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

The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

jhsph.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 537 posts

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#261

Post by JAlexoid »

drb91 wrote: post #189
mikeash wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who get service and can’t pay effectively have their service paid for by all the other customers. That’s basically socialized, since all the other customers basically means all of us.

Well, they also get harrassed and get their credit destroyed. Hardly “effectively” socialized.

A foreigner comes in and racks up bills for $300k. His travel insurance pays only $50k. He leaves... and guess who pays the rest? Or a homeless person gets rolled in - they give no shit if you trash their credit rating.

Honestly... I live in US, if I get hit with anything similar... I'll just pack up and go back to Europe.

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#262

Post by asdff »

ascar wrote: post #236
null000 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also private patients can usually skip some waiting time (e.g. days instead of a few weeks). See, now, that just really doesn't sound like a good idea to my ears. Why should someone be forced to sit through weeks of suffering while a handful of others don't, for the sole reason that they have more money to throw at the problem? I can understand buying better or more thorough treatment, or buying treatment from more…

Why do you think line-jumping is more immoral than getting worse treatment? In one case you just have to wait in non life-threatening and non-urgent cases (you only have to wait if you actually can wait). In the other case you are actually in a worse physical or mental position.

This is like if the whole town is on fire, but you have enough money to pay the fireman to save your house first. Priority access to universal needs shouldn't be given based on personal wealth. I wonder if the people who wrote this line jumping into law qualified for the public or private insurance.

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#263

Post by int_19h »

JAlexoid wrote: post #258
taormina wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is astounding. It used to be that doctors were not allowed to post their prices! Openness is needed to fix medical billing.

Why would you care, when your copay is $30 flat?

Because my premiums could be lower?

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#264

Post by JAlexoid »

ModernMech wrote: post #78
MichaelApproved wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let the free market work Respectfully, enough with this free market garbage. The healthcare industry is not a free market, it can never be. It's not possible for the consumer to be educated. Even if you put emergencies aside, when an unconscious person can't start price shopping emergency rooms, you still have regular office visits that are impossible to price shop. Ask yourself when the last time you asked your ph…

> They finally gave me an estimate of "it'll be nominal", so I accepted the procedure. Turned out to be ~$200. I'm currently disputing it and refuse to pay based on their original quote of "nominal". This is a case of expectations. $200 is nominal as far as medical procedures go. Based on my last couple encounters with healthcare, $200 barely gets you in the door. I paid $2000 on my last ambulance ride. My last stay…

What a shitty insurance. I get full service at CityMD Urgent Care in downtown NYC with 0 insurance for $100(that included a shot, a few pills, basic tests, labs were extra).

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#265

Post by BurningFrog »

mikeyouse wrote: post #4
airstrike wrote: post #2

It's worth noting that the U.S. market does pay for the lion's share of patented drugs, effectively funding a significant portion of R&D that benefits the whole world years later when generics come into market (at least for those drugs which are not costly to manufacture, which happen to be the majority). I'm not saying this model is right. I'm just saying that doing away with it will have fundamental consequences to…

Meh -- If this is the case, it would be far better to explicitly fund research and development in a separate appropriation rather than just mindlessly subsidizing all prescription meds. Calamities like the Valeant fraud would be much less common without the US dramatically overpaying for drugs. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/04/04/inside-the-val...

>Meh -- If this is the case

It is. If the US starts paying what Sweden pays for drugs, there is no one left to pay the cost of developing drugs on this planet.

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#266

Post by int_19h »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #128
bluetwo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free markets and regulations can co-exist. It doesn't have to be one or the other. The most successful markets are a careful balance of well crafted regulations. Healthcare in the US is not carefully balanced. BTW, hospitals in the US begin publishing their pricing data online this year. By law.

> Free markets and regulations can co-exist. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Name one country on this or any other planet where this exists. Anywhere, except some bullshit theoretical textbook funded by a think-tank with obvious conflicts of interest. > BTW, hospitals in the US begin publishing their pricing data online this year. By law. More garbage. Those aren't real prices being published, they're approxi…

> Name one country on this or any other planet where this exists.

With respect to healthcare? Switzerland, for example. Very similar to ACA, actually, with mandatory but private insurance, and significant premiums. Government spending as proportion of GDP is actually lower than in US! But they've got better price controls, and that makes all the difference.

But, really, most countries are hybrid in that regard. It's very rare to see a healthcare system that's completely run by the government, with no market elements at all.

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#267

Post by james_s_tayler »

braythwayt wrote: post #99
mikeg8 wrote: post #81

The book The Healing of America by T.R. Reid, 2010 was a phenomenal look at this subject and the conclusion was this: we are the only developed nation whose government allows for-profit health insurance companies to exist with ZERO regulation to cap healthcare prices. Because of this, we spend 20% of every dollar on "administrative" costs compared to 3%-7% in the European and Asian countries. The goal for American he…

"Never confuse an unregulated market with a free market." --- (Yes, yes, I understand that to an economist, a "free market" is free of regulation, a product of laissez-faire economics. But to the lay person, a "free market" is one where prices are set by perfect competition, which requires a balance of power, the prevention of monopolization, and information symmetry.)

Yeah lay peoples definition is the markets which they are used to living with which don't match the technical terms exactly but come close enough for them.

I just use the term "free enough market" to describe it.

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#268

Post by int_19h »

topkai22 wrote: post #161

I saw an interesting article a while back. It looked at the benefits adjusted income of workers in the US since 1980 or so. Basically, the “disappearing wage growth” at of the last part of the 20th and early 21st century fir the bottom of the income curve is largely (although entirely) explained by the increasing cost of health care as a component of compensation.

Is this averaged across all industries and income levels?

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#269

Post by JauntyHatAngle »

vasili111 wrote: post #235
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the problems with the Canadian system is frankly its proximity to the U.S. A large portion of our homegrown medical talent goes immediately south of the border for higher salaries (see your point about price controls on healthcare providers above).

If you need talents to stay in your country then you need to pay them more.

The argument being made is that USA is allowing companies and medical practitioners to price gouge, therefore allowing for wages for medical practitioners higher than can be offered locally.

I don't think inflating your own wages to match a system that appears systemically ineffective is the right response, especially when your own system is more effective overall than the one you are losing talent to.

In the USA, medical practioners get paid more and the country might gain talent as a result, but the people pay more for it and it results in it being less accessible and less effective overall.

Re: The US spends more on healthcare for no gain says new report from Johns Hopkins

#270

Post by [deleted] »

vasili111 wrote: post #235
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the problems with the Canadian system is frankly its proximity to the U.S. A large portion of our homegrown medical talent goes immediately south of the border for higher salaries (see your point about price controls on healthcare providers above).

If you need talents to stay in your country then you need to pay them more.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN