|
I'm sorry but gchan's post is beyond fail. It is wrong on almost every level. Gchan, maybe address the real reason you are against universal healthcare or any kind of reform in healthcare? Because the reasons you're using right now sound like an attempt to "win" the argument rather than anything you actually believe.
I don't understand how someone who supports free market policies could have such a weak grasp of economics. Are you unfamiliar with how tech firms are capitalized and generate profits? I can assure you, it has nothing to do with this postulated world market where the rest of the planet gets a free ride while Americans foot the bill.
Most all of the costs occur during the research phase and then potential costs from legal liabilities. If the drug works and has no problems, the pharmaceutical companies have virtually no costs in selling their drugs. And as if the privatized insurance companies are paying high prices to the pharma companies right now. They're in bed together to run up the price. It's completely unnecessary. And it's pretty outrageous what drugs get approved with symptoms like loss of vision, possible stroke, death, hyperventilation etc.
|
United Kingdom2674 Posts
These are complex issues which are difficult to untangle. That said, there really are one or two egregious bits of nonsense in this thread: the idea that America is "paying for healthcare for the rest of the world" is truly bizarre.
However, the one thing I always find interesting in threads such as these is to watch exactly how certain people explain the United States' astoundingly poor performance in the main health care indicators. I mean, we are talking about the richest, most powerful nation on earth here. I find the explanations usually involve a mixture of outright falsehoods (either lies or simply generated by ignorance), linguistic contortions and blind free market fundamentalism.
|
I'm confused as to why non-Americans want the U.S. healthcare system to be more like their nation's healthcare system. The U.S. largely foots the bill for R&D and is responsible for a lot of medical advancements that other countries benefit from. Considering this is a "progressive" forum, wouldn't most people be in favor of the wealthiest nation paying the most into R&D?
|
Well, without reading the thread, i can definately say that universal healthcare has been proven to work multiple times over, and is much better for the people despite its problems.
|
On July 15 2009 06:37 BlackJack wrote:
I'm confused as to why non-Americans want the U.S. healthcare system to be more like their nation's healthcare system.
No. Americans want to have a system more like some of the European systems.
Europeans just support the average American. Or make fun of those people who still believe the 'we the US have the best health care system in the world'-propaganda which is why it has taken so many years for it to reform.
Years ago it wasn't even possible to discuss it in mainstream politics. Still, people are offended and call it 'unamerican'.
Polls haven't changed much. They show basically the same.
What has changed? Corporations like GM and others can't compete with even Canada, which doesn't have a very good system either, because the health care costs drive up the price so much. It makes each car like 1000 dollars more expensive. People blame the worker unions for being part in the failure of GM. Yes, they negotiated good health care for the workers. But why is that a problem? Because health care costs are so high. So GM can't be competitive. So what happens then? GM can only operate when their workers have zero health care. And what happens then? A simple disease isn't cured. And then in the case of an emergency they can't be refused. And then the costs sky-rocket even more.
So this is why mainstream politics is now changing. It's one corporate interest vs another. One lobby group vs another. So that's why universal health care has become politically viable.
That's how US politics work.
|
reasons why medical costs in america are so high
-private medical schools
-high tuition
-more rigorous certification process (8 years vs. 4-6 of higher education, residency and internship differences, also no pay)
-lower number of incoming medical students per capita. While the current number of doctors may be similar per capita, many of these doctors are aging and are retiring, while the incoming generation of medical students is decreasing compared to other countries.
-PPO/HMOs acts as monopoly. New doctors are forced to sign up for them in order to attract clientele because they have no way to get clients otherwise, and insurance companies enforce price controls. Because they control all the demand, and because supply is restricted by the government and regulations, prices naturally will be high.
|
What about government purchasing power? I don't think that was brought up. Apparently that can reduce costs, and reduce corporate profits, a lot.
|
On July 15 2009 07:22 Diomedes wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2009 06:37 BlackJack wrote:
I'm confused as to why non-Americans want the U.S. healthcare system to be more like their nation's healthcare system. No. Americans want to have a system more like some of the European systems. Europeans just support the average American. Or make fun of those people who still believe the 'we the US have the best health care system in the world'-propaganda which is why it has taken so many years for it to reform. Years ago it wasn't even possible to discuss it in mainstream politics. Still, people are offended and call it 'unamerican'. Polls haven't changed much. They show basically the same. What has changed? Corporations like GM and others can't compete with even Canada, which doesn't have a very good system either, because the health care costs drive up the price so much. It makes each car like 1000 dollars more expensive. People blame the worker unions for being part in the failure of GM. Yes, they negotiated good health care for the workers. But why is that a problem? Because health care costs are so high. So GM can't be competitive. So what happens then? GM can only operate when their workers have zero health care. And what happens then? A simple disease isn't cured. And then in the case of an emergency they can't be refused. And then the costs sky-rocket even more. So this is why mainstream politics is now changing. It's one corporate interest vs another. One lobby group vs another. So that's why universal health care has become politically viable. That's how US politics work.
