Home Off Topic

Here's why we'll never see affordable health care in this country

2456

Replies

  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    We are among the best in the world for acute trama -- gunshot wounds and the like.

    Not sure I'd fly my flag of American Superiority over that, however.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    cpr wrote: »
    Okay, there is a lot to the issue.
    Patients want to be treated like royalty and get the best of everything but not pay for it.
    MD's, love to try new stuff and a good percentage of the time it is not worth the cost.
    Government regs are out of control. Way out of control.
    Some administrators salaries are out of control.

    The fist fix, I would make is go back before 1980 and make all hospitals non-proift. The money would be put back into the system, used to pay for charity cases, and be a tax write off. Administrators shouldn't have to be cutting staff to make sure share holders make their quarterly cash. There should be no share holders. Maybe non-profit would stop the yearly price increases.

    I think the answer is not rolling the clock backwards, but looking at works other places in the world. You know, those places where they spend less and get better results.

    Many of them have non-profit hospitals, but none of them stopped there.

    Now, I'm sure many of your socialist detectors are going off, but you can't escape the truth. IMO, the free market experiment in healthcare is a failed one.

    IMO, the only way to reduce healthcare costs is to either (a) solve the health problem (i.e. the underlying issues like obesity, smoking, etc.) or (b) control the cost side through regulation and/or socialization (single payer or otherwise).

    If there are any other bright ideas, I'm all ears...Mike
  • MenziesMenzies Posts: 19,289 AG
    Wait until we get hit with increasing smog and pollutants...
    Maybe if we tell people that the brain is an App, they will start using it.
  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    Americans would never put up with the limits needed to make single payer work. And ask Bait's about single payer.
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
  • stc1993stc1993 Albany, GA Carrabelle, FLPosts: 7,540 Admiral
    We have a healthcare monopoly in my city they fight tooth & nail preventing any competition. In GA they have to acquire a certificate of need from the state before any competition can be built.

    The head admin makes almost twice what the one at Grady memorial in Atlanta makes almost $500k/yr.
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 32,579 AG
    Tarponator wrote: »
    We are among the best in the world for acute trama -- gunshot wounds and the like.

    Not sure I'd fly my flag of American Superiority over that, however.

    Trauma care, cancer care, new treatments, all lead in the U.S..

    Where do you see studies that don't use preventative care as a measure, that say the U.S. is worse than other countries. Preventative care is a society problem, not a medical problem. We, Americans, don't take good care of ourselves, but medicine saves us from our own abuses.

    Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 32,579 AG
    cpr wrote: »
    Americans would never put up with the limits needed to make single payer work. And ask Bait's about single payer.

    You are 100% correct. But it is the only option that would reduce healthcare costs.

    Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    stc1993 wrote: »
    We have a healthcare monopoly in my city they fight tooth & nail preventing any competition. In GA they have to acquire a certificate of need from the state before any competition can be built.

    The head admin makes almost twice what the one at Grady memorial in Atlanta makes almost $500k/yr.

    Competition dosen't work in much. Out patient surgical clinics do compete somewhat but not much. As for hospitals if there are 2 or more in one city one becomes a dumping ground and the other (s) make big money with paying patients.
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
  • cadmancadman Home of the Gators Posts: 32,579 AG
    Tarponator wrote: »
    I think the answer is not rolling the clock backwards, but looking at works other places in the world. You know, those places where they spend less and get better results.

    I have already told you the biggest difference and why our costs are higher. We pay those in the healthcare profession a lot more than other countries. Administrators, doctors, nurses, etc are all better paid here than in other countries.

    Unless you want the government controlling the salaries of everyone in the medical profession, like they do in the rest of the world, there is no way to lower healthcare costs significantly.

    Mini Mart Magnate

    I am just here for my amusement. 

  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    cadman wrote: »
    Trauma care, cancer care, new treatments, all lead in the U.S..

    Where do you see studies that don't use preventative care as a measure, that say the U.S. is worse than other countries. Preventative care is a society problem, not a medical problem. We, Americans, don't take good care of ourselves, but medicine saves us from our own abuses.

    The stories I could tell... and it's getting worse. Liver and Gi bleeds in 40 year olds is becoming and epidemic and non compliant diabetics are out of control. (pun intended). OD's from opioids and prescription meds happens daily. Not to mention 40 year old post MI who refuse to quit smoking.:Horse
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
  • mustang190mustang190 Posts: 10,104 AG
    Tarponator wrote: »
    We are among the best in the world for acute trama -- gunshot wounds and the like.

    Not sure I'd fly my flag of American Superiority over that, however.

