Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I'm surprised it's not a greater percentage than that. It is for me.
It's health insurance.
Get it right.
The Democrats fixed healthcare a decade ago, remember?
At $3.00/day what are we to expect, these people are poor. 100 million people are criticaly poor in third world sence, their governments and societies have failed to provide a modicum of capitalism where even a pittance of service to society is worth ten times that.
Perhaps instead of talking about universal global health insurance we should talk about restrictive economic states who keep their poor permanently poor and living is squaller. Perhaps lets skip the 80 years of a socialism experiment and jump right into a free market economy where the worker is in high demand and healthcare is just another perk to attract useful labor. Dare to dream.
That's one way to cure obesity I guess.
Or unemployment and homelessness.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
That's barely 1% of the world population. I think that's damned impressive.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Give all the Stats you want. In America, one of the richest country's in the world, we simply don't give a shit about Poverty or Healthcare issues and have no interest in solving them.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
FYI, the article didn't talk about "starving to death..."
Read this article.
It will perhaps educate you.
That, and killing 95% of the lawyers.
Nothing will improve until the two above changes are made.
Plan B is jail/prison (cover more then er and free food)
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.
The poorest Americans are richer than the average of the rest of the world. They have access to actual healthcare where in other places, they don't even have access, as there are no doctors. We live in a world of riches, and think we're poor, because the myopia we suffer. The solution being offered, "single payer" isn't really a solution, and will end up putting us on the road to Venezuela and Greece.
The real fix is to get rid of insurance all together, and rid ourselves of the middlemen extracting 50% of all costs for themselves. It will actually lower costs (backoffice) that doctors have to run chasing down insurance repayments and keeping track of all the required paperwork it involves.
There is no reason why 8 hour (that should have been 2) visit to the Emergancy Room cost $10,000(no costly tests), except insurance. You see, those that can pay, end up paying for those that can't (or won't), with the Insurance Middlemen getting their cut.
And THAT is why healthcare costs so much.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
A refrigerator you buy once and use for years. Often it comes with the apartment you rent, so you don't really buy it at all. (nor are your permitted to sell it)
Selling a crappy beater car will cover medical expenses for about a month, at least in my case. Then what do you do, not work because you are too disabled to walk the 8 miles to work every morning? Does selling a $150 television really solve a families food problems for more than a few weeks?
You'd have a valid point if priorities of the poor were as Senator Chuck Grassley states, "... that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.”
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Do you run Linux or Windows on that computer? Do you buy using Amazon? Those are free will choices that made those guys rich.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
On a gold-gray morning in Mitchell County, Iowa, Christina Dreier sends her son, Keagan, to school without breakfast. He is three years old, barrel-chested, and stubborn, and usually refuses to eat the free meal he qualifies for at preschool. Faced with a dwindling pantry, Dreier has decided to try some tough love: If she sends Keagan to school hungry, maybe he’ll eat the free breakfast, which will leave more food at home for lunch.
Dreier knows her gambit might backfire, and it does. Keagan ignores the school breakfast on offer and is so hungry by lunchtime that Dreier picks through the dregs of her freezer in hopes of filling him and his little sister up. She shakes the last seven chicken nuggets onto a battered baking sheet, adds the remnants of a bag of Tater Tots and a couple of hot dogs from the fridge, and slides it all into the oven.
So her little brat kid won't eat the free meals. But wait, she was feeding him breakfast at home too?
And she's buying frozen chicken nuggets and Tater tots? A dozen eggs cost $1.50. Potatoes even less per pound. Iceberg Lettuce is sometimes also $1,.50 cents a head.
On this particular afternoon Dreier is worried about the family van, which is on the brink of repossession. She and Jim need to open a new bank account so they can make automatic payments instead of scrambling to pay in cash. But that will happen only if Jim finishes work early.
And they own a Van. OK. Seems like a Corolla would have been a better choice. And apparently she is incapable of opening a bank account by herself? BTW, most banks have Sat hours.
Either this article is poorly made up bullshit or these people are the victims of their own idiocy.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
In my country (Spain) and quite a few other ones, medical expenses rarely represent an issue as far as a part of all the salaries (and contributions of companies/self-employers) is being used to pay for the public health care system. I could even stop working/contributing for some years without losing these benefits (I did over-contribute in the past); but even people with no work or illegal immigrants can enjoy it under quite a few scenarios. You only use paid/private alternatives either voluntarily or for somehow-unnecessary treatments.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
to the job killing regulation that is the medical license. If it's good enough for Dr Nick Riviera it's good enough for me. And let's not let anyone sue Dr Nick, heavens no. Sure, he used an artichoke heart instead of a human on, but he passed the savings on to you!
