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

Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

thelancet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 407 posts

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#191

Post by frosted-flakes »

codegeek wrote: post #86
legitster wrote: post #31

The net savings would be $450B, but the total cost would still be in the 10s of trillions of dollars (Edit: 30-50 over 10 years), bigger than all of our federal spending combined. It's one thing to have as an objective, and another as a plan for getting there. The proposal they cite would make federal healthcare expenditures 69%(!!!) of the GDP (Edit: total federal expenditures). It's simply not realistic to convert…

"any affects of changed consumer preferences if you eliminate copays and deductibles" I am curious on what you think are the effects.

More people will get the care they need than currently. Right now, there's a real dis-incentive to going to the doctor or to hospital for non-critical care/injuries.

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#192

Post by codegeek »

grayed-down wrote: post #183
scottmcf wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alarmist nonsense.

We'll see. I've got enough money to survive single-payer, do you?

I am rich enough but running out of money every year to pay for Insurance Companies profits. So yea.

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#193

Post by [deleted] »

mrep wrote: post #167
arebop wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$6000/year sounds very low for healthcare in the U.S. When you say "I pay" are you really only counting the employee contribution? For purposes of analyzing aggregate healthcare costs for a whole country, we ought to be using combined employee+employer costs (W2 DD) and not just the (usually small) employee portion highlighted by HR at benefits season.

Not op, but you got me curious so I checked my W-2. $8,800 for me and I think mine is top notch (2,600 is my max out of pocket per year limit)

[deleted]

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#194

Post by Ghjklov »

newguy1234 wrote: post #15

What I don't get is how do 37 million Americans not have health insurance when the ACA was suppose to fix that issue? All of the plans are adjusted based on your income level and you get a tax credit if you are low income. If you are very poor then you get free healthcare....

Do you think they'll give me free health insurance as a 23 year old who lives with a parent? I don't have any interest paying a dime for health insurance because I could use that money to eat healthily instead and try to stay out of trouble. Otherwise, I'd starve or sacrifice my diet in order to afford the health insurance. It has never made sense to me.

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#195

Post by dillondoyle »

scarejunba wrote: post #151
nthj wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s right in the name. It’s called Insurance, not Healthcare as a Service.

Kaiser platinum is pretty close to Healthcare as a Service.

Can confirm I love Kaiser but both the best and worst parts for me are the bureaucracy -> time/$ savers. Great when it's fast and cheap, can email Dr to get meds/treatment, get meds mailed 3 for 2 price - but frustrating when wait to see a specialist is more than a month or being rushed through in person visits like cattle. And I feel well taken care proactively with multi-DR/NP team.

Plus they actually did a good job reimbursing me for costs when I had to get care in a non-kaiser state no hassle or haggling.

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#196

Post by leetcrew »

frosted-flakes wrote: post #181
cameronh90 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"eliminate copays and deductibles, something no other universal healthcare system has done." Scottish NHS has no deductibles or copays in general, dentist has an fee for some people though. English system has a flat prescription fee of £9 or so for a minority of the population up to £100ish a year. It's very close to free at the point of use, however.

Canada has no co-pays. The topic of payments never even comes up, unless you're not a resident. Prescription drugs and dental care are generally not covered, however. In fact, I still struggle to understand the concept of a co-pay. Is it like a deductible for automobile insurance?

it's not really like a deductible. it's a small fixed cost you pay every time you see a doctor or fill a prescription. it creates a small amount of friction, presumably to prevent frivolous use of resources.

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#197

Post by burkaman »

macinjosh wrote: post #145
burkaman wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read it? Also, are you familiar with any modern nations where a single-payer healthcare system has been tried? Perhaps we could use them to predict the effects. > Is waste, fraud, and abuse taken into account at all in this study? From the paper: "In addition to savings on overheads, a comprehensive database of health-care charges would facilitate detection of fraud, which extracts $85·7 billion every year. F…

> You already are? That's how health insurance works. I am not a defender of the insurance system. It blows. But single-payer is not the only other choice. I want a freer healthcare market where prices are known before consuming services. Real market competition could actually occur to bring down prices. For drugs, research and development for less profitable cases could be a very worthy target of government funding.…

Healthcare is not and cannot ever be a free market. You cannot have price transparency when a buyer may be unconscious at the time of "purchase". You cannot have price competition when buyers are frequently forced to immediately purchase a good or service if they don't want to die. Hospitals are chosen by proximity, not price. These are the consequences of being mortal human beings. If we were all immortal, and "healthcare" was nothing more than voluntary cosmetic surgery, a free market might make sense.

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#198

Post by gridlockd »

Single payer creates an unnecessary monopoly. One of the best health care systems (Switzerland) is both private and not single payer - but purchase is compulsory.

Obamacare and especially Trumpcare simply can not work when people delay purchasing insurance until it's too late. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Furthermore, insurance plans should not be tied to employment/employers. It's a bad incentive structure.

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#199

Post by n9 »

refurb wrote: post #144
mrcu5 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife is a pediatrician and sees about 80% medicaid patients. People absolutely go in more often than they need to because they don't pay a single cent. I'm talking going to the ER because their kid has a cough or is running a fever. These are usually also the most demanding patients.

I found this part of the paper to be unreasonable: Available ER visits and hospitalizations can be avert through improved access to primary care

Have you ever gone to a busy urban ER? It is absolutely full to the brim 24/7 with people visiting with chronic ailments that don’t have health insurance, which is literally the most expensive possible way to treat something like asthma or chronic emphysema.

Re: Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study

#200

Post by onemoresoop »

beat wrote: post #149
onemoresoop wrote: post #79

I'm paying nearly 20k (parents+child) on insurance I don't have time to use (and luckily no serious need) and once my son went to see his pediatrician and our 'private' insurance company (that i'm not going to name) sent us bill of $500, for a check-up. We disputed the charge with the insurance and they agreed to wave the payment next month. Next month comes and guess what? The same letter comes in mail. We disputed…

This is where I think political leaders (Democrat or Republican) could do really well. It's not just making sure people are covered. It's the existential dread of dealing with opaque, unpredictable, and incomprehensible bureaucracy that can make life-and-death decisions or drop financially crippling bills in your lap, even if you have good insurance . The American health care system isn't just bad for the poor. It's…

Most political leaders both dems and reps are in bed with the insurance companies who are heavily lobbying to keep things as they are. But why not, they're cashing in big and the system is so convoluted that you cannot point any fingers.
Post reply on HN