repeal the "UN-affordable care act" and remove the regulations from the market. Let me buy the health insurance I want from the company of my choosing. The rates will drop dramatically if this is done and the coverage will be what one chooses.
What motivation is there to lower the costs when the system is full of rentiers?

Healthcare works like Airport restaurants. They can charge whatever you want if nothing is preventing them from doing it. It is a captive market, and you have no real choice in providers when getting many types of life saving care. I mean, sure, feel free to shop around for the cheapest doctor to sew you back together after a car accident, or while you are in cardiac arrest. If you can even get a quote for care ahead of time.

Believing the market can fix healthcare is one of the stupidest opinions to have, up there with intelligent design, the time cube, and flat earth theory.
 
Nov 5, 2013
445
87
320
#19
What motivation is there to lower the costs when the system is full of rentiers?

Healthcare works like Airport restaurants. They can charge whatever you want if nothing is preventing them from doing it. It is a captive market, and you have no real choice in providers when getting many types of life saving care. I mean, sure, feel free to shop around for the cheapest doctor to sew you back together after a car accident, or while you are in cardiac arrest. If you can even get a quote for care ahead of time.

Believing the market can fix healthcare is one of the stupidest opinions to have, up there with intelligent design, the time cube, and flat earth theory.
Markets have historically lowered costs and improved products through competition time and time again. For you to claim that this is somehow the "stupidest opinion to have" with no actual counter point is not even an argument. Go read an introductory book on economics to learn how markets work. I'll give you two examples on how markets could (and have in the past) helped lower health insurance costs.

1. Right now the ACA mandates coverage and insurance options. This provides less choice for consumers and fewer options for insurance companies to provide. This has tremendous impact on pricing. For example, when I was younger I could buy a basic catastrophic coverage plan for an affordable price while I was in college. This plan provided minimal coverage for small things, prescription drugs, etc. but had me covered for annual checkups, vaccinations, and major injuries/illnesses that could incur large medical bills. This was perfect for me at the time and I could afford to have health insurance with very low income. Right now, a plan like this is illegal. The markets provided this option, the ACA regulations have taken it away.

2. Another impact is that regulations make it illegal for consumers to buy health insurance across state lines. I was upset with my soaring costs after the "affordable care act" passed. While shopping for insurance I found a lower cost plan from an out of state company (referred to me from a friend with a plan through this company). I checked and the coverages were nearly identical. However, the out of state company had significantly lower cost (30-40%). I tried to buy it and was told it is illegal for them to sell it to me.

An open market would allow me, and others, to significantly reduce health insurance costs by having more choice in coverage (point 1) and more choice in which companies to purchase health insurance from (point 2). These are only two ways which I've experienced personally which can lower costs that are now illegal. I'm sure there are many others and new cost cutting measures that competition would yield if permitted by law.
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
3,934
3,895
460
#20
Markets have historically lowered costs and improved products through competition time and time again. For you to claim that this is somehow the "stupidest opinion to have" with no actual counter point is not even an argument. Go read an introductory book on economics to learn how markets work. I'll give you two examples on how markets could (and have in the past) helped lower health insurance costs.
I've made the point so many times now on this forum because we keep on beating the same dead horse over and over that I am frankly tired of making the same points over and over. And I did make a counter point. Healthcare is a captive market with inelastic demand and that it is impossible to shop around for life saving care when you are in the middle of a life or death situation.

On top of that with how the current system works we have layer upon layer of rentier taking their share of the profits in our absurdly broken for profit healthcare system.

