Almost 100 Million People a Year 'Forced To Choose Between Food and Healthcare' (theguardian.com)

Almost 100 million people are pushed into extreme poverty each year because of debts accrued through healthcare expenses. From a report: A report, published by the World Health Organization and the World Bank this week, found the poorest and most vulnerable people are routinely forced to choose between healthcare and other necessities for their household, including food and education, subsisting on $1.90 a day. Researchers found that more than 122 million people around the world are forced to live on $3.10 a day, the benchmark for "moderate poverty," due to healthcare expenditure. Since 2000, this number has increased by 1.5% a year. A total of 800 million people spend more than 10% of their household budgets on "out-of-pocket" health expenses, defined as costs not covered by insurance. Almost 180 million people spend a quarter or more, a population increasing at a rate of almost 5% per year, with women among those worst affected.

Comments

Don't be mistaken

[damn_registrars]

The reason health care is so costly in the US can be found at the top of the insurance companies. Many of the top execs of these companies - including the ones that are listed as "non-profit" or "not-for-profit" take in guaranteed annual bonuses that exceed the lifetime earnings of most Americans. The "Affordable Care Act" just gave these greedy capitalists the keys to the kingdom as well, in guaranteeing them customers for the rest of time.

People dropping out of the insurance market and having no coverage won't solve this problem. The solution is to finally have our country behave like a modern industrialized nation and have a single-payer system. It's too bad nobody was willing to propose such a sensible thing.

Re:Don't be mistaken

[mridoni]

Single-payer would bankrupt the country. There will never be enough of anything to satisfy demand completely.

Well, I just can't understand how most of Europe and Canada do it without actually going bankrupt.

Re:Don't be mistaken

[OrangeTide]

Yet everyone gets their insulin in Canada. I can't say the same for USA.

There is limiting services through budget constraints that are applied broadly. And there is limited services by not providing any services to lower class people. Which model do you think we have in the US?

Re:Don't be mistaken

[dcw3]

Bullshit. Single payer removes a middleman that is of no value added, and in fact raises the total cost of healthcare.
And, for whatever it's worth, I'm saying this as a fiscal conservative.

Re:Don't be mistaken

[damn_registrars]

Single-payer would bankrupt the country.

Just because the GOP says that, doesn't make it true. The rest of the industrialized world uses some form of single-payer and their nations aren't going broke. We use a market-based system with essentially no floor and we are going broke. We are the only industrialized nation where it is even possible to go bankrupt due to medical debt.

The solution is to relax regulations, not increase them

Single payer does relax regulations. The biggest barriers to health care right now come from the insurance industry, not the government.

Remove the artificial limits placed on the number of doctors by the AMA

You really need to look in to what you're saying. Several problems exist with that statement.

First of all, we have alternative paths to practicing medicine. Ever hear of a Nurse Practitioner? They are able to practice medicine on their own now in several states. Ever hear of a Physician's Assistant? They are taking patients independently for routine cases in many states as well. Ever hear of a Doctor of Osteopathic medicine? They can also see patients on their own. We also have pharmacists who can do more patient care than before in many situations - they are doing a lot more now than just handing out prescriptions and selling Sudafed.

Do you really want someone practicing medicine who has less qualifications than that?

Cap malpractice payouts through tort reform.

Malpractice payouts are a trivial expense compared to what goes to the top of the insurance industry. In fact most doctors pay vastly more in malpractice insurance than they will ever pay in malpractice settlements. The reason why so few doctors go in to Obstetrics (for example) isn't because they are actually concerned about the possibility of committing malpractice, but because the insurance industry requires them to carry absurd terms for their malpractice insurance. Sure, the lawyers are getting a big cut but it is dwarfed again by what the insurance company execs get - and the insurance execs get it regardless of their own performance while the lawyers have to prove a case in court to get the big paycheck.

In other words the bulk of your argument reads like an ad for the insurance industry.

Re:Don't be mistaken

[Computershack]

Single-payer would bankrupt the country. There will never be enough of anything to satisfy demand completely.

The solution is to relax regulations, not increase them. Remove the artificial limits placed on the number of doctors by the AMA, relax the burdens on licensing, etc. Cap malpractice payouts through tort reform.

Its not bankrupted any other first world country which has universal healthcare free at the point of need. The tax burden per capita of the UK NHS is the same as the tax burden per capita in the USA for Medicare and Medicaid yet the NHS covers 100% of the population. It may not be perfect but people don't have to make the choice between getting treatment and eating.

Re:Don't be mistaken

[ranton]

It's not how much they draw compared to each person, it's how much they draw in total. It is, in fact, obscene.

Considering this thread was started with the statement: "The reason health care is so costly in the US can be found at the top of the insurance companies.", the only thing that matters is how much they draw compared to each person. For the purposes of this discussion that is. Whether or not their pay is obscene has no bearing on whether or not it is the reason health care is so costly in the US, which is the contention which was being refuted by the post you replied to.

Based on the figures I found here the top 10 highest paid insurance CEO's made $159 million in 2014. That is about $1.30 per household. I don't think health care costs are so high just because of an extra ten cents per month we all pay extra to pay these CEO's.

If I use Amtrust Financial Services (home of the highest paid CEO above) as a model, the entire C-level suite including the CEO made 261% of the CEO's pay. So I'll estimate that the C-level suite at the 10 companies above were paid $415 million in 2014, which is about a quarter per household per month.

If you factor in every C-level executive in every insurance company in the US, I doubt you would come to more than a couple dollars per household per month. That is not why insurance is so expensive. I would still agree that private insurance companies are the number one reason why health care is so expensive in the US but it has far more to do with the stockholders who demand return on investment (gasp, the horror) than it does with obscene CEO pay.

Re:Don't be mistaken

[c]

Single-payer would bankrupt the country.

Just because the GOP says that, doesn't make it true.

If the GOP were in charge of single-payer, they'd make it true.

10% spent on out-of-pocket" health expenses?

[OffTheLip]

I'm surprised it's not a greater percentage than that. It is for me.

News for Nerds?

[SpaceBoyToy]

First of all, I don't want to minimize the seriousness of this topic. It deserves discussion and action. I'm just not sure it belongs here, on this site.

I have come to /. for many years to stay up to speed on the latest tech news and other interesting news that interests me. I also follow many other sites for political content. Lately, every site has seemed to wade into politics more than usual. I understand we live in a hyper partisan environment. However, we must have some safe havens from it. This site serves as that, to some extent, for me. I would hate to see it devolve into yet another political dystopia.

This site was built for a particular niche. I don't know about the rest of you, but I would like to see it stay in the niche.

Re:Easy way to cap malpractice payouts.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be a shitty doctor, and you won't get sued. It is literally that easy.

Do you think 100% of lawsuits against doctors are reasonable? That is an extraordinary claim. It presumes no one who seeks medical care, and gets a bad outcome due to the limits of medicine and/or bad luck is not willing to cry in front of a jury to get several million dollars.

I live and work with humans. I can report to you that at least 10% of people do something that makes them a jerk at least once a week. People who think they have been wronged in some way (such as going to the doctor and not getting a pill that cures cancer for $1) are even more likely to do this. Please explain why people become angels the minute they step into a doctor's office.

Re:In the USA you just show up at ER and don't pay

[Train0987]

And the rest of us absorb those costs. That's another reason why prices are out of control.