That's a mighty fine breakdown Diomedes. Well said.
|
On July 15 2009 08:06 Diomedes wrote:
What about government purchasing power? I don't think that was brought up. Apparently that can reduce costs, and reduce corporate profits, a lot.
with the current advocated plan of health care, the government would essentially be another PPO that would be subsidized by taxpayers. this fails to solve the problem of the high cost of care and instead perpetuates it.
|
On July 15 2009 07:33 Caller wrote:
reasons why medical costs in america are so high
-private medical schools
-high tuition
-more rigorous certification process (8 years vs. 4-6 of higher education, residency and internship differences, also no pay)
-lower number of incoming medical students per capita. While the current number of doctors may be similar per capita, many of these doctors are aging and are retiring, while the incoming generation of medical students is decreasing compared to other countries.
-PPO/HMOs acts as monopoly. New doctors are forced to sign up for them in order to attract clientele because they have no way to get clients otherwise, and insurance companies enforce price controls. Because they control all the demand, and because supply is restricted by the government and regulations, prices naturally will be high.
Also, pretty much everything is paid through a third party ( businesses, insurance, and/or government), so hospitals are able to get away with charging for much, much more.
The best explanation behind this I've seen is by Milton Friedman: http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3459466.html
|
On July 15 2009 08:14 shmay wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2009 07:33 Caller wrote:
reasons why medical costs in america are so high
-private medical schools
-high tuition
-more rigorous certification process (8 years vs. 4-6 of higher education, residency and internship differences, also no pay)
-lower number of incoming medical students per capita. While the current number of doctors may be similar per capita, many of these doctors are aging and are retiring, while the incoming generation of medical students is decreasing compared to other countries.
-PPO/HMOs acts as monopoly. New doctors are forced to sign up for them in order to attract clientele because they have no way to get clients otherwise, and insurance companies enforce price controls. Because they control all the demand, and because supply is restricted by the government and regulations, prices naturally will be high. Also, pretty much everything is paid through a third party ( businesses, insurance, and/or government), so hospitals are able to get away with charging for much, much more. The best explanation behind this I've seen is by Milton Friedman: http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3459466.html
|
On July 15 2009 06:37 BlackJack wrote:
I'm confused as to why non-Americans want the U.S. healthcare system to be more like their nation's healthcare system. The U.S. largely foots the bill for R&D and is responsible for a lot of medical advancements that other countries benefit from. Considering this is a "progressive" forum, wouldn't most people be in favor of the wealthiest nation paying the most into R&D?
Because we don't want to watch people die because the doctor won't do surgeries pro bono. We don't want to see people lose everything due to one illness/accident.
It's not like we go "Oh hey, that system is super fucked up, but its only hurting americans LOLOLOLOL" which is about as preposterous as the notion that we're doing it to trick american's to our own ends.
You have a lot of people living in places with universal health care/socialized medicine and saying its great. We're not doing it to trick you.
|
I find it absurd that I am obliged to pay at least 800 Euro per year for mandatory student health insurance, which for some reason is higher than regular insurance.
One is forced to buy into healthcare, which is theoretically private, but is de facto semi-public, and caters for a captive market. Once a person earns above a certain income, they may opt out of the mandatory system in preference of a truly private programme. Prices are completely disproportionate to services used. I don't suppose the government will buy my argument that a healthy young person who almost never sees the doctor ought to be allowed to fend for himself.
|
United States20667 Posts
American doctors are also legally obligated to use every last means available to 'save' someone even if it's a 92y/o geriatric who will live a few months more at best. The last year of life accounts for by and far the majority of healthcare costs.
|
On July 15 2009 08:56 Last Romantic wrote:
American doctors are also legally obligated to use every last means available to 'save' someone even if it's a 92y/o geriatric who will live a few months more at best. The last year of life accounts for by and far the majority of healthcare costs.
I am fairly sure that it isn't a "necessity" as much as it is that anything asked by the patients must be followed. The concept of the quality of life after treatment is about the only saving grace.
|
On July 15 2009 06:37 BlackJack wrote:
I'm confused as to why non-Americans want the U.S. healthcare system to be more like their nation's healthcare system. The U.S. largely foots the bill for R&D and is responsible for a lot of medical advancements that other countries benefit from. Considering this is a "progressive" forum, wouldn't most people be in favor of the wealthiest nation paying the most into R&D?
Largely foots the bill? You're really making it out to look like the US don't make a TON off it's patent from it's R&D. Which brings me to my next point, you cannot expect business to be ran off good will.
|
On July 15 2009 08:56 Last Romantic wrote:
American doctors are also legally obligated to use every last means available to 'save' someone even if it's a 92y/o geriatric who will live a few months more at best. The last year of life accounts for by and far the majority of healthcare costs.
Are they legally obligated to do it for free?
|
On July 15 2009 10:01 fusionsdf wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2009 08:56 Last Romantic wrote:
American doctors are also legally obligated to use every last means available to 'save' someone even if it's a 92y/o geriatric who will live a few months more at best. The last year of life accounts for by and far the majority of healthcare costs. Are they legally obligated to do it for free?
No, they will be properly compensated for it. In fact, a large amount of hospital revenue is found with doing excessive procedures and checks like that. It is one of the reasons that institutions like the Mayo Clinic is actually facing financial difficulties.
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
On July 15 2009 07:33 Caller wrote:
reasons why medical costs in america are so high
-private medical schools
-high tuition
-more rigorous certification process (8 years vs. 4-6 of higher education, residency and internship differences, also no pay)
-lower number of incoming medical students per capita. While the current number of doctors may be similar per capita, many of these doctors are aging and are retiring, while the incoming generation of medical students is decreasing compared to other countries.
-PPO/HMOs acts as monopoly. New doctors are forced to sign up for them in order to attract clientele because they have no way to get clients otherwise, and insurance companies enforce price controls. Because they control all the demand, and because supply is restricted by the government and regulations, prices naturally will be high.
Impressive list.
You forgot malpractice insurance and the ridiculous costs that it brings to the profession. Also consider the malpractice trial itself. The costs of lawyers, just bringing the case to court, and the money that can be gotten from punitive damages is just ridiculous.
Another problem is the ability of pharmaceutical companies to patent their drug for 7 years. That's like having a 7 year monopoly on a crucial drug. This allows them to set the prices for the costly R&D process.
A final problem is the overuse in a lot of costly technologies such as MRIs, CTs, and unnecessary tests. Doctors aren't thinking that they can solve the problem with a simple X-Ray, but they're thinking that "Oh, insurance will cover it, the MRI is affordable". But is it really necessary? Probably not.
There are probably a lot more problems, but those are some of the largest causes, in my eyes, to the health care cost issue.
|
On July 15 2009 10:19 Mystlord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2009 07:33 Caller wrote:
reasons why medical costs in america are so high
-private medical schools
-high tuition
-more rigorous certification process (8 years vs. 4-6 of higher education, residency and internship differences, also no pay)
-lower number of incoming medical students per capita. While the current number of doctors may be similar per capita, many of these doctors are aging and are retiring, while the incoming generation of medical students is decreasing compared to other countries.
-PPO/HMOs acts as monopoly. New doctors are forced to sign up for them in order to attract clientele because they have no way to get clients otherwise, and insurance companies enforce price controls. Because they control all the demand, and because supply is restricted by the government and regulations, prices naturally will be high. Impressive list. You forgot malpractice insurance and the ridiculous costs that it brings to the profession. Also consider the malpractice trial itself. The costs of lawyers, just bringing the case to court, and the money that can be gotten from punitive damages is just ridiculous. Another problem is the ability of pharmaceutical companies to patent their drug for 7 years. That's like having a 7 year monopoly on a crucial drug. This allows them to set the prices for the costly R&D process. A final problem is the overuse in a lot of costly technologies such as MRIs, CTs, and unnecessary tests. Doctors aren't thinking that they can solve the problem with a simple X-Ray, but they're thinking that "Oh, insurance will cover it, the MRI is affordable". But is it really necessary? Probably not. There are probably a lot more problems, but those are some of the largest causes, in my eyes, to the health care cost issue.
yes, i agree that these reasons are also responsible for the high costs. But the reason the technology is overused is due to the fear of malpractice insurance, i.e. if they don't find something, 50 DKP minus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