/., so this story didn't belong here in the first place (news for nerds) but as a nerd I trust you can figure out that this is .3% of the annual cost of healthcare in America.
Oh, fyi, payouts for medical malpractice, according to this very pro tort reform (I hate calling it that) website are only $3.6 billion. This is
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
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.
Well, I just can't understand how most of Europe and Canada do it without actually going bankrupt.
By starting 50 or 75 years ago and keeping costs from rising year after year up until the present.
Vermont tried to go single-payer a couple years ago. They couldn’t make it work because there was no way for them to cut doctor and nurse salaries enough to make the financing work out.
If you want to understand, start by learning from Vermont's experience.
www.businessinsider.com/insulin-prices-increased-in-2017-2017-5
"It's led some people living with diabetes to turn to the black market, crowdfunding pages, and Facebook pages to get access to the life-saving drug."
It's true: poor Americans don't normally starve. But they do frequently die of exposure or lack of medical care. The indigent mostly get care from emergency rooms, and don't have treatment for more chronic issues.
In the USA you just show up at ER and don't pay if you don't have a med plan and they can't turn you away.
Is the party med school.
The van might be paid off (either because it's just that old or from better times when money was more plentiful) whereas getting a new (or even used) car would come with car payments that they couldn't afford.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
I'd argue that the solution is for people to have fewer kids, but that's somewhat off-topic.
Yes, we do need of get rid of the insurance companies. If you accept that government is going to be involved in our healthcare, then there's no logical reason for insurance companies. I'm no fan of big government, but insurance companies are simply leaches on the system.
And to pile onto your ER example, I have my own anecdotes. Last March, I had a severe fall that nearly sliced my nose off of my face when it hit the edge of a flagstone step...the photos were brutal. I was on the surgical table for about 1.5 hrs., and spent one night in the trauma unit. This came to more than $50,000, not including subsequent visits to the plastic surgeon's office. And while I only had to cover about 10% of that, I don't understand where all that money went, other than profit, or to subsidize those who couldn't afford ER visits.
Just one more...my daughter sliced her hand open while working in the kitchen of a local resort. The staff at the resort basically superglued the cut. I came and took her to a local ER, where she got a tetanus shot, and after the doctor examined it, told us that the glue job was fine, and she could go home. $1500 for a shot and a look by a doctor. Fortunately, that was covered by workman's compensation.
Just another day in Paradise
Is that true when there are non-negligible parts of the United States that don't have access to basic sanitation?
I had a dream, bright and carefree, but now there's doubt and gravity
The ER has to try to stabilize you. They don't have to provide needed treatment beyond that, or drugs — and they won't. What they will do is determine what will stabilize you, do that, give you perhaps one dose of whatever prescription(s) is(are) needed which you can then go get from a pharmacy if you can pay for it, and refer you to a doctor, who you can also go to if you can pay for it, and that's the end of it.
You have cancer? Diabetes? A hernia? You're not going to get the treatment you need for that at the ER. Period. The ER does things that are specific to the moment, like set a broken arm. Still, you get to pay for the meds, and any follow-up care.
ER visits are not even remotely comparable to appropriate medical care for anything serious. People who claim it is have no idea what they are talking about.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
You can't let ER rooms deny care until they verify your insurance. So you pass a reasonable law making them care for everybody... because that might be you the paying customer they let DIE while trying to find your insurance!
So that gets exploited by desperate people YOU refuse to care for; out of desperation if not involuntarily when disaster strikes. Also, YOU have laws preventing death from sick people who just want to die on their own terms. End of life costs are insane in a country full of cowardly people... home of the brave my ass! I've lived here 40 years and it's a culture of fear all over the place. If you were brave, it's likely they got you acting more cowardly after a decade... probably even buying a gun (most every gun owner I've met is a coward. Yes, I have one - inherited, it gives me no added security; it's so marginal that I'm at greater risk just owning it..fact.)
ER visits are often due to people not having proper preventative care. The expensive situations especially. That greatly increases costs even beyond the ER visit (or repeat ER visits if no follow up care.) This is also a cheap insurance and lazy American problem because proper preventative care is likely the leading cause of all healthcare use in the USA.
