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

Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

mattstoller.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 595 posts

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#211

Post by jdlshore »

alasdair_ wrote: post #206
bushbaba wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Price transparency plus high deductible plans would drive the cost of health insurance down. Health insurance is supposed to cover you for catastrophic health issues that were previously unknown. For some reason it changed to also cover all your recurring or minor illnesses.

Part of that is because it’s far cheaper to catch (say) cancer at an early stage and treat it than it is to catch it at stage 3 or 4 and spend potentially millions on a possibly preventable catastrophe. There is fairly strong evidence that if the cost of routine preventative care isn’t paid by insurance, quite a lot of people opt to skip it because they can’t afford it, leading to worse outcomes.

> leading to worse outcomes.

Do you have evidence of this part specifically? Because the Oregon Experiment found no improvement in health outcomes in a large randomized trial of low-income recipients of Medicaid. (Partly because their health was generally good in the first place.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Medicaid_health_experim...

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#212

Post by acdha »

bushbaba wrote: post #197
sethammons wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A couple years past, def under Obama, I went in for a retina exam. They absolutely could not tell me the price for the appointment. "It depends on services rendered" - "what if it is a standard appointment with no extra services, how much (ball park) should I expect? $50? $500? $5k?" - "I couldn't tell you, I can't imagine that high." There is no price transparency. Sure would like it since I have a high deductible p…

Price transparency plus high deductible plans would drive the cost of health insurance down. Health insurance is supposed to cover you for catastrophic health issues that were previously unknown. For some reason it changed to also cover all your recurring or minor illnesses.

It’d help a little but it’d still be a long way from an Econ 101 market. Preventative care is hugely effective at reducing costs but high-deductible plans ensure that many people will not get it.

Many people simply aren’t capable of shopping around, either: emergency care, cognitive impairments, limited geographic options, and the conflicts of interest inherent to for-profit medicine all make it hard for people to know what they need and whether it’s worth the money. As with preventative care, making it harder to get treatment is certain to lead to many people not getting problems treated prior to them becoming major.

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#213

Post by visualradio »

ozfive wrote: post #181
Karsteski wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the premise of your argument, but why did you have to start it with "I love how conservatives still make this argument"? You have no idea what that person's thoughts or beliefs are...

Because this is the premise of the conservative argument. The thoughts are clearly conveyed.

Price transparency regulations could also be used to implement public price controls or public fines on monopolies engaging in price discrimination.

For instance if a provider billed a patient over 100% of their stated price or over 120% the minimum price for the same item published by comparable providers, there might be some public fine or tax on the biller and rebate to the patient in proportion to the entire amount by which the patient was over-billed regardless of their insurance status.

This would possibly amount to something similar to universal public price negotiation.

But yes the idea of using pricing transparency to suppress over-billing by monopolies could possibly be interpreted as suggesting a rejection of the alternative idea of centrally fixing all consumer facing prices using a public office and then determining all government facing prices from external suppliers providing necessary inputs for the public healthcare system through minimum bid.

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#214

Post by warble »

acdha wrote: post #212
bushbaba wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Price transparency plus high deductible plans would drive the cost of health insurance down. Health insurance is supposed to cover you for catastrophic health issues that were previously unknown. For some reason it changed to also cover all your recurring or minor illnesses.

It’d help a little but it’d still be a long way from an Econ 101 market. Preventative care is hugely effective at reducing costs but high-deductible plans ensure that many people will not get it. Many people simply aren’t capable of shopping around, either: emergency care, cognitive impairments, limited geographic options, and the conflicts of interest inherent to for-profit medicine all make it hard for people to kn…

You don't need everyone shopping around. You just need enough to drive the market, it isn't even necessarily a majority.

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#215

Post by seriousquestion »

alessandroetc wrote: post #161

It's not actually real. The lobbying firm behind most of the fact sheet is made up of people on the boards of different tech firms.

Related? "WestExec represented major corporations throughout the Trump years. Now it’s in the White House."

https://theintercept.com/2021/07/06/westexec-biden-administr...

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#216

Post by hanniabu »

jdlshore wrote: post #211
alasdair_ wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of that is because it’s far cheaper to catch (say) cancer at an early stage and treat it than it is to catch it at stage 3 or 4 and spend potentially millions on a possibly preventable catastrophe. There is fairly strong evidence that if the cost of routine preventative care isn’t paid by insurance, quite a lot of people opt to skip it because they can’t afford it, leading to worse outcomes.

> leading to worse outcomes. Do you have evidence of this part specifically? Because the Oregon Experiment found no improvement in health outcomes in a large randomized trial of low-income recipients of Medicaid. (Partly because their health was generally good in the first place.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Medicaid_health_experim...

I had no health insurance so put off on a specialist i needed to see until i could sign up for medicaid (can only apply at the end of the year for some retarded reason). Just putting my issues off for 4 months turned an easy thing to fix into needing to spend the past 8 months in and out of the doctors and hospital.

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#218

Post by nick__m »

LimaBearz wrote: post #157
revscat wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure what your point is. These contracts between seller and merchant were voluntary. There are other hospitals available should you choose, and if not then you have no one to blame but yourself.

I love how conservatives still make this argument. You're arguing for the free market in a system that literally isn't, and doing it in such a way that it tries to be a thought-terminating cliche. If you get into a car accident tomorrow driving to work, the ambulance/paramedics aren't going to ask you to do your research prior to shuttling you to a hospital to get life saving treatment. Even if you could how would yo…

I think you meant :

  True free market principles require a symmetry of information for the system to work
But great post otherwise!

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#219

Post by ClumsyPilot »

sethammons wrote: post #193
the-dude wrote: post #10

> hospital price transparency, Wasn't this already put in place by the previous administration?

A couple years past, def under Obama, I went in for a retina exam. They absolutely could not tell me the price for the appointment. "It depends on services rendered" - "what if it is a standard appointment with no extra services, how much (ball park) should I expect? $50? $500? $5k?" - "I couldn't tell you, I can't imagine that high." There is no price transparency. Sure would like it since I have a high deductible p…

If the customer won't be told the price and can't opt out, it's not market, it's a racket.

Re: Biden launches action on "Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Ag" – can it be real?

#220

Post by ncphil »

missedthecue wrote: post #196
gregsadetsky wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I double checked -- another source[0] mentions amounts that are a bit higher: "The Chamber [of Commerce] spent nearly $82 million on lobbying in 2020" But generally in line with the list posted by the GP: "Facebook and Amazon were the only companies in the top 10 spending list and spent nearly $19.7 million and more than $18.7 million on lobbying in 2020, respectively" I too, am surprised as how little this is for th…

How much do you think lobbyists should earn instead?

Really. Who doesn't get how cheap our politicians come? Old joke about Spiro Agnew (Nixon's VP who had to resign because he took around $30,000 in bribes while Governor of Maryland years before): When Armstrong set foot on the Moon he would have been set for life if his first words had just been "Coca Cola!" Of course if it had been Agnew he probably would have said something like, "Fred's Tailor Shop, Baltimore!" Point is, US politicians really do come cheap. Political favors are a wholesale business, they make out on volume.
Post reply on HN