freedomdwarf1
Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
So, you have no proof of super duper profits in the American health industry, then?
Yes we do.
Look at the prices of medicine in the US and elsewhere.
Made by the same company (usually in the US) and shipped abroad.
The Americans pay upwards of 10x the price for the same item made by the same US big pharma.
There's your proof - difference in cost to Joe Schmoe public.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The US Government does run it's own national health insurance. It's called Medicare. Then, there's Tricare, CHIP, and the VA. There is also a State and Federal insurance program called Medicaid. And, there are already medical professionals who are starting to refuse to see some of those patients because of the low reimbursements.
And yes.... ALL insurance companies.
It isn't solely funded and supported by the government other than they pay the insurance bill.
All of them are provided for, and billed by, private insurance companies along the same lines as all the other policies.
It is still profit-driven insurance companies providing the cover, the care, AND the billing!!! They also tend to have the same exclusions too!
The only difference is, the tab is picked up by the government.
It is still nothing like socially-funded healthcare.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Some have already argued that reducing the pricing of health care won't reduce the price of insurance. It seems intuitive that it would, but it's been argued already.
If government were to come in tomorrow and set prices for everything, who is going to get fucked? There would be a meltdown, as providers close up shop. I agree there are excess costs somewhere in the system, but where? I agree with JeffBC, that every level adds some, but how do we place price controls at the top, when it's probably not something the top can just absorb? And, who gets fucked in the end of all that? Patients. Consumers.
This is what I mean about you not understanding Desi.
By putting in place a socially funded healthcare system, the patients/consumers will not suffer.
In fact, they will gain by having nationwide cover at a fraction of the cost.
There would be no question as to whether they would be covered out of state - it would be nationwide.
There would be no question to what is covered because there are no exclusions.
The only people that would lose out would be the insurance companies and big pharma.
Except, you are the one that isn't understanding, FD. Where is the "fraction of the cost?" Sure, the consumers won't pay at the point of service, but if reimbursements aren't high enough, there will be a reduction in where those consumers can go (providers will leave the Market). How is that going to be changed, then?
{sigh} Here we go again around the same mulberry bush for the umpteenth time.
The "fraction of the cost" is in the saving made by buying direct at bulk discounts.
And there aren't such things as "reimbursements"!! There is nobody to reimburse.
You really must get that out of your mind because this is where you are fundamentally not understanding.
Yes, providers will leave the market - they will be replaced by government funded facilities instead.
And no, that doesn't mean paying private companies to run a state-funded facility like Medicaid etc.
It means the facility is state funded, the staff and equipment is state funded, the parking lot and the buildings are state funded using state funded workers on state payroll. No private anything involved; no middle men, no insurance companies.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
If a government came in and said:
Doctors, depending on skill/seniority will be paid on a pay scale of $80k-$200k per year salary, regardless.
Nurses, as per doctors, $40k-$100k.
Cleaners, porters and auxilliary workers, $20k-$50k.
Compare that to the current salaries - much cheaper.
And it will be a livable wage because they won't be paying health insurance or deductibles out of it.
Good luck with that.
It works everywhere else. So why shouldn't it work in the US???
That's why your healthcare is sooo expensive.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
On top of that, if an aspirin costs about 10 cents around the world, that's what they will pay big pharma to supply hospitals, clinics and pharmacies across the nation. If big pharma complains and refuses, import them from any OECD country at the cheapest rate. If big pharma can supply boxes of aspirin at 10 cents a box to overseas countries, they shouldn't be allowed to sell on the home market at $1 a box and hospitals shouldn't be allowed to bill patients at 10 cents per pill. That is sheer greedy profiteering on a thoroughly disgusting level.
The same for every other item used in clinics and hospitals - buy at a wholesale price in big numbers and supply them nationwide at cost.
Remember, we are talking nationwide, not on a per-state level.
Any proof that's what Big Pharma is doing? I honestly don't know what the cost is to a hospital for a box of pills. I acknowledge that you could be right, but, without proof, how do we know?
The proof is every other country running similar single-payer systems.
Your graphs showed that. What more proof do you need??
When I lived in the US for 8 months, your OTC medicine costs were excessive compared to here for the same products made by the same companies.
Have you never bothered to ask at hospitals and clinics what these things cost??? I did.
That's how I can quote the costs of the scanner at my local hospital - I asked.
Pills and other medical supplies are at cost from our NHS supplies depot, not the full retail cost.
This is where money is saved hand-over-fist.
There is no profit margin added on to NHS supplies like there would be for private medicine.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
Look again at your earlier graph. Even small countries and those with a lower GDP can do it.
We have private insurance here but if anything is done by farming out the work (like Japan, Canada and Australia does), they only pay the going national rate, not the rates charged privately.
Where is the waste?? Everywhere up the line and at every step.
The meltdown would be the insurance companies and the hundreds of middle-men adding their cut.
If the government can provide universal healthcare at 10% of income, with no deductibles, no co-pays, no exclusions, no personal billing requirements; wouldn't that be better than what the average Joe is paying??
Make it simple: Buy direct, buy in bulk, supply direct; nobody in the middle.
And just think, you'll also be creating jobs for supply drivers, warehouses and other stuff that you can also cap the prices on.
So,now we've got caps on care/services prices, and we're now capping supply drivers, warehouses, etc.
Yes!!
Because they are all government funded and government run by government salaries staff at NO profit!!
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
If it's so profitable that way, why hasn't private insurance done that? Wait. I wonder if that's because insurance isn't allowed to sell across state lines, making it impossible for it to be a "nation-wide" solution. So, that would be "government regulation" preventing a potentially national solution.
There you go again.... private insurance companies and profit!! {sigh}
Stop thinking insurance companies - they don't figure in it at all.
And how many times have I said that socially funded healthcare does NOT have profit driving the service like insurance companies do??
They can all go to the wall unless they toe the national line and provide a competitive product and service.
Sell across state line?? Why the fuck not??
Too many people like yourself thinking in small boxes and state lines.
Healthcare should be nationwide and universal.
You can have a nationwide solution when you stop thinking of state lines and private insurance companies.
It wouldn't be "government regulation" because there again, you are thinking of regulating insurance companies.
There wouldn't be any; or at least very few left after the shake-up.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Even if there are 100 insurance companies, if they all compete on a national scale, wouldn't that help out?
No, it wouldn't help because they are ALL working on bigger profit margins because they are all working in a closed market with a captive audience backed by legislation.
They need to be all-but eliminated from the loop.
< Message edited by freedomdwarf1 -- 11/27/2014 8:01:39 AM >
_____________________________
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” George Orwell, 1903-1950
|
RE: US Health Care Costs - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread