What is the problem with the health care market in America?

[[Deleted User]]

I can't claim to know much about the problem, but as I get older and the reality of having my own plan sets in, I'm more interested and affected by the health care debate in the United States.

I read Steven Brill's 28 page study of the health care marketplace in America, and he seemed to raise a lot of key issues with how we look at health care.
http://livingwithmcl.com/BitterPill.pdf

The first is that the debate has become "who should pay the prices", instead of the more pressing question: "why are the prices so high". His piece looks at why the consumers are so often screwed when it comes time to pay health related bills.

Because the market is not free, in that you have to pay the steep prices because health care is literally life or death, and consumers have little knowledge beyond what their doctors tell them, the hospitals and pharmaceutical companies bask in enormous profits.

I guess it's a case of profitability (in what claims to be a non-profit sector) driving up out of pocket expenses that disproportionately affect the poor and middle class, and those not covered by medicare.

He also argues that while Obamacare does a good thing of including more people in the market, it doesn't come close to solving the problem of the actual costs, and may even exacerbate this problem.

Other countries have implemented price controls and other measures to curb the problem and have higher rated health care at a lower cost than the United States.

So it seems that this is inherently not a free market, and free market solutions that so many are calling for would do little to offset the problem.

Again, I'm hardly an expert. I tried but probably didn't do justice in summarizing his comprehensive findings. Worth a read. Curious what the people with REAL WORLD experience think.

 

[Fire_Marshall_Bill]

Insurance & pharmaceutical companies are basically running things and are financially raping the majority of the general public. When there are attempts at meaningful reform, reactionary thinktanks and media outlets throw out terms like "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, Timmy Tea Party gits real scurred, and things get worse. Stats showing every other industrialized country ranks higher in healthcare quality are ignored. Stats showing Pfizer charges five times the amount for pill that it would cost in Canada are ignored or aren't readily available.

Lather, rinse, repeat

 

[TierbsHsotBoobs]

I can't claim to know much about the problem, but as I get older and the reality of having my own plan sets in, I'm more interested and affected by the health care debate in the United States.

I read Steven Brill's 28 page study of the health care marketplace in America, and he seemed to raise a lot of key issues with how we look at health care.
http://livingwithmcl.com/BitterPill.pdf

The first is that the debate has become "who should pay the prices", instead of the more pressing question: "why are the prices so high". His piece looks at why the consumers are so often screwed when it comes time to pay health related bills.

Because the market is not free, in that you have to pay the steep prices because health care is literally life or death, and consumers have little knowledge beyond what their doctors tell them, the hospitals and pharmaceutical companies bask in enormous profits.

I guess it's a case of profitability (in what claims to be a non-profit sector) driving up out of pocket expenses that disproportionately affect the poor and middle class, and those not covered by medicare.

He also argues that while Obamacare does a good thing of including more people in the market, it doesn't come close to solving the problem of the actual costs, and may even exacerbate this problem.

Other countries have implemented price controls and other measures to curb the problem and have higher rated health care at a lower cost than the United States.

So it seems that this is inherently not a free market, and free market solutions that so many are calling for would do little to offset the problem.

Again, I'm hardly an expert. I tried but probably didn't do justice in summarizing his comprehensive findings. Worth a read. Curious what the people with REAL WORLD experience think.

Disagree.

 

[RaceBannon]

Obama and the democrats had free reign to write this however they wanted and get it passed. Its not the tea party's fault its a pile of shit

 

[death2ducks]

There is only ONE health insurance company operating in Vermont. That's because insurance is regulated at the state level by mostly corrupt State Insurance Commissioners. Get rid of them and open the market for any insurance company to sell in any state, and watch what happens.

You're right, if you think that continuing to manipulate the system will work, you don't know much.

 

[death2ducks]

Insurance & pharmaceutical companies are basically running things and are financially raping the majority of the general public. When there are attempts at meaningful reform, reactionary thinktanks and media outlets throw out terms like "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, Timmy Tea Party gits real scurred, and things get worse. Stats showing every other industrialized country ranks higher in healthcare quality are ignored. Stats showing Pfizer charges five times the amount for pill that it would cost in Canada are ignored or aren't readily available.

Lather, rinse, repeat

Stop letting the FDA allow Pfizer to keep doing that, and watch what happens. The FDA regularly extends drug patents to drugs that should have been generic years ago. Maybe political contributions to BOTH parties might be the cause?

THE DRUG COMPANIES LOVE GOVERNMENT CONTROL YOU IDIOT! FREE UP THE MARKET!

 

[[Deleted User]]

There is only ONE health insurance company operating in Vermont. That's because insurance is regulated at the state level by mostly corrupt State Insurance Commissioners. Get rid of them and open the market for any insurance company to sell in any state, and watch what happens.

You're right, if you think that continuing to manipulate the system will work, you don't know much.

Jesus you are a fucking idiot. I didn't take a particular position. Stop projecting.

 

[MikeDamone]

There is only ONE health insurance company operating in Vermont. That's because insurance is regulated at the state level by mostly corrupt State Insurance Commissioners. Get rid of them and open the market for any insurance company to sell in any state, and watch what happens.

You're right, if you think that continuing to manipulate the system will work, you don't know much.

Jesus you are a fucking idiot. I didn't take a particular position. Stop projecting.

Yes, you did.

HTH.

 

[[Deleted User]]

There is only ONE health insurance company operating in Vermont. That's because insurance is regulated at the state level by mostly corrupt State Insurance Commissioners. Get rid of them and open the market for any insurance company to sell in any state, and watch what happens.

You're right, if you think that continuing to manipulate the system will work, you don't know much.

Jesus you are a fucking idiot. I didn't take a particular position. Stop projecting.

Yes, you did.

HTH.

I summarized an extensive study, found it pointed to one conclusion, and wondered what others thought without projecting my own opinion.

I hear you like checkers.

 

[Kaepsknee]

I can't claim to know much about the problem, but as I get older and the reality of having my own plan sets in, I'm more interested and affected by the health care debate in the United States.

I read Steven Brill's 28 page study of the health care marketplace in America, and he seemed to raise a lot of key issues with how we look at health care.
http://livingwithmcl.com/BitterPill.pdf

The first is that the debate has become "who should pay the prices", instead of the more pressing question: "why are the prices so high". His piece looks at why the consumers are so often screwed when it comes time to pay health related bills.

Because the market is not free, in that you have to pay the steep prices because health care is literally life or death, and consumers have little knowledge beyond what their doctors tell them, the hospitals and pharmaceutical companies bask in enormous profits.

I guess it's a case of profitability (in what claims to be a non-profit sector) driving up out of pocket expenses that disproportionately affect the poor and middle class, and those not covered by medicare.

He also argues that while Obamacare does a good thing of including more people in the market, it doesn't come close to solving the problem of the actual costs, and may even exacerbate this problem.

Other countries have implemented price controls and other measures to curb the problem and have higher rated health care at a lower cost than the United States.

So it seems that this is inherently not a free market, and free market solutions that so many are calling for would do little to offset the problem.

Again, I'm hardly an expert. I tried but probably didn't do justice in summarizing his comprehensive findings. Worth a read. Curious what the people with REAL WORLD experience think.

Well that's a first.

Most Hospitals lose Money. That's why they have foundations. And the poster who says that our costly, low efficiency heathcare system is that way due to the pharma co's and insurance companies is correct.

And Obamacare does absolutely NOTHING to address those issues.

The fact that health insurance can't be sold across state lines limits competition. Also health insurance companies can choose to and do choose to offer rates that double their reserves over what is both mandated and what is constituted to be a financially healthy company. A few years back BlueCross was found to have almost 4 times the reserves than what was required by the state here in Orygun.

Healthcare and drugs are the biggest rackets there is in regards to pay-offs and corruption.

 

[oregonblitzkrieg]

...

 

[MikeDamone]

There is only ONE health insurance company operating in Vermont. That's because insurance is regulated at the state level by mostly corrupt State Insurance Commissioners. Get rid of them and open the market for any insurance company to sell in any state, and watch what happens.

You're right, if you think that continuing to manipulate the system will work, you don't know much.

Jesus you are a fucking idiot. I didn't take a particular position. Stop projecting.

Yes, you did.

HTH.

I summarized an extensive study, found it pointed to one conclusion, and wondered what others thought without projecting my own opinion.

I hear you like checkers.

Disagree

"So it seems that this is inherently not a free market, and free market solutions that so many are calling for would do little to offset the problem."

You took the position the free market didn't hold the solution. You took a position. If you would have said "the article concludes.." But you didn't. Your bias shows even when you try to hide it.

Check mate mother fucker.

 

[[Deleted User]]

"So it seems". Keep playing a game of semantics though.

Did you miss the disclaimer at the end?

You've turned petty. It's sad, really.

 

[MikeDamone]

"So it seems". Keep playing a game of semantics though.

Did you miss the disclaimer at the end?

You've turned petty. It's sad, really.

You can't even hide your liberal agenda when you rebutt. No disclaimer needed. You make it clear you don't think there is a free market solution. I would say you're slipping, but that would imply you had game to start with.

 

[[Deleted User]]

"So it seems". Keep playing a game of semantics though.

Did you miss the disclaimer at the end?

You've turned petty. It's sad, really.

You can't even hide your liberal agenda when you rebutt. No disclaimer needed. You make it clear you don't think there is a free market solution. I would say you're slipping, but that would imply you had game to start with.

Lol liberal agenda. Talk about slipping.

I voted for Mitt and would have voted for McCain.

No one can present an article without it being some kind of an agenda, even when that article is well thought out and worthy of discussion?

Maybe there is a free market solution? That's why I started the thread. I said I know little about the topic.

You are slipping oh so far.

 

[MikeDamone]

"So it seems". Keep playing a game of semantics though.

Did you miss the disclaimer at the end?

You've turned petty. It's sad, really.

You can't even hide your liberal agenda when you rebutt. No disclaimer needed. You make it clear you don't think there is a free market solution. I would say you're slipping, but that would imply you had game to start with.