The political system is horribly corrupt and the voters are out of touch with reality. 1/3 of the medical cost problem is the insurance industry-- all things being equal, they could buy a lot of time by cutting them out completely-- but it would continue to decline as unchecked control over prices continue (thing is government insurance would have more incentive to NOT keep things on the same path so it wouldn't be as bad as it is now. not a great deal better... given all the other problems in the country. still 30% less overhead costs.)
People can't even handle the truth, let alone blunt harsh truths. The worst things get the more impossible it is to have people face the truth of their deteriorating situation. This is why the USA is going to collapse in the near future. Seen it coming for decades now; it's a bug in the system that only a reboot could solve (except it's not a computer, so it'll be an ugly reboot and the rise of trump politics proves it's likely to be quite ugly, not civil like the fall of the british empire.)
Yep...one cost of increased US health care is Dr's running multiple tests to CYA against a lawsuit...when usually 1-2 would suffice. But, medicine is NOT an exact science, and occasionally a test misses something or false negative. If the Dr doesn't cover his ass with every test possible, he's gonna get sued.
Aside from the ONE thing Obama care did to positively, that being disallowing coverage refusal for pre-existing conditions....it has been a disaster and a great reason prices have increased and continue to do so.
For example...I'm self employed. Way back 10 years or so ago, I could get a simple, high deductible insurance policy (only $1300 or so), and basically have that for what used to be termed, "Major Medical" coverage. Basically there for $$$ emergencies like getting hit by a bus or heart attack. I paid about $120/mo for that, and that was with being a smoker and high cholesterol pre-existing.
I couple that with a HSA (Health Savings Account) that I fully fund (this year about $3200 max) annually pre-tax that I used to pay my routine meds needs, and office visit fees, etc.
Now? Well, about 4 years ago, I started off with a "silver" policy...about $450/mo.....increasing yearly till for 2018 they were wanting about $1100-$1200 a month for same thing.
Part of the problem? Well, with fscking Obama care regulations, there isn't ability to get a "major medical" type policy. No....EVERYTHING and the kitchen sink has to be included.
I'm a single male, in between women....I have NO plans to get pregnant, yet I have policy coverage for prenatal, etc. Why the fuck should I pay that?
That's one reason.
Another...WTF don't they allow insurance to be sold across state lines, like car insurance is? That would surely increase competition....and lower prices.
Why can't I pick and choose what coverages I need, a cafeteria type thing, much like we want to do TV ala carte, why can't we all be big boys and big girls and pick and choose what coverage we need?
Let's get the bean counters out of the way, and go back to having insurance be for EMERGENCY care, and all....prices will lower, Dr's then could be independent again and charge reasonable...and let's get some tort reform in there to prevent frivolous lawsuits.
Back before the bean counters, HMO's and all...medical care wan't THAT expensive. I had a relative that was a Dr. back in the 70's-80's....he would charge according to what the patients' means were.
We have medicaid for the truly poor, but for everyone else that is capable of working, lets go back to the older says and things like I've put forth where it won't cost an arm and a leg and people are covered for emergency care, but for routine stuff, they manage themselves.
If nothing else, it would unclog the fucking ER at hospitals...and keep people from using that as their primary physician....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I'm gonna die, and as quickly as possible.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
To fix the health system it must be split into Health Care and Health Insurance.
People must be personally responsible (and pay) for their Health Care and can pay a small amount to be in the large Health Insurance pool.
Stupid Car Analogy: Do you make a claim for an oil change? What about wiper changes? Tires? Back into a tree and get a tiny dent? NO. Car Insurance is for those times when fate smacks you in the face and wrecks your car.
The same should be true in the Health Industry. You are responsible for the care and maintenance of your body. Until people take a direct role in their health and stop thinking things are "free" the system will continue to spiral into failure.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So-called 'health insurance' only really benefits you if you become seriously ill or injured. Otherwise all it does is suck money out of your pocket every month and give you nothing in return. In my opinion, if the average person spent money every month on physical activities and eating healthier instead of spending that money on so-called 'health insurance', they'd find that they don't need 'health insurance'. They'd be stronger, more resistant to injury and illness, lower chance of cancers or heart disease, and little chance (if any) of conditions like obesity or diabetes. Probably be less neurotic and overall happier more of the time than they'd be otherwise, too.
You can look at the LASIK clinics for an example of a medical industry which is mostly unaffected by insurance, since it is generally considered an elective procedure. The price is mostly quoted up front, and you can shop around for a better price, or go for a more reputable doctor. From what I can tell, price is also much lower than most procedures covered by insurance. Of course, if you can't afford LASIK, then you simply don't get it done, so there is a much smaller coercive price driver.
Actually, on second thought, there's no way to compare this with an urgent procedure. If you need a procedure right away, the clinic could charge an exorbitant price, akin to private firefighters watching your house burn down. The insurance company reduces the coercive force because they and the clinic agree to a price structure beforehand, when there is no urgency.
Agree wholeheartedly. Layer a high-deductible policy on top of that (true "health insurance" for big, unexpected problems rather than the make-my-office-visits-and-pills-a-bit-cheaper system we have today), and the vast majority of people would be set.
So we get rid of insurance but single-payer is a no go...the way to pay for medical care is then âoebe richâ? If you donâ(TM)t want to suffer from chronic conditions with expensive treatment then simply donâ(TM)t be not rich?
Even if you take all of the insurance industry padding out of medical bills they are still not cheap. The bottom four quintiles of the population wouldnâ(TM)t be able to afford more than occasional clinic visits. Treatment of chronic conditions would only end up available to the wealthy, even a good portion of the top quintile of the population would find treatment inaccessible.
Insurance works by risk pooling. Thereâ(TM)s nothing fundamentally wrong with risk pooling and is exactly what a single-payer system would do. Everyone pays into the system which has funds to pay for individual expenses because not everyone gets expensive to treat conditions simultaneously. Overall productivity increases because everyone has ready access to basic healthcare and doesnâ(TM)t need to choose between food and a trip to the doctor or filling a prescription.
When people can see a doctor for minor conditions without resorting to an emergency room visit not only do they see less impact from minor conditions but can get early identification and treatment for major ones. Businesses win because their workers are sick at work less often (just by having their symptoms effectively treated sooner) which limits the spread of disease through the staff.
Single-payer has the same benefits economically as just eliminating health insurance with the added bonus of people having effective healthcare.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
You are absolutely right that Obama and the Democrats gave a big wet french kiss to the insurance industry with Obamacare - hey, lets mandate by law that everyone has to buy the most absurdly insurance possible, which included things you will never need.
The real answer lies in history, as in every time you let competition happen prices improve. So what really needs to happen is to let people buy ANY insurance policy they like, including none. Let people buy an insurance policy from anywhere, don't let insurance companies have fiefdoms in each state. Allow people to come up with creative forms of insurance. There are tons of ways medical care can easily get lots cheaper...
But the single worst thing you can do, is ironically to go for single payer. That means the same government that is screwing you over now is the ONLY source of your medical care. It means the government paying for health care has no leverage over costs so costs would go up dramatically, and service quality and amount would taper off (as you can see with anywhere on earth that has single payer, over time waiting lists get much worse and the number of providers of care goes down if the government imposes price controls).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Your comment is dangerous stupidity, because people believe your wild exaggerations.
The cost and number malpractice payouts has been dropping, and the "prevalence" of lawsuits is absolutely related to the arrogance of many doctors.
Cheap storage VM.
A van that is on the brink of repossession is not paid off.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
The last time I went to a bank was to open an account. Well, I had to present myself so they knew I existed. Took about 10 minutes. Could be done during lunch hour.
But perhaps that is all because I use the metric system.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Vehicles that are paid off generally are not "on the brink of repossession" or require "automatic payments".
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Please explain the basis for your assumption that the doctors aren't people with the same made up 10% doing something that makes them a jerk at least once a week. People who think they've been wronged in some way are no more or less likely to be the jerks than the doctors.
Keep in mind we are talking about medical care here. If you go in to have surgery on your shoulder and the doctor makes a good faith best effort but say, sneezes at the wrong moment and slices a nerve leaving your arm hanging limp and dead at your side for life, you can't just shrug it off (heh) because the doctor wasn't being a jerk. It isn't about thinking the doctor was an ass, most people NEED their limbs and the loss of a limb is too great a burden to bear financially.
Why don't you just be happy that women who plan to get pregnant are paying for treatment if you get prostate cancer? It works both ways.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
The stories people hear in the U.S. about long waiting times, people dying before getting service etc. are hand-picked outliers designed to set an anti-public health care agenda.
