By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
TheRealMafoo said:
Slimebeast said:

Oh yeah, that's a big factor too. The lack of consumer interest in how much stuff cost. The consequence of an insurance based system.

How can it be changed?

 

I know how I would do it.

Get rid of health insurance all together. If you need healthcare, you pay for it. I am not against the government giving out extremely low interest guaranteed loans to pay for these services.

If you look at the healthcare industry where insurance is not a factor, like elective eye surgery, or plastic surgery, the services over the last 10 years have gotten so much better, and are drastically cheaper. You are also treated very well by the doctors and nurses. They are competing for your business, so they have to make sure they provide a better service at a better cost then the next guy.

Right now it’s crazy to ask someone to pay 50k for a bypass surgery. But if there was no insurance, that operation would probably cost around 3k, and be done with so much more comfort and efficiency. If you can’t afford it, take out a loan with the government, and pay it back though tax return deductions, or with a payment plan.

With this plan, everyone still gets healthcare, but the consumer now cares what things cost. It drives competition, and competition breeds excellence.

I agree with the previous point about the need to address the reasons for the relatively high cost of health care provision in the US.  Slimebeasts point about excess testing because the cost is always going to be covered is silly because whether healthcare is being provided privately or publicly, of course it should be regulated.  So i agree, socialising health care in the US right now would not solve the problem.

On the other hand you can't just leave health care provision over to capitalist principles and say everything is gonna be alright.  The whole concept of supply and demand in the economic sense is fine if you are talking about something that isn't essential.  That's why in the case of elective surgery it works fine.  People are only going to pay so much for something they don't actually need so it's up the service provider to meet the needs of the patients.

If you try and apply the same principles to someone requiring a bypass, you are effectively asking someone what price they put on their life.  The system could continue to drive the cost of the operation higher and higer because people would be willing to mortgage themselves out of house and home to save their life.  Lending money to people who may not be able to pay it back is not a good idea.

I'll stop now because this is getting too long.