Meanwhile, there's a private sector hospital that charges a fraction of the costs. Yet they don't accept insurance or state subsidies. They have that pressure to be efficient. The ideal from my perspective is finding a way to keep this competitive market pressure to drive costs down while finding the most indirect means possible for the government to allow all citizens to afford it. If the government starts subsidizing such organizations directly, the costs and inefficiencies might skyrocket again.https://youtu.be/fkXywMBYfLM
The government isn't a direct solution in my opinion. The US federal government can't be compared so directly to smaller and/or more homogeneous countries with governments that have a decent track record for efficiency. The system and culture don't produce efficiency absent sufficient pressure and incentives at a system-wide level. Instead, people tend to act like money grows on trees if they aren't spending their own money directly. Politicians have almost zero incentives for fiscal responsibility -- to the contrary, they have pressure to spend as much as possible for popularity and significant pressure not to make budget cuts to promote efficiency. Things inevitably skyrocket in costs and waste as a result -- almost everything the government touches.
It is very quality and free if you have an insurance in my country. Why it is so expensive in the US?
$1,000 to be taken by an ambulance too...Because America is a money gobbling shithole. 🤷♂️
Wow... I feel like devils govern your country, not humans...
Oh wow, I had no idea it was that expensive. Thanks for sharing
If its such a shithole then leave.
With insurance, I have a $10 co-pay for a doctor's visit and generic prescriptions are $2. If you aren't insured, it's very expensive so get insurance.
Very good point. Honey
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
That's fucking primitive man. I can't believe there's so many 'tards in your country that defend your system, and try and denigrate ours, with the greatest respect.
I agree with you. Most of America agrees with you. However, only a minority of Americans have the power to make that decision. After the American Civil War, as part of the agreement to reunify the nation, southern states with low, rural populations, were given weighted votes. That gives them a tremendous amount of say in national policy. Because of this, the states with the least population, least educated citizens per capita, and most conservative ideologies have almost complete control over the nation. That's why presidential campaigns focus almost entirely on these states while ignoring the others. Because these are the only states whose votes actually matter.
Having said that, I do think a sizeable chunk associate universal healthcare with socialism, and aren't in favour, with the overt devastating results.
Oof this is a great point I left out of my reply. No insurance coverage is good enough for a medical emergency. And you will end up with a partial bill.
There is no point having good doctors when nobody can afford to see them.
"Full privatization is the infinitely best option though, because it would be comparatively cheaper than single payer"That seems extremely unlikely, as does your claim of heavy regulation. Unless you expect privatisation to just ignore a large proportion of the population for being poor or having been ill.Germany has had universal health care since 1890, and it's based on insurance companies and private hospitals. The difference is, they're not allowed to play silly games like inflating prices so the insurance companies can negotiate "better" prices.
@goaded Full privatization works for driving down prices of food and water, which are by any standard even more "essential" than healthcare. If your argument is that the reason healthcare wouldn't be cheaper if left to the free market is that companies will exploit the nature of the good/service being sold as life-saving, in order to inflate prices, that argument is rendered null by the fact that this doesn't happen with food and water. The free market drives down prices of everything from shoes, to food, to water, to internet service, so either provide a legitimate reason it wouldn't do the same for healthcare, or it simply isn't an argument. As for the Germany example, federal law forcing employers to provide health insurance that provides access to private hospitals is not a fully privatized system, especially if the employers, insurance companies, and hospitals are even more regulated than they are here. And if you're instead trying to make the argument that we should keep our current system and simply institute some of the regulations Germany has in place, that doesn't contradict my original statement than any change in either direction would lower the cost of healthcare, however, it still doesn't provide a legitimate counter-argument to my claim that change in the direction of privatization would be comparatively cheaper than change in the direction of single payer.
No, it doesn't, it pushes up prices for natural monopolies like water, or power, or telecoms. Maybe it works with food, which doesn't need massive investment in infrastructure, but that's only because the government has built the roads they use.US health care costs are rising unreasonably, because of control of the market by the big players.The Germany example was to show that the private hospital and insurance companies system can work, but only with government regulation. In other words, that your system is dysfunctional. The only way the American system will provide cheaper health care is by letting poor and sick people die.