1. Right now the ACA mandates coverage and insurance options. This provides less choice for consumers and fewer options for insurance companies to provide. This has tremendous impact on pricing. For example, when I was younger I could buy a basic catastrophic coverage plan for an affordable price while I was in college. This plan provided minimal coverage for small things, prescription drugs, etc. but had me covered for annual checkups, vaccinations, and major injuries/illnesses that could incur large medical bills. This was perfect for me at the time and I could afford to have health insurance with very low income. Right now, a plan like this is illegal. The markets provided this option, the ACA regulations have taken it away.
ACA is a piece of shit legislation that 90's conservatives thought up as a means to counter the universal healthcare argument back then. It was shit then, it was shit when Obama and the Dems shoved it down our throats and it is shit now that congress and the supreme court did their damnedest to break it even more.

But - insurance like what you are proposing is a good thing is a terrible idea in practice. What happens if you get sick with something that isn't covered by one of those plans and then you can't get coverage in the future because it is now a preexisting condition? I'll tell you what happens. You don't either pay the doctor for the care you need which forces everyone else to pay for you still or you die because you don't get care.

2. Another impact is that regulations make it illegal for consumers to buy health insurance across state lines. I was upset with my soaring costs after the "affordable care act" passed. While shopping for insurance I found a lower cost plan from an out of state company (referred to me from a friend with a plan through this company). I checked and the coverages were nearly identical. However, the out of state company had significantly lower cost (30-40%). I tried to buy it and was told it is illegal for them to sell it to me.

You do understand that different markets have differing costs, right? For the same reason car insurance costs different depending on where you store your car...

Do you know how you lower costs in healthcare? Do what Japan does. Utilize the power of government to prevent price gouging and set fair market rates for provider reimbursement. Cut out middlemen. Simplify billing practices so that doctors don't need to hire a team of administrators and debt collectors to handle billing.
 
Likes: cryptoadam

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
3,934
3,895
460
#22
I already pay for Medicare. Just make it Medicare for All and be done with it.

Too bad the Democrats keeping tanking this idea on purpose and Republicans are no more likely to implement it.
Well, if they did that they would have to restructure their campaign budgets, on account of losing some very large donations.
 
Likes: *Nightwing
Jan 12, 2009
16,292
1,513
935
#23
I already pay for Medicare. Just make it Medicare for All and be done with it.

Too bad the Democrats keeping tanking this idea on purpose and Republicans are no more likely to implement it.
Dems can get close, but this is what happens when you have blue dog Democrats. Election a Democrat at all costs nets you something more conservative than center-lefts. But you have to get them to win in certain places like Texas, Virginia, etc.

So basically the US needs to experience more culture shifting in order to get it done. That may never happen until it gets more drastic.

But even then it'd be such a huge change that I'm ready for.
 
Last edited:
Apr 18, 2018
7,975
12,970
555
USA
dunpachi.com
#24
Well, if they did that they would have to restructure their campaign budgets, on account of losing some very large donations.
Yeah within like a week of becoming Governor of MI, our Democrat Gov. Whitmer announced a partnership with Blue Cross / Blue Shield and I was like "welp, not getting any decent healthcare in this state for awhile".

Dems can get close, but this is what happens when you have blue dog Democrats. Election a Democrat at all costs nets you something more conservative than center-lefts. But you have to get them to win in certain places like Texas, Virginia, etc.

So basically the US needs to experience more culture shifting in order to get it done. That may never happen until it gets more drastic.

But even then it'd be such a huge change that I'm ready for.
We need a party that simultaneously doesn't let the system run amok so that medical companies take taxpayers for a ride while also keeping a strong border so that we don't have a repeat of Europe over here.
 
Oct 5, 2015
4,323
452
290
#25
Private healthcare was always going to fail at some point especially with companies exaggerating prices and cost of food, gas and home multiplying several times more than previous generations, there's quality but whats the point if no one can buy it.
And you think government healthcare with a seemingly infinite amount of resources is a better? (Hint, it will get worse).
 
Mar 1, 2017
597
351
255
#27
Wouldn’t hurt to have healthier lifestyles
This is actually a fundamental problem that I believe should be considered when considering what caused the failures in the US health care system. People don't give a FUCK about their health. Exercise, diet, stress management? Fuck all that. People are willing to pay 10,000 a year because they are ultimately uninvolved and ignorant when it comes to anything about their health, would rather want a quick fix by paying someone to keep stacking on life changing drugs and end up being sicker and sicker, getting gi bleeds from all the blood thinners, requiring constant scans, hospitalizations and procedures. If people were actually involved in their health most ppl would seldom need medical attention. This is why France's system has been so succesful. Their goal is to keep the prices down, so their incentive is to make people healthy at young age and keep them that way. they end up paying 1/4th what we pay and have better outcomes across the board. the private sector really likes that you don't care about your own health
 
Last edited:
Nov 5, 2013
445
87
320
#28
I've made the point so many times now on this forum because we keep on beating the same dead horse over and over that I am frankly tired of making the same points over and over. And I did make a counter point. Healthcare is a captive market with inelastic demand and that it is impossible to shop around for life saving care when you are in the middle of a life or death situation.
By definition, insurance is not something you go around shopping for after something has happened. Your are obfuscating the point. I'm not talking about buying health care ala carte. I'm talking about health insurance. The reason that the costs of health insurance have become more inelastic is precisely due to government involvement and regulation. I gave you two specific examples I have personally experienced showing how pricing would be elastic if not for recent laws and regulations.

On top of that with how the current system works we have layer upon layer of rentier taking their share of the profits in our absurdly broken for profit healthcare system.
I agree. Wouldn't it be nice if a company was permitted to create a health insurance product that helped improve this? Much savings are possible.



But - insurance like what you are proposing is a good thing is a terrible idea in practice. What happens if you get sick with something that isn't covered by one of those plans and then you can't get coverage in the future because it is now a preexisting condition? I'll tell you what happens. You don't either pay the doctor for the care you need which forces everyone else to pay for you still or you die because you don't get care.
It was a great idea in practice and served me and millions of others well while it was legal. I had health insurance. I couldn't be kicked off my health insurance plan due to getting a health condition. The insurance plan was specifically designed to cover expensive and catastrophic events that I would have no way of paying for. The alternative, which many poor college students now have, is no health insurance at all. I'd rather have a low-cost catastrophic coverage plan than no plan at all.

You do understand that different markets have differing costs, right? For the same reason car insurance costs different depending on where you store your car...
Yes! This is my exact point! Let the market work and provide alternatives! The lower-cost out of state plan I referred to exists in a state 10 miles from my house! My friend who informed me about this plan, which he has, has the same doctor I do, his children were born at the same hospital mine were. He gets to use all the same services I do for significantly less. Let the market work! Stop making competition illegal and costs will go way down.
 
Nov 5, 2013
445
87
320
#29
I already pay for Medicare. Just make it Medicare for All and be done with it.

Too bad the Democrats keeping tanking this idea on purpose and Republicans are no more likely to implement it.
I pay for medicare too. I don't get any benefits from it. If we all go to medicare, then who is going to pay the bill?
 
Last edited:
Feb 25, 2018
155
217
225
#30
Coming from Canada and I am working in its universal healthcare system, it's not ideal and the whole thing is going to fall apart in the next 10-20 years. There will be a quasi private/public system in place, especially if the USA moves towards a more universal public health plan. I don't know if going only private is the best course of action for anywhere though, the lower classes will always be screwed on that end, but a system can't afford to spend millions of dollars on single individuals who have never paid a dollar in taxes in their lives. Basically Health care is expensive and canadian taxpayers don't like the ever increasing costs (taxes) for an ever declining quality of service/product. Statistics still show Canadians overall like the system, but approval has been on a downward trend and will continue. Just in my years of work I've noticed a substantial decline of quality in healthcare in my area of the country and I have colleagues across the country that have noticed the same things. The regular citizen who uses the system doesn't necessarily notice it, because most people don't continually come to the hospital on a monthly basis to see the subtle decline.
 
Last edited:
Likes: DeepEnigma
May 9, 2008
387
242
745
#31
You remove pricing negotiations and red tape while heavily regulating the cost of care. Right now the major benefit of insurance is their ability to negotiate down a bill because of their buying power. Hospitals know this so they artificially jack up the price as better leverage. It’s a silly game they play that also manages to increase overhead making care even more expensive. Streamline everything.

My brother who lives abroad had bloodwork here without insurance. They sent him a bill for over 10k. For bloodwork. He called to complain and say that he simply won’t pay it. Without negotiating down they reduced it to like 400 bucks. Broken. System.

Meanwhile no one wants to have the discussion on practical solutions because there is no lobbyist for that.

There are two scenarios where the medical system wins either we keep the status quo and they continue to make bank off the backs of hard working people, or we go to single payer where they can take advantage of the inefficiencies that the government brings to the equation. The only people who benefit from streamlining are the American people so we simply cannot have that.
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
3,934
3,895
460
#32
The reason that the costs of health insurance have become more inelastic is precisely due to government involvement and regulation
The reason it is inelastic is because the demand is there regardless of the cost. That has nothing to do with regulations or government involvement. As long as people would rather live than die, healthcare demand stays inelastic.

I agree. Wouldn't it be nice if a company was permitted to create a health insurance product that helped improve this? Much savings are possible.
How? You keep talking about these savings can provide but are offering no method of creating them.

It was a great idea in practice and served me and millions of others well while it was legal. I had health insurance. I couldn't be kicked off my health insurance plan due to getting a health condition. The insurance plan was specifically designed to cover expensive and catastrophic events that I would have no way of paying for. The alternative, which many poor college students now have, is no health insurance at all. I'd rather have a low-cost catastrophic coverage plan than no plan at all.
That is kind of what universal health care would fix, no? Isn't it better to be covered for everything than catastrophic coverage? Why do you seem to think that you are going to be on the hook for so much more money than you are currently with universal?

Yes! This is my exact point! Let the market work and provide alternatives! The lower-cost out of state plan I referred to exists in a state 10 miles from my house! My friend who informed me about this plan, which he has, has the same doctor I do, his children were born at the same hospital mine were. He gets to use all the same services I do for significantly less. Let the market work! Stop making competition illegal and costs will go way down.
Do you have any details on his plan? You are providing an anecdote here with little supporting facts.

No right minded insurance company is going to sell their product at a lower premium to provide coverage in a significantly more expensive state without raising the premiums. If you opened up the borders they just would switch to national plans with singular rates. Which may save some people money, and may cost some people more money. They have little interest in creating a cheaper product.

The entire industry needs strict regulations and cost controls. And the only way to institute said cost controls is to have one party at the negotiating table telling providers what they will be paid.
 
Nov 23, 2010
4,264
193
625
#33
I pay for medicare too. I don't get any benefits from it. If we all go to medicare, then who is going to pay the bill?
The US Congress gives authorization by law and the US Treasury/Fed handles the financing. That's who pays the "bill".

TBH, if your private health care sector was more efficient and could compete well on the global stage then the US government wouldn't have to get involved. Basically, the problem is your private sector sucks yet people are making a lot of money and living lavishly as if America is way better than everyone else.

In reality, America is getting embarrassed by other nations that are heavily regulated. You're being outclassed by health care systems where governments have a bigger role and they cover virtually everyone.

So, the point of the universal push is to tackle the redundant employment, overhead and inefficiency in your health care sector. The fact America dedicates 18% of GDP to health care is insane. What are you paying for?
 
Last edited:
Likes: ssolitare

Ke0

Member
Aug 10, 2012
2,083
492
430
Reading, Berkshire
#34
I voted your country should keep things the way they are. Mostly because one of your parties is against any kind of change while in the same breath making empty statements about how the system isn't working.

Yeah I think average health/lifestyle plays a substantial part in this.
Maybe Americans health and lifestyle is so shite because they can't even afford routine check ups and general preventative care so they go to the doctor only when things are extremely dire
 
Last edited:
Mar 12, 2014
3,663
2,193
415
#36
I really don't know what the solution should be. I love the idea of all Americans being covered, but herein lies the rub: Both parties have lobbyists so far up their asses that the only solutions actually discussed seem to involve us working stiffs paying more for less, all to provide free shit to people who are not self-sufficient in terms of finances. Other than covering pre-existing conditions, that is exactly what Obamacare did for most people who receive no government benefits (that I know anyway). So naturally any discussion centered on 'for everyone" raises the hairs on a lot of people's necks. You know, fool me once shame on you, but fool me twice shame on me.

Anyway, I would like a better system. I would also like universal health care. But not universal health care that is a code word for me paying more, so someone who doesn't support themselves (or people here illegally) gets something free or cheap. My suggestion is we attack this first by addressing costs, and later start looking at expansion. But that will require some real hard choices. Such as kicking lobbyists to the curb, caps on profit margins (big taboo for free market people), caps on pay for medical professionals (the ridiculous stuff, not rank and file, but a big taboo for free market people no matter what), and maybe even allowing hospitals to refuse to treat people except where they objectively know the person's life is at risk unless they provide proof of payment or insurance up front.
 
Aug 3, 2011
1,028
40
480
#38
I work in data analytics in the insurance industry, health insurance is a lot of it. (Side bar, but thanks to current politics, we disclose our politcal beliefs to our coworkers so that we can work honestly with one another, as healthcare and ACA is highly political at the moment)

Anyone blaming insurance for this is wrong. Insurance is shopped around at all possible angles to multiple different businesses. There's an underwriting process that sees if the risk of taking on a group of employees is worth it. A lot of times this is rejected.

Luckily actual health care costs are starting to be regulated. Won't fix the issue, but is a start.

When you need an ambulance, or your heart gives out, you don't have the time to shop. Unchecked capitalism takes advantage of that.
 
Last edited:
Jun 9, 2004
6,687
109
1,275
#39
70% for universal health care. That's cool. I didn't expect that. It wouldn't be an easy transition even if it was politically viable as over half a million people in the insurance industry and who knows how many people in hospital administration would have to find new jobs.
 
Aug 21, 2018
193
61
175
#40
I work in data analytics in the insurance industry, health insurance is a lot of it. (Side bar, but thanks to current politics, we disclose our politcal beliefs to our coworkers so that we can work honestly with one another, as healthcare and ACA is highly political at the moment)

Anyone blaming insurance for this is wrong. Insurance is shopped around at all possible angles to multiple different businesses. There's an underwriting process that sees if the risk of taking on a group of employees is worth it. A lot of times this is rejected.

Luckily actual health care costs are starting to be regulated. Won't fix the issue, but is a start.

When you need an ambulance, or your heart gives out, you don't have the time to shop. Unchecked capitalism takes advantage of that.
Actually I believe insurance IS the reason for the skyrocket rate. Back then before the days of medical insurance, hospital fee are affordable. Ever since health insurance happen, fee are a lot higher since doctor are charging more since they know insurance vis paying for it
 
Mar 12, 2014
3,663
2,193
415
#41
Actually I believe insurance IS the reason for the skyrocket rate. Back then before the days of medical insurance, hospital fee are affordable. Ever since health insurance happen, fee are a lot higher since doctor are charging more since they know insurance vis paying for it
Any time demand increases without supply increasing, prices go up. So insurance is definitely a factor in the problem. But that is a problem we just have to adjust for in other ways, because taking insurance away will not happen. I'm generally free market, but with respect to health care I think the free market is giving too much credit. When you see the same companies selling the same products for different prices depending on country, it's a problem to me. On the flip side, the whole notion of lets pay for everyone regardless is just as bad. You put too many people in a carriage without increasing the number of horse pulling it, and the carriage stops moving.