Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 540 posts

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#131

Post by nhebb »

mrb wrote: post #108
maxxxxx wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All involved players are mainly interested in lining their own pockets. The question if this will come at the expense of patients or other players in health care.

Given that Buffett pledged to donate 90% of his wealth to charities, I'm not sure you can characterize him as "mainly interested in lining his own pocket."

Buffet seems like a good-hearted person, but nothing about Amazon or JPMorgan leads me to believe this will be an altruistic enterprise. Also, Buffett is 87 and not likely to be involved for too many more years.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#132

Post by maxerickson »

criddell wrote: post #28
adventured wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US healthcare system worked for the majority of people until roughly the last 15 years, and then it began failing gradually up the income ladder. So if you look more recently, the last ten years in particular, that would be the window where something like this would especially begin to matter. It wasn't done before, because it didn't make sense for large entities to bother; things have gotten bad enough that now…

> Today it's closer to $18,000. Do you happen to know the sources of inflation? Are we consuming a lot more services? Are healthcare providers being paid more? Are healthcare companies getting rich?

Yes, people are consuming more services.

Look at cancer outcomes. People that live 5 years with cancer consume a lot more medical care than people that die quick.

And all sorts of other things are similar. Trauma care is better, etc.

It's clearly not the only factor but I'm pretty sure it is a factor.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#133

Post by joezydeco »

runako wrote: post #66
swarnie_ wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hearing the report on Bloomberg news earlier today. Isn't this just for the 900k employees and isn't it just focusing on wearable tech? It sounded more like fitbit with cloud services than insurance.

> Isn't this just for the 900k employees and isn't it just focusing on wearable tech? I believe it's initially for the employees of those companies. If they can make it work for them, they have a great team (ecommerce, finance, insurance) to back a larger rollout. The announcement says it's about providing healthcare at lower cost with better results, which sounds like a lot more than wearables.

Stock market seems to confirm that theory. All the other healthcare stocks opened down this morning.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#134

Post by citizenkeen »

23443463454 wrote: post #125
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #53

It's not just the cost. It's the incredible inefficiency of the operations, and, the gerrymandering of coverage. Under the ACA, I had to choose between allowing my family to continue to see their lifetime care givers, or, paying in network rates, for the full year, because the insurance company I chose gave me incorrect information when they were trying to get my business (my wife is less kind in evaluating their mot…

It's a bit of an aside, but this whole issue, the bare knuckle fight about health care brings about an interesting deeper rooted issue that clearly and uniquely differentiates the two primary perspectives; one side always tends towards the heavy handed, imposing, authoritarian approach to force things they deem self-evident as desirable or have determined to be "good" and are thereby inherently inefficient and wastef…

Or it's the eternal struggle of a community whole trying to overcome ruthless selfishness of those in power.

Your naked partisanship is ugly and unhelpful.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#135

Post by criddell »

adventured wrote: post #43
criddell wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today it's closer to $18,000. Do you happen to know the sources of inflation? Are we consuming a lot more services? Are healthcare providers being paid more? Are healthcare companies getting rich?

It's a little bit of everything. As the other comment noted, there has been a vast expansion of administrative bullshit cost in the system. Pharma drug costs have gone up a lot (that's around 10% to 15% of the $1.x trillion cost problem the US has). The US is spending about ~20% of its GDP on healthcare, or roughly twice the OECD average (~70-80% more than countries like France or Belgium). That's up from 12.x% in 19…

> The boomer generation is going to be extraordinarily expensive from a healthcare standpoint.

When I log in to check my 401(k) status, there's a button that will tell me my projected income and expenses down the road. Today, I'm 47 and spend very, very little on healthcare. However, when I'm 87, they project I will be paying more than $10,000 per month for healthcare. How is that possible?

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#136

Post by nojvek »

Spoom wrote: post #115
WisNorCan wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing wrong with “lining your own pockets” as a motivation. It is the fundamental driver of capitalism and the motivation for most entrepreneurs.

