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

Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 227 posts

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#31

Post by jjulius »

bergenty wrote: post #27
na85 wrote: post #22

Can't wait to get banned from healthcare with no recourse unless I'm lucky enough to frontpage HN. Sarcasm aside I can't think of a company I'd trust less than Alphabet (maybe Meta) with managing healthcare.

I disagree. Alphabet values human life. Sure they may kill products constantly but I trust the company to uphold certain values, especially around humanistic principles.

>... but I trust the company to uphold certain values, especially around humanistic principles.

You mean like, "Don't be evil"?

/s

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#32

Post by GiorgioG »

googlryas wrote: post #29
thr0wawayf00 wrote: post #4

How incredible would it be if Alphabet spent, say 1% of their total healthcare venture budget, just running models on all of the different ways that the cost of healthcare could be reduced and access to care could increase. And maybe they do this already (we have no idea if they do, it might be nice to share that information if they did). It's just become so clear that many people believe the anti-science stuff that…

Isn't it fairly obvious how the costs could be decreased? Dozens of other countries have figured it out, there isn't some secret.

Well, what we have here is the unique snowflake syndrome or not invented here syndrome. At this point I’ve lost all hope that we’ll see a single payer system in the USA in my lifetime.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#33

Post by adamredwoods »

thr0wawayf00 wrote: post #4

How incredible would it be if Alphabet spent, say 1% of their total healthcare venture budget, just running models on all of the different ways that the cost of healthcare could be reduced and access to care could increase. And maybe they do this already (we have no idea if they do, it might be nice to share that information if they did). It's just become so clear that many people believe the anti-science stuff that…

>> anti-science stuff that gets thrown around these days

It wasn't just anti-science but deliberate attempts to stop Obamacare, the ONLY initiative ever attempted to fix the US healthcare system. Then came the Republicans to stop it.

https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/commentary/why-t...

IMO, the Pacific coast states need to reject national health care, create a health-care pact between states that slowly grows larger by adding new states. If another state doesn't want to join, then, so be it.

Enough of splintered policies that change across state lines. Reduce health care insurance costs by allowing continued and universal care to states that elect this policy. The strength of change is in the states themselves, not the federal level.

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/04/13/california-oregon-washingt...

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#34

Post by nopenopenopeno »

sumy23 wrote: post #20
thr0wawayf00 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually not. The CBO already built these models last year and reported that they reduced costs in nearly all cases, across the board[0]. It's only a hard problem because some billionaires want us to believe that it's a hard problem. From the summary: > The report makes many sound assumptions but also some questionable ones that are overly pessimistic. Yet, overall, its bottom-line estimates should reassure thos…

There are political concerns as well. As the article mentions, healthcare spending is 17% of U.S. GDP (which is an absolutely insane figure). Healthcare jobs account for 14% of the workforce according to Census Bureau's 2019 American Community Survey. You can't get the first number down (17% of GDP) without impacting the second number (14% of jobs). I agree that single-payer would be a net benefit, but the U.S. hasn'…

The same logic can be applied to literally anything in a capitalist society. If the current way of doing things employs people, we can’t possibly do it any other way.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#35

Post by yalogin »

thr0wawayf00 wrote: post #4

How incredible would it be if Alphabet spent, say 1% of their total healthcare venture budget, just running models on all of the different ways that the cost of healthcare could be reduced and access to care could increase. And maybe they do this already (we have no idea if they do, it might be nice to share that information if they did). It's just become so clear that many people believe the anti-science stuff that…

IMo, The ballooning costs in healthcare are not from not knowing how to reduce the costs or make the system more efficient. There is entrenched interests/ businesses that will lose 100s of billions if it were replaced or shifted. They absolutely will not let it happen. Spending a few billions to buy politicians is justifiable for them. That is the main reason we are in this mess and will always be. May be I am too pessimistic, but Google, Amazon put together is not enough to change it

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#36

Post by 8organicbits »

bergenty wrote: post #27
na85 wrote: post #22

Can't wait to get banned from healthcare with no recourse unless I'm lucky enough to frontpage HN. Sarcasm aside I can't think of a company I'd trust less than Alphabet (maybe Meta) with managing healthcare.

I disagree. Alphabet values human life. Sure they may kill products constantly but I trust the company to uphold certain values, especially around humanistic principles.

What makes you believe that?

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#37

Post by sumy23 »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #34
sumy23 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are political concerns as well. As the article mentions, healthcare spending is 17% of U.S. GDP (which is an absolutely insane figure). Healthcare jobs account for 14% of the workforce according to Census Bureau's 2019 American Community Survey. You can't get the first number down (17% of GDP) without impacting the second number (14% of jobs). I agree that single-payer would be a net benefit, but the U.S. hasn'…

The same logic can be applied to literally anything in a capitalist society. If the current way of doing things employs people, we can’t possibly do it any other way.

Yes, but 14% of jobs is a huge number. Healthcare is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, employment sectors.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#38

Post by dragonwriter »

systemvoltage wrote: post #24
suture wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming by free you mean universal coverage that is (almost) free at the point of usage then this is a solved problem. What the United States lacks in order to realize a solution is political willpower and an electorate that is savvy enough to know that wanting such a system does not make one a communist. (And that being a communist does not make one an evil person.)

I'm not convinced, even with the best of intentions. In fact, I am convinced of the opposite: A) Universal Health program would result in terrible quality health care B) It would lead to longer wait times, and less choices C) It would be insanely costly to fund. We've been busy printing a lot of $. Increased the Federal deficit from $21T to $30 since COVID and there isn't a good way to fund a bloated system in USA, c…

> We already have free health for the poor:

No, we have free health insurance for some of the poor (states that have no accepted the ACA expansion have basically no coverage for adults without dependents.)

Medicaid is not (as a generality) free health care (it can be, in some states, for some recipients). It is free health insurance, which can have copayments, coinsurance, deductibles, etc.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#39

Post by klyrs »

suture wrote: post #23
thr0wawayf00 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that fear is stoked from the top down. You hear it all the time from the leadership of a certain political party. It's not just something that people fear naturally, it's driven home explicitly by the political messaging of those that benefit the most from our current system.

Yes, I know this. However, in this age of easy information and knowledge about other societies readily available it becomes more a matter of willful ignorance than being duped by propaganda.

You aren't familiar with the propaganda if you think folks duped by it would consider "other societies" with anything other than fear hatred and contempt. The problem with "do your own research" is confirmation bias.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#40

Post by rayiner »

adamredwoods wrote: post #33
thr0wawayf00 wrote: post #4

How incredible would it be if Alphabet spent, say 1% of their total healthcare venture budget, just running models on all of the different ways that the cost of healthcare could be reduced and access to care could increase. And maybe they do this already (we have no idea if they do, it might be nice to share that information if they did). It's just become so clear that many people believe the anti-science stuff that…

>> anti-science stuff that gets thrown around these days It wasn't just anti-science but deliberate attempts to stop Obamacare, the ONLY initiative ever attempted to fix the US healthcare system. Then came the Republicans to stop it. https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/commentary/why-t... IMO, the Pacific coast states need to reject national health care, create a health-care pact between states that slowly gr…

> IMO, the Pacific coast states need to reject national health care, create a health-care pact between states that slowly grows larger by adding new states. If another state doesn't want to join, then, so be it.

It blows my mind that they don’t do this. During most of the 20th century, Democrat-run states wanted to tax Republican California to pay for social programs. So doing things at the national level was critical. But now that the states that have all the money are also run by Democrats, that roadblock is gone. California can just tax California to pay for universal healthcare for California. They have no reason to care what Iowa chooses to do.

Post reply on HN