Medicare for all

a reply to: QBSneak000

As long as "for profit" is balanced with competition, it works out pretty well. The best providers, the most efficient providers, and the cheapest providers win out. The problem is that government regulations (HPPA anyone?) and insurance interfering with supply/demand laws have removed all effective competition. It's now a "for profit" with zero competition.

The fact that our medical system is "for profit" is the only reason the newer miracle treatments exist.

TheRedneck

a reply to: ketsuko

That phrase gov't employed doctors is kinda scary.
Especially if applied to psychiatrists.

As in one day you tell your doctor you believe in or pray to God so they call you schizophrenic, which disqualifies you from having a gun.

a reply to: Psilocyborg

That's what a single payer system would create though. Government control of the whole system similar to the public school system. Teachers are government employees.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: QBSneak000

As long as "for profit" is balanced with competition, it works out pretty well. The best providers, the most efficient providers, and the cheapest providers win out. The problem is that government regulations (HPPA anyone?) and insurance interfering with supply/demand laws have removed all effective competition. It's now a "for profit" with zero competition.

The fact that our medical system is "for profit" is the only reason the newer miracle treatments exist.

TheRedneck

Yup. There is very little true competition in the healthcare market or insurance market.

The issue is government interference.

You can get decent car insurance, life insurance, homeowner's insurance, commercial insurance..... but health insurance?

The difference is that health insurance if far more regulated and has been tied to your employer.

Imagine how messed up car insurance market would be if you had to get it through your employer and it changed if you changed employers. Not only that, you could only use one or two insurance companies in your state. Then on top of that, your insurance had to pay for oil changes, tire rotations, and car washes.

a reply to: Bluntone22

In New Zealand, we have the government agency, Pharmac, who negotiate prices with the the Pharmaceutical companies and we have schemes such as ACC which cover most medical costs. The local regional health boards have schemes that assist those in high care or low income situations.

In New Zealand, you can get disposable Swann-Moreton scalpel blades for about $3 for a pack of five and a metal handle for about $20. Or you can go for a disposable all-in one scalpel with a plastic handle for $2.

Of course CO2 laser scalpels are probably more expensive and are usually maintained with an annual cost of about $1k and an initial price of $2k - $10k.

a reply to: Bluntone22

If there is only one hospital in a hundred mile radius, I wouldn't count on competition forcing the costs down?

a reply to: dawnstar

That might be true but I can't say for sure.
I do know that hospitals and insurance companies have contracts where they agree on payments for services.

That is likely true for rural hospitals too.


There are several hospitals near me but my insurance company has a contact with one of them so I'm not sure if competition matters.