@goaded "No, it doesn't, it pushes up prices for natural monopolies like water, or power, or telecoms." - You can say that, but by abject measures, bottled water is pretty fucking cheap. "but that's only because the government has built the roads they use." - Oh here we go. "b-but muh roads!". Construction workers would still exist in the absence of a state, dude. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. "US health care costs are rising unreasonably, because of control of the market by the big players." - Yes, big players that are artificially propped up by the very regulations in place that you advocate more of. "The only way the American system will provide cheaper health care is by letting poor and sick people die." - Or by fully privatizing and making it cheaper for everyone.
"bottled water is pretty fucking cheap."Do you bath in bottled water? I'm talking about tap water."big players that are artificially propped up by the very regulations in place that you advocate more of."No, by the terrible lack of price control (or even price transparency) regulation. There's something wrong if you can fly to Europe to have an operation done for the price of your co-pay.I don't know where people get the idea that "all regulation bad", from. Bad regulations are bad, good ones save lives. (Actually, I do know, it's been a Republican talking point for the last few decades.)""The only way the American system will provide cheaper health care is by letting poor and sick people die." - Or by fully privatizing and making it cheaper for everyone."How, exactly, do you think that would happen? How would the system be any different to now?If you get sick, health care is very expensive, probably more than you could afford. So, people pay in to a pool a smaller amount every year on the off chance that they get sick, that's where the insurance companies come from.The problem is, the more expensive hospitals make the health care, the more money they earn, and the more money insurance companies have to take in to cover the costs of their members who need care. The problem is that the insurance companies also make more money when the health care is more expensive; they get the same proportion of a bigger pie for no extra work. It's a positive feedback loop. Something has to apply pressure to reduce prices. Ordinarily, that would mean people would stop buying the product, but in this case it's literally a matter of life and death, so that doesn't work.
@goaded - tap water is cheap too- That pressure is provided by competition, which is severely reduced by regulations that bar new companies from entry to the industry.
No, there is almost no competition, and they all want bigger profits. Medicare for all would be competition; if the free market is so much better than government run programs, maybe they should prove it!
@goaded "No, there is almost no competition, and they all want bigger profits." - Yes, and for the third time, that lack of competition is due to regulation. "if the free market is so much better than government run programs, maybe they should prove it!" - I would absolutely LOVE TO!!! As would any proponent of the free market. The problem is you, and other proponents of state intervention won't LET us prove it.
"lack of competition is due to regulation."Really? What regulation stops competition, exactly?""if the free market is so much better than government run programs, maybe they should prove it!" - I would absolutely LOVE TO!!! As would any proponent of the free market. The problem is you, and other proponents of state intervention won't LET us prove it."Maybe you should be supporting Medicare for all, then? What state intervention is stopping you from proving it?
@goaded You can't seriously be suggesting that medicare for all is a free market practice. That's just political illiteracy.
The terrible, inefficient government can maybe provide a cheaper alternative to the free market insurance companies and hospitals, just by negotiating better deals, and maybe building a few hospitals? How could that possibly be? They'd probably feel the need to make health care more local to rural areas, like the post office, that will surely sink them!Or maybe it will be better and cheaper than the government giving insurance companies money.
@goaded Also, one example of a regulation that harms small health insurance agencies/bars new agencies from entry is the component of ACA that requires agencies to insure patients with pre-existing conditions and doesn't allow them to charge higher premiums. This forces smaller insurance agencies to raise premiums for everyone else, while larger agencies with more capital can afford to undercut the smaller agencies until they are driven out of business, then raise them afterward. Undercutting is often used as an argument against deregulation, but in this case it is ironically facilitated by regulation. Not to mention that if we were to impose price controls too (like you suggested), small agencies simply wouldn't be able to survive, even without their larger competitors undercutting them.
