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

As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

statnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 330 posts

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#251

Post by krapp »

WalterBright wrote: post #232
krapp wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would assume at least North Korea does. But every modern state requires you to at least work and to have housing, in order to generate taxable revenue and afford the means of survival. But unless you hunt and grow your own food, own your own land and aren't subject to laws or government that owns your identity and tells you where you can go and what you can do, you aren't sovereign. If you have to spend the majorit…

I am sure you know the difference between free labor and slave labor.

I'm sure you know that's beside the point. Free labor isn't that free when the only alternative to trading the most useful half of your life to corporations is starvation in the streets. And the only alternative to that is dependence on a state's social safety net. Neither may be outright chattel slavery or literal feudalism but in modern society where people truly own so little, even of themselves, it isn't freedom either.

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#252

Post by anomaly_ »

mhh__ wrote: post #28
nickff wrote: post #10

Private equity discovered that regulations, compliance requirements, & other similar barriers to entry are the most effective 'moats' which allow businesses to raise prices and have little impact on demand; they are now exploiting this 'hack' ruthlessly.

That some people apparently can't see this strat with AI "safety" laws is genuinely bizarre.

People have an appalling understanding of free markets. So many things that are considered "market failings" (like this article / housing / etc) are almost entirely driven by regulation and red tape.

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#253

Post by JTbane »

somethoughts wrote: post #137
minusLik wrote: post #67

What the article does not seem to mention is that an usual electric wheelchair costs about $65,000 (and is intended to be replaced every six years or so). This and the non-availability of replacement parts is why some wheelchair users started a project to open-source a wheelchair from standard parts: https://themif.org/ Louis Rossmann interviewed the founder of the project here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaAj59…

To be honest - it actually seems like a risky Private Equity play as I bet the $65000 sticker price is due to the fact that Medicare is footing the bill. Medicare is likely what is requiring a regulation grade wheel chair, not the users themselves. I bet a huge segment of the user base could easily self purchase a mobility scooter and achieve the same quality of life if the price point was such that they could out of…

Is this why hearing aids are $4000 when they probably have $0.50 of components?

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#254

Post by wolverine876 »

zmgsabst wrote: post #163
HillRat wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without commenting on the specific standards and regulations, the parade of horribles that could go wrong with a powered wheelchair is pretty extensive, when realizing that when a wheelchair goes wrong the user cannot move away from it . Consider the risks of a battery fire you can't escape, a drivetrain that could grab loose clothing around a pair of immobile legs, or a user whose wheelchair dies on an empty street…

Do they? I don’t think the FDA is in a position to asses whether those risks versus the benefits of mobility are an appropriate trade off for any individual. The FDA is deciding that some people should have no mobility so that others have… what, exactly? The people who bought $65,000 chairs still could — and they’d be equally reliable. But because one person needs to use it in Alaska, all people need to pay a premium…

> I don’t think the FDA is in a position to asses whether those risks versus the benefits of mobility are an appropriate trade off for any individual.

Why wouldn't the FDA, which employs experts for that exact task, assess risks? Who is in a better position?

> I think people themselves know what’s best for them.

How can anyone but an expert evaluate the safety of a powered wheelchair?

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#255

Post by wolverine876 »

readyman wrote: post #123
icegreentea2 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think powered wheelchairs should be Class II, but we should be a bit kinder to the FDA. The FDA is not comparing no mobility and simply an inoperable device, the FDA is comparing no mobility vs the possible outcomes of an malfunctioning device. Like perhaps what happens if the throttle gets stuck on forward.

The FDA serves many compromised purposes that, in sum, prioritize the interests of the capitalists who predominately control it. The same can be said for the entire US government.

Everyone keeps repeating it, but could you give evidence of that happening? Who are the commissioners? What about the staff?

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#256

Post by gregwebs »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #248
newsclues wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s similar to defence procurement. If the customer is government with endless budget, inflate costs, and use regulatory capture to maintain the cash flow.

I used to work at an org that audits defense programs. A surprising amount of the unreasonable cost is self-inflicted, which is a valid cost to the vendor. If it wasn’t, the auditors have the power to clawback the excess cost. In defense procurement the costs are frequently inflated greatly by the procurement process overhead and the government imposing last minute changes of scope, requirements, or delivery dates. T…

Sometimes this gets taken advantage of by the vendor. The government doesn't have the ability to design and specify things properly themselves when the deal is signed. The vendor might know that things are wrong at that point but wait until afterwards to point out all the problems and correctly claim changes in scope and requirements at significant expense. At least I was told that happened on the California rail project.

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#257

Post by benced »

tmaly wrote: post #83
nickff wrote: post #10

Private equity discovered that regulations, compliance requirements, & other similar barriers to entry are the most effective 'moats' which allow businesses to raise prices and have little impact on demand; they are now exploiting this 'hack' ruthlessly.

It is not just wheelchairs and nursing homes. My eye doctor office got bought out. They pay the doctors as little as possible and maximize the number of appointments per day.

That sounds great for the consumers of optometry services in your area.

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#258

Post by hallway_monitor »

newsclues wrote: post #237
beaeglebeachh wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I'm for total deregulation of healthcare. Government fucks it up so bad hamstringing access that some hack work with 15 minutes of YouTube training plus whatever pills drop out the dark web is often better than not being able to access it at all. Right now we basically end up going to Mexico if we can help it, where there's basically no real oversight or regulation to raise cost so long as the doc/pharmac…

Regulations should be voluntary and exist in a market with options. I want a market where I can choose a highly regulated healthcare system or a system with no regulations and a system somewhere in between.

Yes please. We don't need to get rid of the FDA, just make it optional. If I want to trust the government's opinion of a doctor or drug, I can look for the FDA seal of approval.

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#259

Post by srackey »

tenuousemphasis wrote: post #192
srackey wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because communism (what else is “banning private equity”?) NEVER results in “enshitification” of ANY kind. Seriously, the issue here can most likely be tracked to private equity taking advantage of existing regulations. Not sure why MORE state involvement in the economy would be the solution.

It doesn't sound like you understand what Private Equity means. Allow me to assist you in your quest for enlightenment. >Private equity describes investment partnerships that buy and manage companies before selling them.

And it sounds like you’re a communist, unless how you can explain how you can ban “investment partnerships buying companies” without doing away with private ownership more broadly?

The issue people have isn’t with “private equity”. If it was a publicly traded company doing this people would be equally upset.

Re: As private equity dominates wheelchair market, users wait months for repairs

#260

Post by xyzzy_plugh »

newsclues wrote: post #237
beaeglebeachh wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I'm for total deregulation of healthcare. Government fucks it up so bad hamstringing access that some hack work with 15 minutes of YouTube training plus whatever pills drop out the dark web is often better than not being able to access it at all. Right now we basically end up going to Mexico if we can help it, where there's basically no real oversight or regulation to raise cost so long as the doc/pharmac…

Regulations should be voluntary and exist in a market with options. I want a market where I can choose a highly regulated healthcare system or a system with no regulations and a system somewhere in between.

This doesn't really work. An unregulated market has every opportunity to undercut a regulated market in almost every dimension. Do you expect that a highly regulated market would become sustainable let alone affordable? You may as well just demand that regulations are removed.

The only way this works is if the government subsidizes the regulated market such that it is accessible (and sustainable) to an appropriate market. It also generally puts some populations at severe disadvantages, and usually those populations are disadvantaged to begin with.

This may seem good to you but, unless your fellow man is equally wealthy, it is problem detrimental to your fellow man.

Post reply on HN