If It Works In Healthcare

Comment threads from front page posts.
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53716
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Post by TheCatt »

From Here.



Edited By GORDON on 1191271955
It's not me, it's someone else.
Malcolm
Posts: 32040
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Post by Malcolm »

Heh. I remember what a pack of ciggies used to cost when I was smoking. Then I think what the vending machines in Edinburgh sold them for. Fucking ouch.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54396
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:

Post by GORDON »

Ok....

Are you talking about differences in health insurance plans, and then gasoline prices?
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Mommy Dearest
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 12:59 pm

Post by Mommy Dearest »

Totally confused me.
User avatar
Cakedaddy
Posts: 8798
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 6:52 pm

Post by Cakedaddy »

I couldn't follow it either.
Mommy Dearest
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 12:59 pm

Post by Mommy Dearest »

All right read it again and it sunk in. Could not figure out who could feed their families so cheap. lol
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53716
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Post by TheCatt »

Just saying that if health insurance is such a good idea, why not grocery insurance?
It's not me, it's someone else.
thibodeaux
Posts: 8055
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:32 pm

Post by thibodeaux »

What I can't figure out is why They are insisting that the government has to run the medical system. An analogy would be: instead of building crappy housing projects for the poor and letting everybody else pay for their own houses, they want us ALL to live in crappy housing projects.

The current drum-banging of "health care reform" is a classic example of government creating a problem and then trying to fix it with more of the same. Idiots. How can an intelligent person actually support MORE government tomfoolery here? How can an intelligent person these days actually believe that the solution to ANYTHING is more government?
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53716
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Post by TheCatt »

Well, if government created the problem, surely they know how to fix it too.

My inlaws said the birth of my wife cost about $400 in 1978 (They didn't have insurance). Our daughter's birth cost our insurance companies about $4500 (The list price was close to $10,000, but of course insurance companies get "discounts").

Inflation has not been 1100% since 1978.
It's not me, it's someone else.
User avatar
Cakedaddy
Posts: 8798
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 6:52 pm

Post by Cakedaddy »

The rich are fucked no matter what. . . cause there's more have-not's than there are have's. We already know 20% of the people pay 80% of the taxes (or something like that). Which means that 80% of the people are voting to get the money from the other 20%. The rich will always be fighting an uphill battle against the stream in the winter barefoot because the have-not's are jealous lazy bastards.

If you can't afford health care or your meds or whatever, it's cause you don't have your priorities straight. I already pay the 'high health insurance costs' for me and mine. Now the dems want me to pay even more to cover the people that would rather buy tobacco, weed, lottery tickets and a 40 oz instead of health insurance? Great. Thanks. Fuckers.

Hey. Maybe after we try the socialist thing for 60 years, the soviets can bail us out.
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54396
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:

Post by GORDON »

TheCatt wrote:Just saying that if health insurance is such a good idea, why not grocery insurance?
GORDON for the win!
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
thibodeaux
Posts: 8055
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:32 pm

Post by thibodeaux »

TheCatt wrote:Inflation has not been 1100% since 1978.
Well, just to play Devil's Advocate: I recall reading something somewhere saying that one of the reasons we have "skyrocketing" medical and educational costs is that their costs have risen relative to other goods and services because it's hard to improve productivity there. A doctor can only see so many patients per day, a teacher can only teach so many students.

Probably doesn't work out to 1100%, though, but still, might there be something to that?
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54396
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:

Post by GORDON »

So the answer to rising health care costs is... send more kids to med school?

I heard that in a lot of cases the AMA... to which all doctors are required to belong... sets minimum prices for procedures.

The econ 111 prof I menioned before used the AMA as a "monopoly on medicine," and why that is a bad thing.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Mommy Dearest
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 12:59 pm

Post by Mommy Dearest »

TheCatt wrote:Well, if government created the problem, surely they know how to fix it too.

My inlaws said the birth of my wife cost about $400 in 1978 (They didn't have insurance). Our daughter's birth cost our insurance companies about $4500 (The list price was close to $10,000, but of course insurance companies get "discounts").

