Healthcare on US is ultra expensive because is over-regulated. And if i really need a treatment, i can spend some days on my home country. Dollars worth a lot more since the pandemic. Making money in dollar even if i had to come back will gonna be amazing.
I honestly don't fear Coronavirus. I an 6' 1" tall, with broad shoulders, live in the less violent capital of Brazil and got victim of two assault attempts.
As an American, I've got to let you know this is totally wrong. Completely wrong. You are wildly wrong saying that regulations are why healthcare is expensive in America.
It's because there are NOT ENOUGH regulations. There are a lot of middle men who drive up prices. You see there are private insurance companies, drug makers, CEOs, for profit hospitals, insurance companies, investors, advertising people etc all want to make the most money they can from healthcare.
So the price goes up. Why's it go up? No regulations to say that prices shouldn't go up. No protections against greedy people. The price goes up when there's nothing stopping it from going up. When you need healthcare it's not really optional. You can't shop around for the best deal when you're bleeding in the street. So you go and get healthcare and they want to charge you as much as they possibly can.
You don't fear Coronavirus, well good for you. You realize that you can get it and then get your mother, father, child, sick and kill them right? You probably didn't realize that because you might not have been thinking about other people. They totally exist.
Yep, if it was true that government regulation made healthcare expensive, we'd expect healthcare costs to be even more expensive in Canada, France, Germany, and the UK. We see the opposite.
Healthcare on US is ultra expensive because is over-regulated. And if i really need a treatment, i can spend some days on my home country. Dollars worth a lot more since the pandemic. Making money in dollar even if i had to come back will gonna be amazing.
I honestly don't fear Coronavirus. I an 6' 1" tall, with broad shoulders, live in the less violent capital of Brazil and got victim of two assault attempts.
You don't fear Coronavirus, well good for you. You realize that you can get it and then get your mother, father, child, sick and kill them right? You probably didn't realize that because you might not have been thinking about other people. They totally exist.
That is an unjustifiably harsh statement. Whether or not you 'fear' Coronavirus is not related to blatant disregard for other's health. I don't 'fear' Coronavirus either. Just like I don't 'fear' any other disease. However, I have no problem staying home, wearing a mask when I go out and keeping my distance from people when possible. Fear makes people do stupid things like rush out and buy two years worth of toilet paper. Understanding, on the other hand, results in calmly waiting out the storm while doing what's necessary to get this over with as soon as possible. I know which I prefer...
Well if this is your outlook that's certainly fine. If you are willing to do your part great. A lot of people aren't team players.
A lot of these people demanding that the lockdown end so people go back to work so they can get a haircut are only thinking about themselves. And I've seen people say that "I'm young and strong so covid-19 doesn't bother me" and acting reckless and refusing to wear masks.
In the end, the stimulus bill was exactly what we feared it would be. A rushed giveaway to blood-sucking corporations accomplished by the GOP holding the $1200 pittance given to regular people hostage so they could ram through what will likely be the largest upward transfer of wealth ever.
The PPP system was a joke. Hardly any of it went to small businesses. The $1200 went to landlords and utility bills. And Trump fired the person in charge of the oversight within days. This is a hijacking. He created an unprecedented crisis with his mismanagement (which may have been purposeful) and is now allowing corporations to loot the Treasury.
In the end, the stimulus bill was exactly what we feared it would be. A rushed giveaway to blood-sucking corporations accomplished by the GOP holding the $1200 pittance given to regular people hostage so they could ram through what will likely be the largest upward transfer of wealth ever.
The PPP system was a joke. Hardly any of it went to small businesses. The $1200 went to landlords and utility bills. And Trump fired the person in charge of the oversight within days. This is a hijacking. He created an unprecedented crisis with his mismanagement (which may have been purposeful) and is now allowing corporations to loot the Treasury.
Well, in the government's defense, there isn't anything in the world more of a strategic necessity than oil. It's a raw material feedstock for so many things that's it's virtually indespensible now. Allowing the domestic companies to fail would just lead to nightmares later. Or maybe you'd rather we get it from Russia?
As an American, I've got to let you know this is totally wrong. Completely wrong. You are wildly wrong saying that regulations are why healthcare is expensive in America.
It's because there are NOT ENOUGH regulations. There are a lot of middle men who drive up prices. You see there are private insurance companies, drug makers, CEOs, for profit hospitals, insurance companies, investors, advertising people etc all want to make the most money they can from healthcare. (...)
You don't fear Coronavirus, well good for you. You realize that you can get it and then get your mother, father, child, sick and kill them right? You probably didn't realize that because you might not have been thinking about other people. They totally exist.
If health insurance companies are soo profitable, why not everyone is desperate trying to open one? Maybe because the regulations makes it impossible.
As for Coronavirus, i life in the most violent country of the world. Is more likely that i would die from any other thing than this virus.
Yep, if it was true that government regulation made healthcare expensive, we'd expect healthcare costs to be even more expensive in Canada, France, Germany, and the UK. We see the opposite.
US has one of the most regulated healthcare in the world.
In the end, the stimulus bill was exactly what we feared it would be. A rushed giveaway to blood-sucking corporations accomplished by the GOP holding the $1200 pittance given to regular people hostage so they could ram through what will likely be the largest upward transfer of wealth ever.
The PPP system was a joke. Hardly any of it went to small businesses. The $1200 went to landlords and utility bills. And Trump fired the person in charge of the oversight within days. This is a hijacking. He created an unprecedented crisis with his mismanagement (which may have been purposeful) and is now allowing corporations to loot the Treasury.
Well, in the government's defense, there isn't anything in the world more of a strategic necessity than oil. It's a raw material feedstock for so many things that's it's virtually indespensible now. Allowing the domestic companies to fail would just lead to nightmares later. Or maybe you'd rather we get it from Russia?
The lesson from this is clear. If an individual person runs out of money because of external events, we'll give you enough money to cover one month of bills. If you are a corporation who runs out of money because of external events, you have access to unlimited funds.
In the end, the stimulus bill was exactly what we feared it would be. A rushed giveaway to blood-sucking corporations accomplished by the GOP holding the $1200 pittance given to regular people hostage so they could ram through what will likely be the largest upward transfer of wealth ever.
The PPP system was a joke. Hardly any of it went to small businesses. The $1200 went to landlords and utility bills. And Trump fired the person in charge of the oversight within days. This is a hijacking. He created an unprecedented crisis with his mismanagement (which may have been purposeful) and is now allowing corporations to loot the Treasury.
Well, in the government's defense, there isn't anything in the world more of a strategic necessity than oil. It's a raw material feedstock for so many things that's it's virtually indespensible now. Allowing the domestic companies to fail would just lead to nightmares later. Or maybe you'd rather we get it from Russia?
The lesson from this is clear. If an individual person runs out of money because of external events, we'll give you enough money to cover one month of bills. If you are a corporation who runs out of money because of external events, you have access to unlimited funds.
The government CAUSED this event so yeah, they're responsible for bailing them out. Would you rather the corporations say 'fuck you government' we're not shutting down unless you send troops? I hate to say this out loud, but it's true, none of these corporations would go bankrupt if 1-2% of the population died. However, they're all in danger of insolvency if they're completely shut down for months! I'll go look up how many major corporations went bankrupt during the 1918 pandemic. Might be an interesting read. Will post my findings later...
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
There needs to be a serious mea culpa on this. We bought 29 million doses of this shit, used senior citizens as lab rats, and it did NOTHING. You'll notice Trump hasn't mentioned the drug for at least a week. Guess he was told about the numbers from the VA before the press got ahold of it today. These numbers would actually indicate it may have killed people who might otherwise have pulled through. This is a MUCH larger study than the one that was hyped high and low that took place in France. Over 10x as large in fact:
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Read the article "Market opponents have not only claimed there are too many doctors but also too many hospital beds. In 1972, the federal government started restricting the supply of hospitals with certificate-of-need (followed by repeal of the Hospital Survey and Construction Act in 1974). Alaska House of Representatives member Bob Lynn argued the true motivation was "large hospitals are ... trying to make money by eliminating competition" under the pretext of using monopoly profits to provide better patient care. From 1965 to 1989, the number of hospital beds and occupied beds (per population) declined by 44 and 15 percent, respectively (Friedman 1992)." https://mises.org/wire/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive
Other good part
"The obvious solution is to increase the supply of physicians and hospitals to meet demand. Unfortunately, if medical schools doubled their class sizes by next year, it could still take over 20 years to achieve the number of doctors relative to population found in continental Western Europe. "!
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Yeah, the big bad boss. Let's stick it to him and shut down his business! Oh wait, he still has his money. What about the thousands of workers that lose their jobs? Not any answer for that? I guess they should just storm the boss's house and steal all of his shit. That'll last a real long time split between thousands of people won't it? Well, I guess they can just get another job. Oh wait, all of the jobs are gone now. I guess they'll just have split up the boss's land and plant their own vegetables. Great plan...
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Yeah, the big bad boss. Let's stick it to him and shut down his business! Oh wait, he still has his money. What about the thousands of workers that lose their jobs? Not any answer for that? I guess they should just storm the boss's house and steal all of his shit. That'll last a real long time split between thousands of people won't it? Well, I guess they can just get another job. Oh wait, all of the jobs are gone now. I guess they'll just have split up the boss's land and plant their own vegetables. Great plan...
Apparently he doesn't have any money because he needs the "handouts" he's been bitching about other people getting his entire life. As I keep saying, an individual is supposed to have an emergency fund to last them 3 months, but a BUSINESS is exempt from this and apparently isn't expected to have liquid assets that can even last them a full two-week payroll cycle. I'm simply turning their Chamber of Commerce bullshit back on them. Why don't they have emergency funds and contingency plans?? Every normal worker was expected to. It's even LESS excusable for corporations that are not just making, but PROFITING billions of dollars a year.
The fact is, lots of poor people have events every month that are a shock to their system the way COVID-19 is to businesses. They have always been told they are lazy and to suck it up. They should have thought ahead, tired harder, made more of themselves. Same logic applies to businesses. Their motto has been "shit happens, deal with it." Well, shit happened to you. Now take your medicine. You squeezed you employees dry by paying them as little as possible, yet you still have NOTHING on hand to get you over a rough patch. All consequence and suffering is supposed to be transferred to the worker, and all profit and reward will go to the owner. The game is rigged.
You know more about my personal work situation then others. I could sit here and CLAIM I put myself in that situation and deserve to be ok financially during this period based on choices I made, but the unvarnished truth is it was nothing but dumb luck and circumstance that put me in this situation. It's the same for everyone. Dumb luck and circumstance. Yet that isn't the rhetoric we are sold.
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Yeah, the big bad boss. Let's stick it to him and shut down his business! Oh wait, he still has his money. What about the thousands of workers that lose their jobs? Not any answer for that? I guess they should just storm the boss's house and steal all of his shit. That'll last a real long time split between thousands of people won't it? Well, I guess they can just get another job. Oh wait, all of the jobs are gone now. I guess they'll just have split up the boss's land and plant their own vegetables. Great plan...
Apparently he doesn't have any money because he needs the "handouts" he's been bitching about other people getting his entire life. As I keep saying, an individual is supposed to have an emergency fund to last them 3 months, but a BUSINESS is exempt from this and apparently isn't expected to have liquid assets that can even last them a full two-week payroll cycle. I'm simply turning their Chamber of Commerce bullshit back on them. Why don't they have emergency funds and contingency plans?? Every normal worker was expected to. It's even LESS excusable for corporations that are not just making, but PROFITING billions of dollars a year.
The fact is, lots of poor people have events every month that are a shock to their system the way COVID-19 is to businesses. They have always been told they are lazy and to suck it up. They should have thought ahead, tired harder, made more of themselves. Same logic applies to businesses. Their motto has been "shit happens, deal with it." Well, shit happened to you. Now take your medicine.
Here is your error in thinking. The boss has his money. The corporation does not. The two are separate. When a corporation goes bankrupt, the CEO does not go bankrupt. The shareholders will probably lose money (although probably not as much as you think) but mostly it'll just screw over anybody who the corporation owes money to.
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Read the article "Market opponents have not only claimed there are too many doctors but also too many hospital beds. In 1972, the federal government started restricting the supply of hospitals with certificate-of-need (followed by repeal of the Hospital Survey and Construction Act in 1974). Alaska House of Representatives member Bob Lynn argued the true motivation was "large hospitals are ... trying to make money by eliminating competition" under the pretext of using monopoly profits to provide better patient care. From 1965 to 1989, the number of hospital beds and occupied beds (per population) declined by 44 and 15 percent, respectively (Friedman 1992)." https://mises.org/wire/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive
Other good part
"The obvious solution is to increase the supply of physicians and hospitals to meet demand. Unfortunately, if medical schools doubled their class sizes by next year, it could still take over 20 years to achieve the number of doctors relative to population found in continental Western Europe. "!
This isnt arguing what you think it's arguing. This is a conservative policy put in place to put an emphasis on making money for the hospital ahead of patient care. It's the application of resource efficiency capitalism applied to a vital human need.
Those arent the kind of regulations that people who want more government in healthcare want. They're the opposite. I want the government to step in and prevent profiteering. That's a regulation, and it would bring costs down.
What I want more than that is to emulate the healthcare system in other nations that have significantly better quality of care for a smaller cost. I dont mind if my taxes go up in the process. Healthcare is a human right.
Also - those links you've cited - are from libertarian think-tanks. They're incredibly biased, and not super useful unless you do a LOT of adjusting for the bias of their message.
Lastly - I find it interesting that the libertarian here is arguing for company bailouts.
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Yeah, the big bad boss. Let's stick it to him and shut down his business! Oh wait, he still has his money. What about the thousands of workers that lose their jobs? Not any answer for that? I guess they should just storm the boss's house and steal all of his shit. That'll last a real long time split between thousands of people won't it? Well, I guess they can just get another job. Oh wait, all of the jobs are gone now. I guess they'll just have split up the boss's land and plant their own vegetables. Great plan...
Apparently he doesn't have any money because he needs the "handouts" he's been bitching about other people getting his entire life. As I keep saying, an individual is supposed to have an emergency fund to last them 3 months, but a BUSINESS is exempt from this and apparently isn't expected to have liquid assets that can even last them a full two-week payroll cycle. I'm simply turning their Chamber of Commerce bullshit back on them. Why don't they have emergency funds and contingency plans?? Every normal worker was expected to. It's even LESS excusable for corporations that are not just making, but PROFITING billions of dollars a year.
The fact is, lots of poor people have events every month that are a shock to their system the way COVID-19 is to businesses. They have always been told they are lazy and to suck it up. They should have thought ahead, tired harder, made more of themselves. Same logic applies to businesses. Their motto has been "shit happens, deal with it." Well, shit happened to you. Now take your medicine.
Here is your error in thinking. The boss has his money. The corporation does not. The two are separate. When a corporation goes bankrupt, the CEO does not go bankrupt. The shareholders will probably lose money (although probably not as much as you think) but mostly it'll just screw over anybody who the corporation owes money to.
I understand the reality, just pissed about the double standard and venting.
(...)
This isnt arguing what you think it's arguing. This is a conservative policy put in place to put an emphasis on making money for the hospital ahead of patient care. It's the application of resource efficiency capitalism applied to a vital human need.
Those arent the kind of regulations that people who want more government in healthcare want. They're the opposite. I want the government to step in and prevent profiteering. That's a regulation, and it would bring costs down.
What I want more than that is to emulate the healthcare system in other nations that have significantly better quality of care for a smaller cost. I dont mind if my taxes go up in the process. Healthcare is a human right.
Also - those links you've cited - are from libertarian think-tanks. They're incredibly biased, and not super useful unless you do a LOT of adjusting for the bias of their message.
Lastly - I find it interesting that the libertarian here is arguing for company bailouts.
Nobody is asking for company bailouts. Only that the state should put less entry barriers and less intervention. Doens't matter if the interventionism was made by "right wingers" or "left wingers", interventionism is always bad. And the cause of the high cost on healthcare on US dates 1970 regulations. There is no short therm solution. You can't pass a regulation to negate gravity. Same with supply and demand.
Due the regulations, supply is extremely limited and demand is too high. Limit profits will only serve to disincentive more people from dealing with all existing regulations. Other problem of US is that US has tough intellectual propriety laws. IT causes the overprices on drugs. If you had money to build a hospital, would you deal with all insane bureaucracy and not expect a huge profit?
(...)
This isnt arguing what you think it's arguing. This is a conservative policy put in place to put an emphasis on making money for the hospital ahead of patient care. It's the application of resource efficiency capitalism applied to a vital human need.
Those arent the kind of regulations that people who want more government in healthcare want. They're the opposite. I want the government to step in and prevent profiteering. That's a regulation, and it would bring costs down.
What I want more than that is to emulate the healthcare system in other nations that have significantly better quality of care for a smaller cost. I dont mind if my taxes go up in the process. Healthcare is a human right.
Also - those links you've cited - are from libertarian think-tanks. They're incredibly biased, and not super useful unless you do a LOT of adjusting for the bias of their message.
Lastly - I find it interesting that the libertarian here is arguing for company bailouts.
Nobody is asking for company bailouts. Only that the state should put less entry barriers and less intervention. Doens't matter if the interventionism was made by "right wingers" or "left wingers", interventionism is always bad. And the cause of the high cost on healthcare on US dates 1970 regulations. There is no short therm solution. You can't pass a regulation to negate gravity. Same with supply and demand.
Due the regulations, supply is extremely limited and demand is too high. Limit profits will only serve to disincentive more people from dealing with all existing regulations. Other problem of US is that US has tough intellectual propriety laws. IT causes the overprices on drugs. If you had money to build a hospital, would you deal with all insane bureaucracy and not expect a huge profit?
Well A - I was referring to @Balrog99 about defending bailouts (And that's not a shot btw - I agree with some measure of bailouts are necessary. However, I would expect conditions to apply to ensure that this isnt just us making the rich far richer. The emphasis of protection should be upon the majority of the workforce and not upon the business owners).
B - the rest of that is mostly untrue, and as has been pointed out by several posters in the last page and half of this thread.