Lol liberal agenda. Talk about slipping.

I voted for Mitt and would have voted for McCain.

No one can present an article without it being some kind of an agenda, even when that article is well thought out and worthy of discussion?

Maybe there is a free market solution? That's why I started the thread. I said I know little about the topic.

You are slipping oh so far.

Do they not have a writing or communications course at your school, or have you just not take it yet?

 

[[Deleted User]]

I can't claim to know much about the problem, but as I get older and the reality of having my own plan sets in, I'm more interested and affected by the health care debate in the United States.

I read Steven Brill's 28 page study of the health care marketplace in America, and he seemed to raise a lot of key issues with how we look at health care.
http://livingwithmcl.com/BitterPill.pdf

The first is that the debate has become "who should pay the prices", instead of the more pressing question: "why are the prices so high". His piece looks at why the consumers are so often screwed when it comes time to pay health related bills.

Because the market is not free, in that you have to pay the steep prices because health care is literally life or death, and consumers have little knowledge beyond what their doctors tell them, the hospitals and pharmaceutical companies bask in enormous profits.

I guess it's a case of profitability (in what claims to be a non-profit sector) driving up out of pocket expenses that disproportionately affect the poor and middle class, and those not covered by medicare.

He also argues that while Obamacare does a good thing of including more people in the market, it doesn't come close to solving the problem of the actual costs, and may even exacerbate this problem.

Other countries have implemented price controls and other measures to curb the problem and have higher rated health care at a lower cost than the United States.

So it seems that this is inherently not a free market, and free market solutions that so many are calling for would do little to offset the problem.

Again, I'm hardly an expert. I tried but probably didn't do justice in summarizing his comprehensive findings. Worth a read. Curious what the people with REAL WORLD experience think.

Well that's a first.

Most Hospitals lose Money. That's why they have foundations. And the poster who says that our costly, low efficiency heathcare system is that way due to the pharma co's and insurance companies is correct.

And Obamacare does absolutely NOTHING to address those issues.

The fact that health insurance can't be sold across state lines limits competition. Also health insurance companies can choose to and do choose to offer rates that double their reserves over what is both mandated and what is constituted to be a financially healthy company. A few years back BlueCross was found to have almost 4 times the reserves than what was required by the state here in Orygun.

Healthcare and drugs are the biggest rackets there is in regards to pay-offs and corruption.

Wondering where you found most hospitals lose money? The article found that most hospitals are very profitable and donations to the foundation are just a drop in the bucket.

 

[[Deleted User]]

"So it seems". Keep playing a game of semantics though.

Did you miss the disclaimer at the end?

You've turned petty. It's sad, really.

You can't even hide your liberal agenda when you rebutt. No disclaimer needed. You make it clear you don't think there is a free market solution. I would say you're slipping, but that would imply you had game to start with.

Lol liberal agenda. Talk about slipping.

I voted for Mitt and would have voted for McCain.

No one can present an article without it being some kind of an agenda, even when that article is well thought out and worthy of discussion?

Maybe there is a free market solution? That's why I started the thread. I said I know little about the topic.

You are slipping oh so far.

Do they not have a writing or communications course at your school, or have you just not take it yet?

Predictably, weak.

 

[MikeDamone]

"So it seems". Keep playing a game of semantics though.

Did you miss the disclaimer at the end?

You've turned petty. It's sad, really.

You can't even hide your liberal agenda when you rebutt. No disclaimer needed. You make it clear you don't think there is a free market solution. I would say you're slipping, but that would imply you had game to start with.

Lol liberal agenda. Talk about slipping.

I voted for Mitt and would have voted for McCain.

No one can present an article without it being some kind of an agenda, even when that article is well thought out and worthy of discussion?

Maybe there is a free market solution? That's why I started the thread. I said I know little about the topic.

You are slipping oh so far.

Do they not have a writing or communications course at your school, or have you just not take it yet?

Predictably, weak.

Typical comeback for a guy who continues to get his ass handed to him.

Do you even try?

articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/02/business/fi-hospitals2 And it's getting worse.

 

[[Deleted User]]

"So it seems". Keep playing a game of semantics though.

Did you miss the disclaimer at the end?

You've turned petty. It's sad, really.

You can't even hide your liberal agenda when you rebutt. No disclaimer needed. You make it clear you don't think there is a free market solution. I would say you're slipping, but that would imply you had game to start with.

Lol liberal agenda. Talk about slipping.

I voted for Mitt and would have voted for McCain.

No one can present an article without it being some kind of an agenda, even when that article is well thought out and worthy of discussion?

Maybe there is a free market solution? That's why I started the thread. I said I know little about the topic.

You are slipping oh so far.

Do they not have a writing or communications course at your school, or have you just not take it yet?

Predictably, weak.

Typical comeback for a guy who continues to get his ass handed to him.

Do you even try?

articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/02/business/fi-hospitals2 And it's getting worse.

Uhhhh, that article and study came right after the recession when everyone was tanking.

Do you even try?