By the way, you didn't answer my question of which regulations were stopping healthcare from getting cheaper, nor did you show a flaw in my argument:If you get sick, health care is very expensive, probably more than you could afford. So, people pay in to a pool a smaller amount every year on the off chance that they get sick, that's where the insurance companies come from.The problem is, the more expensive hospitals make the health care, the more money they earn, and the more money insurance companies have to take in to cover the costs of their members who need care. The problem is that the insurance companies also make more money when the health care is more expensive; they get the same proportion of a bigger pie for no extra work. It's a positive feedback loop. Something has to apply pressure to reduce prices. Ordinarily, that would mean people would stop buying the product, but in this case it's literally a matter of life and death, so that doesn't work.
Overlapped, give me a moment to respond, please!
The ACA is, what, six years old, now, and was a response to rocketing costs. Big companies have more clout than small ones? How about a regulation that a hospital has to charge the same amout for the same procedure no matter who the insurer is? How can they undercut the small guy, then? (And, as you correctly point out, the current situation leads to a higher prices once they've used their monopoly power to wipe out the competition; only they can't wipe out Medicare, can they?)
@goaded Even with such a regulation, larger insurance agencies could still charge lower premiums because they can endure a small profit margin longer than smaller agencies. Such a regulation simply wouldn't solve the problem. You are falling into the trap of attempting to solve problems produced by one regulation with another regulation, which introduces more and more problems at every turn. It's a never-ending cycle.
Nonsense, there's no regulation requiring the existance of insurance companies, and a public option could (and should) work on a zero profit margin. Also, what happened to monopoly regulations?
@goaded Who said anything about requiring the existence of insurance companies? And nothing can ever work with a zero profit margin, barring charity organizations (in which case there is no longer an argument, as I'm all for charity organizations on account of them being voluntary). In the case of a public option, hospitals, healthcare workers, and workers for the public insurance program all return a profit--only it is stolen wealth.
Well, you've been complaining that it's all the fault of regulations, I wondered which ones!The government can work with a zero profit margin; some people have it that a government is an insurance company with an army.Are you suggesting that a public option shouldn't pay the people who work for it?
@goaded I've told you which regulations are at fault. Exactly. The "army" in the picture (the use of force) is what the problem is.No. I'm arguing that a public option shouldn't exist. But you know all of this. At this point you are just intentionally misrepresenting my claims. This discussion is not productive. I'm done here.
You have? Remind me, what regulation requires insurance companies?
But the insurance costs almost as much as rent.
In my country, it is like that too. If you have insurance, it is almost free. So how do you get insurance in the US? Is it easy?
No, it's not easy. And there are many ways of getting it, but pretty much everyone's story is different. It's a very complicated system. Some people can sign up for it at work (but they still have to pay for it.). Others fill out an application to see if they can qualify to get insurance from the government. A third group of people just pay the insurance company directly for their own insurance.
So sacrifice poor people to satan so others can stay rich? Gotcha. 👍
Getting insurance in the US is very easy. Most employers offer health insurance to full time employees or you can purchase it through any major insurance company. Unfortunately, many people who aren't sick choose not to get health insurance because they don't see the need so when something unexpected happens, they are stuck with high medical bills because they chose to forego insurance.
I have no idea what healthcare is like in the US but I'd be surprised if poor people were getting medical treatment. Or maybe they were rich before the treatment started?
@EnglundUberAlles They usually start out poor and end up in debt. It's usually married people, I think, because single people have more leeway with their life decisions and they can just say "screw it" and embrace death because they don't have a family depending on them.
@Jamie05rhs Sounds quite dystopian, that.
@Levin. It is, my friend; it is.
I'm fortunate I don't worry about Finances or Medical Costs but I Pay a Bundle for my Insurance and it's not through my Employer the City. I pay Sky High Premiums so I don't have to deal eith msjor Deductibles and Co-Pays and for a Private Hospital Room. I have Friends and Relatives that Poor, Wealthy, & Middle and only the Wealthy have Great Health Insurance. I really feel for my Friends on Medicaid, Medicaid is Constantly Denying Diagnostics & Treatment until Worse Case Scenarios happen!!!