    Can you name a country that has a better medical system???
    Most American cities have more MRI machines than a lot of countries have.
    Please post a country that has the cancer research and care that we have here?
    And since you despise the free market so much, why doesn't the government run you car insurance? I'm sure you would like it to be like health insurance!
  • tunamantunaman Posts: 3,767 Captain
    Tarponator wrote: »
    We are among the best in the world for acute trama -- gunshot wounds and the like.

    Not sure I'd fly my flag of American Superiority over that, however.

    I call my health care pretty good....but then again I expect to pay for my insurance..
  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    4-6 thousand out of pocket with good insurance is going to start taking a toll.
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
  • tunamantunaman Posts: 3,767 Captain
    cpr wrote: »
    4-6 thousand out of pocket with good insurance is going to start taking a toll.
    When does all this start?? That sounds like my wifes insurance, I don't call that good insurance.
  • NewberryJeffNewberryJeff Posts: 7,447 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    I think the answer is not rolling the clock backwards, but looking at works other places in the world. You know, those places where they spend less and get better results.

    Many of them have non-profit hospitals, but none of them stopped there.

    Now, I'm sure many of your socialist detectors are going off, but you can't escape the truth. IMO, the free market experiment in healthcare is a failed one.

    IMO, the only way to reduce healthcare costs is to either (a) solve the health problem (i.e. the underlying issues like obesity, smoking, etc.) or (b) control the cost side through regulation and/or socialization (single payer or otherwise).

    If there are any other bright ideas, I'm all ears...Mike


    Very few would call it a free market. A sector that is 18% of the economy is hardly a failure - despite what they may say, no elected official in this country wants to mess with that :wink
  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    Very few would call it a free market. A sector that is 18% of the economy is hardly a failure - despite what they may say, no elected official in this country wants to mess with that :wink

    And how much is unnecessary?*and who's to say? Some nerd in DC or a lobbyist in DC who buys a congressman to add another rule. IMO a lot is a fear based or political scam. It's like you can haul with a WT but are told you need a high country or king ranch to do the job right.
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    cadman wrote: »
    Trauma care, cancer care, new treatments, all lead in the U.S..

    Where do you see studies that don't use preventative care as a measure, that say the U.S. is worse than other countries. Preventative care is a society problem, not a medical problem. We, Americans, don't take good care of ourselves, but medicine saves us from our own abuses.

    We don't see doctors nearly as much as you think, compared to other countries that have much better results:

    squires_oecd_exhibit_03.png?la=en

    And nobody is disputing that the USA leads in some areas of healthcare.

    But you cannot escape the facts of the matter:

    US-Population-Health-4.png

    Again, the USA is not anywhere close to the best when it comes to healthcare outcomes despite spending far and away more per captia.

    Why?

    We're too unhealthy as a nation and our healthcare system as too many profit centers.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    tunaman wrote: »
    I call my health care pretty good....but then again I expect to pay for my insurance..

    Have you experienced healthcare outside the United States?
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    Very few would call it a free market. A sector that is 18% of the economy is hardly a failure - despite what they may say, no elected official in this country wants to mess with that :wink

    When we pay almost twice as much as other countries and generally speaking have worse results, I'd call that a failure.

    But you're right, no elected official really wants to touch this issue. It's a cash cow for them when it comes to election contributions:

    opioid-lobby-card.png
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    mustang190 wrote: »
    Can you name a country that has a better medical system???
    Most American cities have more MRI machines than a lot of countries have.
    Please post a country that has the cancer research and care that we have here?
    And since you despise the free market so much, why doesn't the government run you car insurance? I'm sure you would like it to be like health insurance!

    I can name 15 of them -- and 12 of them are listed in a table I posted above. Don't believe me? Fine, perhaps you believe this idiot:

    gt2.jpg

    But you're right to point out we lead in cancer care -- and several areas of medicine -- not that it matters as we still die at a younger age on average than most other developed countries.

    And I could not love the free market more. I just don't think it's the best thing for healthcare, where people's lives should come before profit.

    But, hey, if you like paying more for less, please be my guest, but there's no reason to stick your head in the sand and deny reality when it comes to the facts of the matter.
  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    We don't see doctors nearly as much as you think, compared to other countries that have much better results:

    squires_oecd_exhibit_03.png?la=en

    And nobody is disputing that the USA leads in some areas of healthcare.

    But you cannot escape the facts of the matter:



    Again, the USA is not anywhere close to the best when it comes to healthcare outcomes despite spending far and away more per captia.

    Why?

    We're too unhealthy as a nation and our healthcare system as too many profit centers.


    Comparing the US to other countries is apples to grapes. Seeing a MD in the US just adds to the cost, where in single payer countries ,that have usage rules or limits they can save money. Plus end of life care in the US is crazy. Also I don't see Russia, China and India, big landmass counties with big populations. Comparing the US to Norway is silly.
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    Also the money we spend in research and development leads the world. Actually the rest of the world rides the US gravy train in advancements.
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    cadman wrote: »
    I have already told you the biggest difference and why our costs are higher. We pay those in the healthcare profession a lot more than other countries. Administrators, doctors, nurses, etc are all better paid here than in other countries.