Inflation has not been 1100% since 1978.
And that is basically my biggest problem with the health care situation. If I am self pay, I pay on the spot, there is no application for payment and no three month wait for the payment, yet I pay more than the insurance company. Not right.
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53716
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

Post by TheCatt »

To Thib's point:
That may be part of it, but
a) There's little incentive to improve "productivity." There is mostly incentives (that I can see) to see more patients, and do more procedures. Regardless of benefit/outcome.
b) There is little competition in medical services. Sure, I can see anyone in my healthplan, but I'm still restricted to doctors that are products of medical school. I'm guessing 90% of the things people see doctors for could be taken care of by nurses or other lower-paid staff. Since there's no price pressure (Doctor costs me $20), there's no incentive.
c) Medicine. Since I don't pay full prices, I have little incentive to care what my doctor prescribes, or what I take. If something costs my insurer 10x as much, but me only $5 more, what do I care?

In other words, the inflationary trends in medicine I believe are largely the product of a lack of market forces.

To MD's point. Yeah, I was trying to make a point about that in the article with the "friend who lost his job" paying more than my grocery insurer and I did.

I've heard that the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) sets enrollment limits, and basically controls the number of doctors entering medicine, thus further limiting competition. Again, I argue that most things don't need the rigor of the current version of medical education.
It's not me, it's someone else.
TPRJones
Posts: 13418
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 2:05 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:

Post by TPRJones »

TheCatt wrote:Well, if government created the problem, surely they know how to fix it too.

I'm going to assume that was sarcasm. :)

A lot of the cost comes from governmental "protections" that cause tons of red tape and developmental costs on every new drug or device - developmental costs that are far higher in relation to the production costs of the final product than in most other industries - and then those costs must be recouped from the patients. The massive amount of administration required by governmental regulations adds to the problem. And doctors do make a lot of money, but all this extra cost also carries over into their costs to become a doctor in the first place, so they need to make a lot to catch up.

Another factor that's not the government's fault directly is that the pace of progress in the field is pretty high and there've been some significant advances in what is possible to cure in the last few decades. By trying to provide all possible proceedures and cures to everyone it's like trying to ensure that everyone gets a brand new top-of-the-line plasma TV; of course it's going to cost a ton to provide those high-end products to everyone that needs it. The high costs associated with new proceedures and equipement that are a result of it being naturally new and costly will go down over time, though, while the governmental overhead won't; it will only go up as long as the government stays involved.

Do we need that huge governmental "protection" overhead? I don't think so, but I'm definately in the minority there.

EDIT: I agree with The Catt, though, about market forces being another large factor. The insurance companies and that whole system is certainly not designed to lower prices in the slightest. I'm not sure how much of the blame for that setup can be pinned on the government, but I'll certainly try my best to blame it on government, too. :p

EDIT2: I've never cared for the whole idea of insurance to begin with. Of course the payouts from the insurance company will be less than what they take in in coverage payments, otherwise they wouldn't be in the business. So on average you get far less than you pay for with insurance. Unless you are one of the unlucky ones that ends up needing the coverage, of course. Essentially you are making a wager that you will become horribly ill, which is a bet I'd rather not be involved in because you lose either way. But I don't have that choice because my employer made the decision for me and pays money that could be going into my pocket for insurance that I almost never use. Annoying.




Edited By TPRJones on 1182359947
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
Malcolm
Posts: 32040
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Post by Malcolm »

Jesus H. Lapdancing Christ. More insurance. Why don't they just stop beating 'round the bush & call it "extortion?"
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Mommy Dearest
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 12:59 pm

Post by Mommy Dearest »

So lets see. Lose $219.00 in tax credits or pay twice that a month for health insurance. No brainer ???
User avatar
Cakedaddy
Posts: 8798
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 6:52 pm

Post by Cakedaddy »

Mommy Dearest wrote:
So lets see. Lose $219.00 in tax credits or pay twice that a month for health insurance. No brainer ???
That was my first thought too. It was quickly followed up with the thought that it's fucked up they are going to take that money away. Why? To offset the cost of the care he'd had that year that he didn't pay for? He can't afford health insurance, so take his money?

As was pointed out, it's state sponsored extortion.

Insurance Agent: Hey, congressman. Make people give me money. That would be cool. Thanks. Oh, don't worry. We'll take care of ya.
Post Reply