@Moonchild714 What if someone is on Medicaid and they already have a worst case scenario?
Well Medicaid pays the bare minimum so they usually get the bare minimum treatment what Medicaid is willing to pay for.
It is very quality and free if you have an insurance in my country. Why it is so expensive in the US?
I don't live in US
Other nations don't realize this.They just mock the US, while taking a free ride (pretty much like NATO defense, etc.).
I am starting a government job tomorrow. They're generally revered as having great insurance at a low cost. I will pay about $200 USD a month for health/vision/dental. My boyfriend works at a private company his insurance coverage sucks, as soon as we are married I will put him on mine. That will make it jump to nearly 600 per month. People on my plan with a family? 800 a month.
Bloody hell. Over here in the UK you get it for free!
Aye, 'tis expensive.
@CupcakeKiller oh that is a lot. We pay around 60€ a month... We do have a lower standard, but not THAT much lower. This sucks.
Tough that sh! t out. I did. 4hours of pure pain. Better than going in debt over it
@Chitown10 Great advice except about 15 thousand die a year from kidney stones.
@77gnat my father has had more kidney stones than I can think of and hasn't passed away. Yes he's had surgery's and one part of the kidney was not right but still alive. Still has stones in there.
@Chitown10 Sure showed me!
@77gnat maybe you should get your facts straight before you mouth off. Only 10k die from kidney stones. Read up if you know how to. Obviously the know it all type of person. How come you didn't know that? Also the main reason people die is from the untreated infection, not the stone itself. Knock knock... whose there? not a very smart guy... not a very smart guy who?77gnat
@Chitown10 16k plus died in 2015 from it. Why did your dad bother with surgery? You ever get kidney stones? I have.
@77gnat omg are you really this dumb? Read my first comment! That was 2015 and posted on wikipedia's. So everything you read published on the net is truthful? Right! Because when you have 15 plus kidney stones or calcium deposits you usually need surgery.
@Chitown10 Oh another fake news Alex Jones lover. YoU sEem SMarT!
@77gnat you make no sense at all. Obviously smarter than you since the comment you posted on of mine acting all high and mighty you didn't read at all. Make sure you wear a helmet all the time. can't have you get any dumber or your parents will have to file for mental disability on the next knock on your head.
How is Medicaid a joke? Just curious.
@Jamie05rhs It has arbitrary rules that vary state by state. For example unless you are blind or pregnant you are not covered for physical therapy on your leg in my state. It makes no sense. Medicaid wasn't even supposed to be in place for this long Johnsin and Mills just added it to be a temporary system until universal healthcare passed. LBJ hasn't been in office for a while and we still don't have it.
Why don't people protest your government for this serious issue in the streets? I guess, the worst part of the US is healthcare system.
The U. S. is mad greedy.
I heard US taxpayer money goes towards isreal healthcare
Third cause of Deaths in the USA is Medical Errors. First is Heart Disease, Second is Cancer and Medical Errors which gets listed as Unintentional Injuries is Third approximately 250K People Die because of Medical Mistakes!!! Great Healthcare System, LMAO
In the U. S it's more a case of you get a fraction of what you pay for. Healthcare costs are astronomical in the U. S
God is my witness. I got charged $1,400 so I can get a prescription in case the stray cat nails infected me.
because our system is full of fat, lawyers always suing the medical professionals, insurance companies are private and collect profits
Yea America likes capitalism a whole lot but it usually just ends up getting the rich even richer.
Yes unfortunately it is the sad reality of this fucking world and all countries in the world now. I hate wild capitalism so much, I don't like communism either. The world needs a new justice system, governments shouldn't ban free market, but there should also be a more social system, especially when it comes to health... Everyone needs to reach basic needs easily. When there are people with billion dollars, but there are also poor homeless people starving in the streets. This proves that something really wrong is going on in this world.