    Unless you want the government controlling the salaries of everyone in the medical profession, like they do in the rest of the world, there is no way to lower healthcare costs significantly.

    If we normalized physician pay, we'd still have the highest spending and worse results.

    Sure it's part of the problem, but I would argue it's the symptom of no price controls rather than the real reason.

    And I am effectively arguing for socialization of healthcare, whether it be single payer or something else.

    What's as obvious as can be is what we're doing now isn't working, even if there are some bright spots that doesn't change the overwhelmingly bad picture of healthcare in the USA.
  • NewberryJeffNewberryJeff Posts: 7,447 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    When we pay almost twice as much as other countries and generally speaking have worse results, I'd call that a failure.

    But you're right, no elected official really wants to touch this issue. It's a cash cow for them when it comes to election contributions:

    img

    In terms of cost vs outcomes, it sure doesn't look so great. In terms of median home prices, exchange traded funds dividends, and campaign $$$, it's stupendous.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    Would you rather be rich or alive?

    The politicians have voted with their hands out, and it's our health and savings accounts that are cashing that check.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    cpr wrote: »
    Also the money we spend in research and development leads the world. Actually the rest of the world rides the US gravy train in advancements.

    Very true.

    Unfortunately, it hasn't really lead to anything here in the USA in terms of outcomes other than corporate profits to many of these USA (and multinational) corporations.

    As I'm sure you see with your own two eyes on a daily basis.
  • NewberryJeffNewberryJeff Posts: 7,447 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Would you rather be rich or alive?

    The politicians have voted with their hands out, and it's our health and savings accounts that are cashing that check.

    Americans are rich and alive.

    I'd rather live to 79.3 in America than 82.8 in Spain.

    As far as single payer, the US government pays 64% of health care costs. If state purchasing power was effective in controlling costs, I would expect costs to at least start to level off, not increase at record rates.
  • MenziesMenzies Posts: 19,289 AG
    cpr wrote: »
    Also the money we spend in research and development leads the world. Actually the rest of the world rides the US gravy train in advancements.

    Seriously? You believe that?

    Can you share the data that you have?
    Maybe if we tell people that the brain is an App, they will start using it.
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    Americans are rich and alive.

    I'd rather live to 79.3 in America than 82.8 in Spain.

    As far as single payer, the US government pays 64% of health care costs. If state purchasing power was effective in controlling costs, I would expect costs to at least start to level off, not increase at record rates.

    Americans are unhealthier and die earlier than other developed countries. They are richer, but not more happy, and die younger than most any other developed country. Those are the facts. And personally, I'd prefer to live longer and be happier over a large bank account. But we are all different.

    State purchasing power is ineffective to control costs. That's just a line used by politicians to continue the fleecing. Please don't be naive.

    Don't believe me? Cool. How much would you like to wager that if control of healthcare is given to the states that costs continue to rise? You pick the time horizon and the wager. I'm game.
  • cprcpr Posts: 9,309 Admiral
    Tarponator wrote: »
    Very true.

    Unfortunately, it hasn't really lead to anything here in the USA in terms of outcomes other than corporate profits to many of these USA (and multinational) corporations.

    As I'm sure you see with your own two eyes on a daily basis.

    Actually, I have seen it work wonders. When I started 35 yr ago if you had an MI it was bed rest and quiet for 3-5 days, not you are in a cath lab within an hour (max) and the blockage or clot is removed, stinted or dissolved. It's truly amazing. On the other hand I see expensive technology used for elderly and or chronically ill with only the prolonging of death as an end result.

    But cardiovascular health (despite americans best efforts) has made huge gains. I'll quote freakonomics

    Believe it or not, this flat mortality rate actually hides some good news. Over the same period, age-adjusted mortality from cardiovascular disease has plummeted, from nearly 600 people per 100,000 to well beneath 300. What does this mean? Many people who in previous generations would have died from heart disease are now living long enough to die from cancer instead. Indeed, nearly 90 percent of newly diagnosed lung-cancer victims are fifty-five or older; the median age is seventy-one.
    The flat cancer death rate obscures another hopeful trend. For people twenty and younger, mortality has fallen by more than 50 percent, while people aged twenty to forty have seen a decline of 20 percent. These gains are real and heartening — all the more so because the incidence of cancer among those age groups has been increasing. (The reasons for this increase aren’t yet clear, but among the suspects are diet, behaviors, and environmental factors.)

    http://freakonomics.com/2013/10/22/the-unsustainable-economics-of-cancer-drugs/

    BTW The whole article is great as well as the book
    "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

    "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr
Sign In or Register to comment.