I think in healthcare, there is a problem with profit as a motivation, at least insofar as the ability to receive care. I think healthcare professionals should be paid, and paid well. But a for-profit company (or whether or not one can pay the premiums or deductible of any insurance company) should not be a gatekeeper to whether or not one can receive care at all. Inevitably, someone will be left out in the cold, or…

Single payer healthcare is the best soln. Agreed, However I can’t see it working more than a presidential term. America is too politically unstable.

What i’d love to see is a commercial business having vertical integration. Insanely cheap basics like X-rays, mris, and other checks. Heavy use of AI based diagnosis confirmed by doctors, and a big insurance pool where profits go back into scaling healthcare.

Basically current American healthcare is not scalable. Period.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#137

Post by enlightenedfool »

Everyone focuses on the wrong problem - the insurance. Why do doctors and hospitals charge exorbitantly? 10 - 25 times for the same quality, equipment elsewhere in the world. There are just not enough doctors and they take advantage of that. Let qualified doctors get in the country. When they undercut these blood suckers, prices go down.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#138

Post by nervousvarun »

rocketpastsix wrote: post #122
austenallred wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re right, but respectfully, in the long term, “I want this specific provider at any cost” is somewhat of an edge case. A lot of (most?) people just want good healthcare and a low cost. That’s a complex but solveable problem.

No, its not an edge case. If you have a rapport with a doctor/care provider, you would want to stay with them. I have a genetic disease and an endocrinologist who helps me manage it. I wouldn't want to leave that doctor, who has seen me multiple times, has my charts, understands what Im working with, and so much more.

But isn't that OP's point? By nature of your specific disease/condition you are a bit of an outlier no?

Obviously the ideal would be you have a system that accommodates "my kid has a fever/fell out of a tree and broke their arm" majority of medical issues who could be helped by basically anyone trained in basic medicine while also accommodating people who need a rapport with a highly trained/expensive specialist.

That's how I took the comment...apologies in advance if this comes off as insensitive to your condition, definitely not my intention.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#139

Post by pc86 »

rocketpastsix wrote: post #122
austenallred wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re right, but respectfully, in the long term, “I want this specific provider at any cost” is somewhat of an edge case. A lot of (most?) people just want good healthcare and a low cost. That’s a complex but solveable problem.

No, its not an edge case. If you have a rapport with a doctor/care provider, you would want to stay with them. I have a genetic disease and an endocrinologist who helps me manage it. I wouldn't want to leave that doctor, who has seen me multiple times, has my charts, understands what Im working with, and so much more.

People want to believe that their medical condition(s) are a special, one-in-a-billion mix requiring years or decades of rapport-building and conversations. That's not the case for the vast majority of people, even with very complicated medical histories and diagnoses.

"Has seen me in the past" and "has my charts" are not indicative of medical efficacy. There are doctors I have rapport with, absolutely. I still have lunch occasionally with the physician who was my family doctor as a child and still sees my parents. But that doesn't mean his medical treatment is going to be any better than a doctor seeing me for the second or third time.

Re: Amazon, Berkshire, JPMorgan to Create Healthcare Company

#140

Post by maxerickson »

23443463454 wrote: post #125
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #53

It's not just the cost. It's the incredible inefficiency of the operations, and, the gerrymandering of coverage. Under the ACA, I had to choose between allowing my family to continue to see their lifetime care givers, or, paying in network rates, for the full year, because the insurance company I chose gave me incorrect information when they were trying to get my business (my wife is less kind in evaluating their mot…

It's a bit of an aside, but this whole issue, the bare knuckle fight about health care brings about an interesting deeper rooted issue that clearly and uniquely differentiates the two primary perspectives; one side always tends towards the heavy handed, imposing, authoritarian approach to force things they deem self-evident as desirable or have determined to be "good" and are thereby inherently inefficient and wastef…

Let's tear down on the government restrictions on the sell side of the market before we champion the glory of the market.

Repeal EMTALA. No patents. No certificates of need. Make Medicare and Medicaid fully opt in for providers. Create a path for additional private organizations to certify medical schools.

Anyone refusing to do all that stuff and face the political consequences for it just wants to pay less taxes.

Post reply on HN