I've had friends/loved ones who, when going to the doctor for something they thought was minor, being immediately wheeled to the MRI in order to save their lives. The system isn't perfect, and definitely there have been cases of people waiting in emergency room lines too long (deaths have occurred, no doubt about it -- but we're talking a few cases in the last decade, not people daily having to decide between bankruptcy for their entire family, and death, with a diagnosis). But it's lightyears better than what the US has and we'd never, ever give it up for the trainwreck you poor people have to endure.
And yet, in the US., with its supposedly low tax rate, people are via the health system down there paying hundreds of dollars for a pair of rubber gloves. Someone's getting very, very rich literally on the blood of Americans there.
My dentist said the paperwork burden for public healthcare was much higher than for private insurance and that the rates allowed for hygienists and doctors was below what they could turn a profit, so they stopped taking it. The doctors left that still take insurance seem to be universally horrible, so I doubt dropping wages and allowing for more doctors would make any difference in quality, so I say bring on the single payer. I'll pay out of pocket for anything diagnostic or surgical anyway just to get decent quality.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
I have NO plans to get pregnant, yet I have policy coverage for prenatal, etc. Why the fuck should I pay that?
Are you suggesting that having a vagina should be considered a preexisting condition?
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
You know..why not let people pick and choose what coverage they want?
Let women worry about prenatal stuff if they plan on having kids.
I don't intend to have kids, but I will happily pay for my own coverage of prostate problems.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Well, it is potential for having a kid.
ON the other hand, I have no problem paying for insurance covering prostate problems...having one is pretty much a potential pre-existing condition for that...so, sure, why not?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Maybe different rates for the preexisting condition, black?
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Well, different things cost different amounts to treat, and different things affect the sexes and yes, some races have different pre-dispositions to different illnesses. Hell, why not mention Jews, Canadians and Cajuns and Tay-Sachs disease?
Thing is, not everyone is the same, but everyone generally has things wrong unique to their genetic makeup. Some are worse than others and hence yes, they will cost a bit more.
So what?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I didn't see that coming. I was surprised at suggesting different rates for women but thought you'd stop short of suggesting special rates for Jews, et al.
So if somebody's born with a genetic disorder, they pay rates comparable to their expected cost of treatment? I think you and I have different ideas about the purpose of insurance. But then, I'm one of those kooks that thinks even unemployed women should get prenatal care.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
There are restrictione that prevent competition. In India, generic insulins, porcine or human analog, are available for $1-3 per vial.
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.
How many Americans, Europeans, Australians, etc. are forced to live on $3.10/day because of medical bills?
Ken
Why do you need insurance at all ? Why not pay for only the disease you get, and for exactly the treatment you choose, at the place of your own choice, after you get the disease ?
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
How many kiloseconds is that ?
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
I don't think insurance is there for routine care.
It is there ONLY for emergencies....heart attack, cancer, getting hit by a bus....it is for catastrophic needs.
But your routine care, that should be planned and paid for by the individual. That would lower insurance costs to what insurance should be.."insurance against catastrophic loss".
I think it would help if the govt would loosen up and broaden the allowance of HSA's so people could save their money monthly pre-tax for these routine medical needs.
You save money monthly for food, shelter, etc...why should you not also save for routine medical/health needs?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I mostly agree.
However, having coverage for routine wellness visits and the related tests generally results in far more people getting them. And THAT results in addressing far more conditions before they become serious and thus harder (and more expensive) to treat.
What "universal healthcare" did was just add another layer, more complexity, more options and features and nonsense instead of removing barriers and administration and focusing the spend in healthcare on...well...healthCARE.
Agreed, you used to be able to go do a Dr. and get care...and just pay for it. Now doctors need to 'charge' ridiculous rates so the percentage they actually get paid still comes out to something livable after you figure in all the support costs required.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
That's the scam of insurance.
Unless you're out there on the bell curve, it's CHEAPER to do without it. Mind you, that would mean paying into a savings plan significantly in years where you don't even see a doctor...which people generally will not do if they have the option not to.
Insurance is a game of adding up the overall cost, adding your overhead, then dividing that larger number out between your customers. Benefit is shared risk, downside is additional cost.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
But your routine care, that should be planned and paid for by the individual. That would lower insurance costs to what insurance should be.."insurance against catastrophic loss".
I think we've confirmed that you and I have different philosophies on insurance. If I understand you correctly, people who have more expensive medical needs by being black, female, whatever, will pay for life for their bad decision. People with chronic conditions like genetic disorders will be fucked. You'll be fine.
You save money monthly for food, shelter, etc...why should you not also save for routine medical/health needs?
"Routine" can vary radically from one person to another based solely on where you stand at birth. Just having a vagina is pretty expensive. I don't mind subsidizing people who opt for a vagina. "Saving up" for chronic conditions can be insurmountable even though expensive treatments are "routine" for that patient.
Making women 100% responsible for the cost of all pregnancies because men "don't need that coverage" is something I strongly disagree with. I thought that opinion would be pretty much universal.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
There are bigger problems.
The AMA defines the codes that are used by billing, and because of Medicare, the AMA makes a huge amount of money from the Government. A great big racket built on lies, and for the benefit of corruption.. https://www.forbes.com/sites/t...
The number elderly (who use most of the health care resources) is increasing far faster than the supply of doctors. We need to streamline and reduce the cost of getting young people through school and into medical fields in order to get a better balance which will tilt the cost balance in favor of the patient, not to mention reducing waiting times to get care.
I would like to see health care coops provided in locally were you pay a membership fee, and your care is taken care of. Whoever sells the membership promises to include care at the ER, hospital, cancer, and other chronic conditions for a reasonable cost, with an option on preventative care, and with multiple different groups competing somewhat on price to keep each other honest.
There is probably some other things that can be done with regard to making sure regulations are reasonable, etc.
Implement these, and I think you'd see costs move toward a more affordable level. The thing is neither side is interested in addressing the long term demographic need to have more doctors to care for a more elderly population because the medical provider lobby doesn't want them to because it keeps prices high and enriches the medical field at the cost of the rest of us.
Ok..so, you're saying I should pay for everyone else's problems?
Why is that?
Are you assuming that be virtue of my sex, race, {add category here} that I don't/won't have special needs in my life too?
It all balances out...but I shouldn't have to pay up front for everyone else/s special needs, just like they shouldn't pay for mine.
As far as having kids and all the costs that go with it...hey, it takes two to tango and have one, therefore those that CHOOSE to have kids should be the ones that pay for it with insurance, etc.
I choose not to have them, why should I subsidize others that have them?
And I realize we disagree, I'm guessing you are much younger than me.
I remember a time growing up, where medical insurance is exactly what I'm describing...it was for catastrophic needs, not routine care.
That insurance for routine care is a fairly new paradigm....I'm just wanting to go back to what it was decades back, before medical insurance costs skyrocketed.....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Single Payer is Health Insurance. Instead of private companies striving for efficiencies, you end up with what looks a lot like the VA health system.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Ok..so, you're saying I should pay for everyone else's problems?
Why is that?
Because civilized societies shouldn't leave the weak to die. That's just my opinion.
And I realize we disagree, I'm guessing you are much younger than me.
40.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Well, we do have a bottom safety net, medicaid...but for those of us (hopefully the majority) with real jobs, we can pay our own way...individualism and all that.
But anyway, very nice discussion with you on this...nice to have a respectful discussion of differing opinions.....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
nice to have a respectful discussion of differing opinions.....
Let's hope that doesn't get us kicked off slashdot. I don't think differing opinions are allowed unless one person calls the other a snowflake.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Nah...we're both too old to be snowflakes.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
What is the scam ? You forgot to describe it.
Which bell curve ? Is there a bell curve but everybody is not "out there" on it ?
Do you understand diminishing marginal utility ?
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Unless you're out there on the bell curve, it's CHEAPER to do without it.
Yes. That's by design.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
My dad is in the VA health system. He has a hospital bed and an electric wheel chair that they have provided and gets regular physical therapy in the hopes that we can get him walking again.
So were you pointing out how awesome VA coverage is as a means of reinforcing the above's claims?
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
What a world of ignorance you live in. There is an entire Western world outside of our own that has perfectly healthy economies (think Germany, UK, Australia, and Canada to name a few) that have socialized medicine. No one who finds themselves ill due to genetic disease, cancer, or any other form of illness ever has to worry about impoverishing their families in these societies.
Really it sounds like some sort of crazy utopia to Americans and yet it's something that is regularly enjoyed by country's that are far less wealthy than ours. The reality is we are poorer than these nations for this.
You're comparison of socialized medicine to country's that were massively corrupt and/or miss-run really betrays your willful ignorance of the subject.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.