I agree the problem is not profit, it is structure. Name another product or service routinely bought and sold with neither provider not recipient knowing the price.
Can't expect good value without price transparency.
I agree the problem is not profit, it is structure. Name another product or service routinely bought and sold with neither provider not recipient knowing the price.
Can't expect good value without price transparency.
+1
Absolutely correct. Time Magazine did a great story on this issue a few years ago.
That may be why ultimately, the same kind of free market dynamics which govern for instance the price of corn may not apply to health care.
The same kind of dynamics definitely don't govern the prices of corn and health care. Just to mention a few differences that are criticalThat may be why ultimately, the same kind of free market dynamics which govern for instance the price of corn may not apply to health care.
Again, Single Payer works. BUT for some reason we are so afraid of the "T"(ax) word, that we seem to be very happy to give way more money to an Insurance company than pay 1/5th the amount we give them in extra taxes. It really does not make sense to me as one who has actually experienced 2 single payer systems before emigrating to the USA. What the difference is between a profit based company making decisions on our healthcare, than a single dedicated funded government department making them is, I do not know.
There are so many examples of government waste, that it would take too long to answer this.
I love the idea of single payer, but everyone does understand how they have to operate to at least try to remain solvent?
There is always some form of gatekeeper deciding whether or not the plan even covers a specific treatment or medication.
Such a plan would never cover those "live a few months longer with your advanced cancer by paying 6-figures for our medication" treatments seen advertised on TV here in the U.S.
I believe covering the most people at the lowest cost makes that an acceptable trade-off, but it's clear reading the posts here many would not agree.
+1 essentially "society" would make those difficult decisions since "society" is paying for it... hopefully balancing humanity and economics..... that would be fine with me as I believe that we spend too much trying to prolong life where there is poor quality of life.... and those who have the means and want to spend their money on expensive treatments to prolong their life a little would be free to do so if they wish.
The Private system will ONLY work if it is NOT FOR PROFIT.
You are absolutely right. Still, it is questionable even with 'not for profit' organization, not long ago I read that Goodwill CEO get paid million(s). Hmm, my donation helps pay that guy.
How much should the CEO of an organization with 100,000 employees and revenue of $3 billion dollars get paid? I don't have the answer, but not for profit doesn't mean no salaries.
I just think it's great that we're able to have a civil discussion, without the usual politics around this subject.
I'm not even going to offer my opinions. A lot of them have already been covered.
I just think it's great that we're able to have a civil discussion, without the usual politics around this subject. In the US today, this sort of debate usually ends up as nothing but name-calling and hurling around empty (and often untrue) talking points.
There ARE facts out there, and varying degrees of opinion about which are most important. If everyone interacted like this, we COULD solve this problem.
Hence, most countries with universal healthcare allow supplemental insurance so people who want to pay for additional care can get it, whether it really helps them live longer or not. Hope springs eternal. It's a reasonable solution, I think.
Is there really a case where someone is absolutely refused lifesaving care due to no insurance? I have always been under the impression that part of the reason our HC insurance and medical costs are so high is that they have to cover the uninsured through the insured and paying?
Hence, most countries with universal healthcare allow supplemental insurance so people who want to pay for additional care can get it, whether it really helps them live longer or not. Hope springs eternal. It's a reasonable solution, I think.
Implicit in that statement is that the private sector is less wasteful than government. IME, that's not true, the private sector is just subject to less oversight.
I like it.
You could order an appendectomy online and a Dr. could show up at your house within two hours, let himself in using a special door code, and do the surgery on your kitchen counter. The reduced overhead cost would allow for a huge savings!
Yes. I'd love to save everyone..... I'll stop here to avoid Porky.
The Private system will ONLY work if it is NOT FOR PROFIT.