U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
statnews.com
U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
1–10 of 33 posts
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#2$16,500 per person is insane. Someone is charging way too much for goods and services, and someone is paying it with no questions asked.
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#3How much of that spending is continuously treating symptoms vs. finding and curing root causes? At what point do the pentagon and other agencies step in and treat this like an unsustainable existential threat to the country?
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#4IMO, there's an interesting opportunity for AI to make healthcare deflationary.
For example, Medicare is launching a new program in July that pays a fixed rate for achieving defined outcomes, like lowering blood pressure or cholesterol. Medicare's explicit goal here is to create incentives to automate the repetitive parts of care delivery with software. (Much of preventive cardiology is surprisingly algorithmic and guideline-driven, so this is more plausible than it seems.)
This reverses the incentives of the current system, where CPT codes incentivize doing more "stuff" (but not necesarily delivering the most effective care efficiently).
If you're a software engineer who cares about health, and have been sitting on the sidelines till now, I think the next few years are a really interesting time to make a contribution.
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#5Surprised a healthcare CEO hasn't tried to bribe the gov to just let them be the only game in town.
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#6IMO, there's an interesting opportunity for AI to make healthcare deflationary. For example, Medicare is launching a new program in July that pays a fixed rate for achieving defined outcomes, like lowering blood pressure or cholesterol. Medicare's explicit goal here is to create incentives to automate the repetitive parts of care delivery with software. (Much of preventive cardiology is surprisingly algorithmic and g…
> If you're a software engineer who cares about health, and have been sitting on the sidelines till now, I think the next few years are a really interesting time to make a contribution.
do you have thoughts on what that looks like? what does the hiring landscape look like?
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#7$16,500 per person is insane. Someone is charging way too much for goods and services, and someone is paying it with no questions asked.
The Seven-Times Markup: The Johns Hopkins study analyzed the nation's top 100 hospitals by revenue and found that their "chargemaster" prices (the initial sticker price) averaged 700% of the actual cost of providing the service.
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/top-100-us-hos...
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#8IMO, there's an interesting opportunity for AI to make healthcare deflationary. For example, Medicare is launching a new program in July that pays a fixed rate for achieving defined outcomes, like lowering blood pressure or cholesterol. Medicare's explicit goal here is to create incentives to automate the repetitive parts of care delivery with software. (Much of preventive cardiology is surprisingly algorithmic and g…
> IMO, there's an interesting opportunity for AI to make healthcare deflationary.
How many times have I heard this, about how many techs. But this time for real?
Health spending in the us is too tied up with the country’s economy for it to ever be reduced. Same goes for housing. The cost of both of these will continue to increase. As long as the investor class is satisfied, this is all that matters.
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#9The plan to extract as much wealth as possible out of families with members near end of life is showing excellent results.
Re: U.S. health spending on pace to hit $6T
#10$16,500 per person is insane. Someone is charging way too much for goods and services, and someone is paying it with no questions asked.
We could end the Triffin dilemma by no longer maintaining the dollar as the unit of international reserve. This would eliminate the biggest driver of the trade deficit and via a reversing of the Baumol effect, lower the price of health care and education.
The only problem? No one has the political will to do it.
> Someone is charging way too much for goods and services
It's more money chasing meager supply. They're charging market rates. However when the market is distorted through the described arrangement, it's clear what has to change - the structure of international finance.