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Read the article "Market opponents have not only claimed there are too many doctors but also too many hospital beds. In 1972, the federal government started restricting the supply of hospitals with certificate-of-need (followed by repeal of the Hospital Survey and Construction Act in 1974). Alaska House of Representatives member Bob Lynn argued the true motivation was "large hospitals are ... trying to make money by eliminating competition" under the pretext of using monopoly profits to provide better patient care. From 1965 to 1989, the number of hospital beds and occupied beds (per population) declined by 44 and 15 percent, respectively (Friedman 1992)." https://mises.org/wire/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive
Other good part
"The obvious solution is to increase the supply of physicians and hospitals to meet demand. Unfortunately, if medical schools doubled their class sizes by next year, it could still take over 20 years to achieve the number of doctors relative to population found in continental Western Europe. "!
That article is only about costs in the US. Given the cost of healthcare in the US is at least double what you would expect based on other countries, it's hardly surprising the authors are able to point to high rates of health cost inflation there. However, those costs have nothing to do with the quantity of regulation - as has been said there are plenty of other countries where medical care is at least as highly regulated. Rather it's to do with the content of regulation - more specifically, setting up a system designed to reward what would be classed as unethical practice by healthcare providers in other western countries.
The article makes a big play of the fact that the US did not expand supply of healthcare at the same time they expanded demand through Medicare and Medicaid. The reason for that is pretty obvious given the structural flaws in the US system. That is designed to allow providers to make as much money as possible from individual patients. Medicare and Medicaid patients (for whom the government pay relatively low rates) are thus much less attractive than private patients. That also explains why so many millions of citizens in the US are not covered by healthcare at all - the ones not covered are the ones with the least money and therefore they are not attractive to providers who make money by charging patients.
The number of doctors in the US is not as comparatively low as the article suggests. By international comparisons based on population the US certainly is at the low end of western countries. However, you need to take into account that there are considerable numbers of people uninsured and under-insured. Adjusting for that, the US number of doctors is around the mid-point for western countries.
Edit: I see this was already covered while I was reading about it - oh well .
The UK also has one of the most regulated healthcare systems in the world - and it's FREE for EVERYONE.
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Yeah, the big bad boss. Let's stick it to him and shut down his business! Oh wait, he still has his money. What about the thousands of workers that lose their jobs? Not any answer for that? I guess they should just storm the boss's house and steal all of his shit. That'll last a real long time split between thousands of people won't it? Well, I guess they can just get another job. Oh wait, all of the jobs are gone now. I guess they'll just have split up the boss's land and plant their own vegetables. Great plan...
Apparently he doesn't have any money because he needs the "handouts" he's been bitching about other people getting his entire life. As I keep saying, an individual is supposed to have an emergency fund to last them 3 months, but a BUSINESS is exempt from this and apparently isn't expected to have liquid assets that can even last them a full two-week payroll cycle. I'm simply turning their Chamber of Commerce bullshit back on them. Why don't they have emergency funds and contingency plans?? Every normal worker was expected to. It's even LESS excusable for corporations that are not just making, but PROFITING billions of dollars a year.
The fact is, lots of poor people have events every month that are a shock to their system the way COVID-19 is to businesses. They have always been told they are lazy and to suck it up. They should have thought ahead, tired harder, made more of themselves. Same logic applies to businesses. Their motto has been "shit happens, deal with it." Well, shit happened to you. Now take your medicine.
Here is your error in thinking. The boss has his money. The corporation does not. The two are separate. When a corporation goes bankrupt, the CEO does not go bankrupt. The shareholders will probably lose money (although probably not as much as you think) but mostly it'll just screw over anybody who the corporation owes money to.
I understand the reality, just pissed about the double standard and venting.
Yeah, it's kind of an f'ed up System but it's still the best I've seen. If it's any consolation I've went way to the left on healthcare since actually listening to Bernie. There needs to be more checks on our brand of capitalism.
I'm more of a social libertarian than a true libertarian. @Mathsorcerer is our resident libertarian. I think I'm probably closer to plaid than I am to red or blue anymore. Socially libertarian, fiscally conservative but can actually see the necessity of some of the progressive platform. No wonder I'm so fed up with our two party system in this country...
This data is a bit old (2015) so forgive that, but it's all taken from the World Bank, I don't have the energy to dig through the data now. The health spending figure is all health care spending, public+private.
It's notable that the US spends an enormous amount of money per capita on healthcare, but on the aggregate does worse than comparable countries. This fact is doubly so because the US actually has a slightly higher per capita income than most of these countries.
I think it's important to maybe test one's hypotheses against objective data once in awhile. If you're constantly pulling arguments and data from only ideologically committed outlets, you are doing yourself a giant disservice. You're not actually learning anything new about the world.
How does that support your argument? Chile is 34th on that list, behind all the major Western European countries - who all spend much less on healthcare than the US, but achieve better results despite all having lots of regulations ...
The GDP per capta of Chile is also higher than a lot of western european countries.
Correlation does not imply causation.
The argument here is relatively straight forward:
Regulations can be good or bad. Child labor laws are regulations on industry, and they're nearly uniformly evaluated as a good thing.
Since the government is the source of regulations upon a nation's healthcare system, we can comfortably make the argument that having a government run healthcare means there will be more regulations and not fewer regulations put in place to control the healthcare industry.
There are plenty (PLENTY) of countries with healthcare that is run by their government (See the NHS in the UK).
On average - they cost less. They work better (As determined by people's favorability with their healthcare coverage).
Simply said - the argument that "Regulations in healthcare = bad" is completely false.
Here's a prime example of why the healthcare system in the US is broken. In the middle of a pandemic, one of the largest healthcare companies in Michigan is laying people off. Not only that, they 'temporarily' shuttered one of their hospitals in Detroit. Detroit for God's sake! Not some facility in the boonies of the Upper Peninsula, but a hospital in the heart of one of the hardest hit cities in the country!
I strongly agree that "Correlation does not imply causation" This is why countries who had poor income, poor life expectancy and managed to become better are better examples than countries who are rich from centuries ago. Chile and Singapore for example, was among the poorest countries compared to the rest of the region and the world. Now they are developed countries.
But seems that this only applies one way around. The question is; why US spending more in healthcare has worst healthcare? As i've explained, because entry barriers limit the supply and there are no short therm solution. Also, not all regulations are the same. Demanding that you have a fire extinguisher by law is completely different than forcing diversity hiring in a area where there are few minority graduate professionals.
And Chile having 80 years of of live expectancy(Sweden is 82 years) despite receiving a lot of illegal immigrants from Colombia, Venezuela(...) and passing for a lot of hard times on the last century is extremely surprising.
The GDP per capta of Chile is also higher than a lot of western european countries.
Chile has a per capita income of $16k (2018). UK: 43k, France: 41k, Germany: 47k, Czech: 23k Spain: 30k, Portugal: 23k Italy: 34k, hell, even Greece: $20k
I wish you would take the time to fact check yourself before posting misinformation, especially on something so easy to check. It would make us more ready to accept your more complex, and less easily verified arguments.
The GDP per capta of Chile is also higher than a lot of western european countries.
Chile has a per capita income of $16k (2018). UK: 43k, France: 41k, Germany: 47k, Czech: 23k Spain: 30k, Portugal: 23k Italy: 34k, hell, even Greece: $20k
I wish you would take the time to fact check yourself before posting misinformation, especially on something so easy to check. It would make us more ready to accept your more complex, and less easily verified arguments.
I should have said western but
Croatia = 14,949
Poland = 14,901
Bulgaria = 9,518
Comments
Yep, if it was true that government regulation made healthcare expensive, we'd expect healthcare costs to be even more expensive in Canada, France, Germany, and the UK. We see the opposite.
Well if this is your outlook that's certainly fine. If you are willing to do your part great. A lot of people aren't team players.
A lot of these people demanding that the lockdown end so people go back to work so they can get a haircut are only thinking about themselves. And I've seen people say that "I'm young and strong so covid-19 doesn't bother me" and acting reckless and refusing to wear masks.
In the end, the stimulus bill was exactly what we feared it would be. A rushed giveaway to blood-sucking corporations accomplished by the GOP holding the $1200 pittance given to regular people hostage so they could ram through what will likely be the largest upward transfer of wealth ever.
The PPP system was a joke. Hardly any of it went to small businesses. The $1200 went to landlords and utility bills. And Trump fired the person in charge of the oversight within days. This is a hijacking. He created an unprecedented crisis with his mismanagement (which may have been purposeful) and is now allowing corporations to loot the Treasury.
Well, in the government's defense, there isn't anything in the world more of a strategic necessity than oil. It's a raw material feedstock for so many things that's it's virtually indespensible now. Allowing the domestic companies to fail would just lead to nightmares later. Or maybe you'd rather we get it from Russia?
If health insurance companies are soo profitable, why not everyone is desperate trying to open one? Maybe because the regulations makes it impossible.
As for Coronavirus, i life in the most violent country of the world. Is more likely that i would die from any other thing than this virus.
US has one of the most regulated healthcare in the world.
A good article
COVID-19 Is Forcing Governments to Admit Their Regulations Aren’t Really Necessary
https://austrian.economicblogs.org/jay-taylor-media/2020/institute-covid-19-forcing-governments-regulations-arent/
How Government Regulations Made Healthcare So Expensive
https://mises.org/wire/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive
Here is a graph from the article above
The lesson from this is clear. If an individual person runs out of money because of external events, we'll give you enough money to cover one month of bills. If you are a corporation who runs out of money because of external events, you have access to unlimited funds.
The government CAUSED this event so yeah, they're responsible for bailing them out. Would you rather the corporations say 'fuck you government' we're not shutting down unless you send troops? I hate to say this out loud, but it's true, none of these corporations would go bankrupt if 1-2% of the population died. However, they're all in danger of insolvency if they're completely shut down for months! I'll go look up how many major corporations went bankrupt during the 1918 pandemic. Might be an interesting read. Will post my findings later...
I'd like to know what regulations we should get rid of to make things easier for businesses in the US. Maybe remove the requirement for fire extinguishers and eye-wash stations for starters. Then we can remove the need for safety harnesses for working at heights (and as someone who has worked in a tire plant who WAS 20 feet above the ground constantly on a modified forklift, I can tell you first-hand they didn't provide any even WITH the requirement). What else should we get rid of to save our bosses a couple extra grand so they can build a swimming pool in their backyard??
Read the article "Market opponents have not only claimed there are too many doctors but also too many hospital beds. In 1972, the federal government started restricting the supply of hospitals with certificate-of-need (followed by repeal of the Hospital Survey and Construction Act in 1974). Alaska House of Representatives member Bob Lynn argued the true motivation was "large hospitals are ... trying to make money by eliminating competition" under the pretext of using monopoly profits to provide better patient care. From 1965 to 1989, the number of hospital beds and occupied beds (per population) declined by 44 and 15 percent, respectively (Friedman 1992)." https://mises.org/wire/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive
Other good part
"The obvious solution is to increase the supply of physicians and hospitals to meet demand. Unfortunately, if medical schools doubled their class sizes by next year, it could still take over 20 years to achieve the number of doctors relative to population found in continental Western Europe. "!
Yeah, the big bad boss. Let's stick it to him and shut down his business! Oh wait, he still has his money. What about the thousands of workers that lose their jobs? Not any answer for that? I guess they should just storm the boss's house and steal all of his shit. That'll last a real long time split between thousands of people won't it? Well, I guess they can just get another job. Oh wait, all of the jobs are gone now. I guess they'll just have split up the boss's land and plant their own vegetables. Great plan...
Apparently he doesn't have any money because he needs the "handouts" he's been bitching about other people getting his entire life. As I keep saying, an individual is supposed to have an emergency fund to last them 3 months, but a BUSINESS is exempt from this and apparently isn't expected to have liquid assets that can even last them a full two-week payroll cycle. I'm simply turning their Chamber of Commerce bullshit back on them. Why don't they have emergency funds and contingency plans?? Every normal worker was expected to. It's even LESS excusable for corporations that are not just making, but PROFITING billions of dollars a year.
The fact is, lots of poor people have events every month that are a shock to their system the way COVID-19 is to businesses. They have always been told they are lazy and to suck it up. They should have thought ahead, tired harder, made more of themselves. Same logic applies to businesses. Their motto has been "shit happens, deal with it." Well, shit happened to you. Now take your medicine. You squeezed you employees dry by paying them as little as possible, yet you still have NOTHING on hand to get you over a rough patch. All consequence and suffering is supposed to be transferred to the worker, and all profit and reward will go to the owner. The game is rigged.
You know more about my personal work situation then others. I could sit here and CLAIM I put myself in that situation and deserve to be ok financially during this period based on choices I made, but the unvarnished truth is it was nothing but dumb luck and circumstance that put me in this situation. It's the same for everyone. Dumb luck and circumstance. Yet that isn't the rhetoric we are sold.
Here is your error in thinking. The boss has his money. The corporation does not. The two are separate. When a corporation goes bankrupt, the CEO does not go bankrupt. The shareholders will probably lose money (although probably not as much as you think) but mostly it'll just screw over anybody who the corporation owes money to.
This isnt arguing what you think it's arguing. This is a conservative policy put in place to put an emphasis on making money for the hospital ahead of patient care. It's the application of resource efficiency capitalism applied to a vital human need.
Those arent the kind of regulations that people who want more government in healthcare want. They're the opposite. I want the government to step in and prevent profiteering. That's a regulation, and it would bring costs down.
What I want more than that is to emulate the healthcare system in other nations that have significantly better quality of care for a smaller cost. I dont mind if my taxes go up in the process. Healthcare is a human right.
Also - those links you've cited - are from libertarian think-tanks. They're incredibly biased, and not super useful unless you do a LOT of adjusting for the bias of their message.
Lastly - I find it interesting that the libertarian here is arguing for company bailouts.
I understand the reality, just pissed about the double standard and venting.
Nobody is asking for company bailouts. Only that the state should put less entry barriers and less intervention. Doens't matter if the interventionism was made by "right wingers" or "left wingers", interventionism is always bad. And the cause of the high cost on healthcare on US dates 1970 regulations. There is no short therm solution. You can't pass a regulation to negate gravity. Same with supply and demand.
Due the regulations, supply is extremely limited and demand is too high. Limit profits will only serve to disincentive more people from dealing with all existing regulations. Other problem of US is that US has tough intellectual propriety laws. IT causes the overprices on drugs. If you had money to build a hospital, would you deal with all insane bureaucracy and not expect a huge profit?
Well A - I was referring to @Balrog99 about defending bailouts (And that's not a shot btw - I agree with some measure of bailouts are necessary. However, I would expect conditions to apply to ensure that this isnt just us making the rich far richer. The emphasis of protection should be upon the majority of the workforce and not upon the business owners).
B - the rest of that is mostly untrue, and as has been pointed out by several posters in the last page and half of this thread.
That article is only about costs in the US. Given the cost of healthcare in the US is at least double what you would expect based on other countries, it's hardly surprising the authors are able to point to high rates of health cost inflation there. However, those costs have nothing to do with the quantity of regulation - as has been said there are plenty of other countries where medical care is at least as highly regulated. Rather it's to do with the content of regulation - more specifically, setting up a system designed to reward what would be classed as unethical practice by healthcare providers in other western countries.
The article makes a big play of the fact that the US did not expand supply of healthcare at the same time they expanded demand through Medicare and Medicaid. The reason for that is pretty obvious given the structural flaws in the US system. That is designed to allow providers to make as much money as possible from individual patients. Medicare and Medicaid patients (for whom the government pay relatively low rates) are thus much less attractive than private patients. That also explains why so many millions of citizens in the US are not covered by healthcare at all - the ones not covered are the ones with the least money and therefore they are not attractive to providers who make money by charging patients.
The number of doctors in the US is not as comparatively low as the article suggests. By international comparisons based on population the US certainly is at the low end of western countries. However, you need to take into account that there are considerable numbers of people uninsured and under-insured. Adjusting for that, the US number of doctors is around the mid-point for western countries.
Edit: I see this was already covered while I was reading about it - oh well
Yeah, it's kind of an f'ed up System but it's still the best I've seen. If it's any consolation I've went way to the left on healthcare since actually listening to Bernie. There needs to be more checks on our brand of capitalism.
I'm more of a social libertarian than a true libertarian. @Mathsorcerer is our resident libertarian. I think I'm probably closer to plaid than I am to red or blue anymore. Socially libertarian, fiscally conservative but can actually see the necessity of some of the progressive platform. No wonder I'm so fed up with our two party system in this country...
This data is a bit old (2015) so forgive that, but it's all taken from the World Bank, I don't have the energy to dig through the data now. The health spending figure is all health care spending, public+private.
It's notable that the US spends an enormous amount of money per capita on healthcare, but on the aggregate does worse than comparable countries. This fact is doubly so because the US actually has a slightly higher per capita income than most of these countries.
I think it's important to maybe test one's hypotheses against objective data once in awhile. If you're constantly pulling arguments and data from only ideologically committed outlets, you are doing yourself a giant disservice. You're not actually learning anything new about the world.
The GDP per capta of Chile is also higher than a lot of western european countries.
How does that support your argument? Chile is 34th on that list, behind all the major Western European countries - who all spend much less on healthcare than the US, but achieve better results despite all having lots of regulations ...
Correlation does not imply causation.
The argument here is relatively straight forward:
Regulations can be good or bad. Child labor laws are regulations on industry, and they're nearly uniformly evaluated as a good thing.
Since the government is the source of regulations upon a nation's healthcare system, we can comfortably make the argument that having a government run healthcare means there will be more regulations and not fewer regulations put in place to control the healthcare industry.
There are plenty (PLENTY) of countries with healthcare that is run by their government (See the NHS in the UK).
On average - they cost less. They work better (As determined by people's favorability with their healthcare coverage).
Simply said - the argument that "Regulations in healthcare = bad" is completely false.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox2detroit.com/news/beaumont-health-temporarily-laying-off-2475-employees-permanently-eliminating-450-jobs.amp
But seems that this only applies one way around. The question is; why US spending more in healthcare has worst healthcare? As i've explained, because entry barriers limit the supply and there are no short therm solution. Also, not all regulations are the same. Demanding that you have a fire extinguisher by law is completely different than forcing diversity hiring in a area where there are few minority graduate professionals.
And Chile having 80 years of of live expectancy(Sweden is 82 years) despite receiving a lot of illegal immigrants from Colombia, Venezuela(...) and passing for a lot of hard times on the last century is extremely surprising.
Chile has a per capita income of $16k (2018). UK: 43k, France: 41k, Germany: 47k, Czech: 23k Spain: 30k, Portugal: 23k Italy: 34k, hell, even Greece: $20k
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ny.gdp.pcap.cd
I wish you would take the time to fact check yourself before posting misinformation, especially on something so easy to check. It would make us more ready to accept your more complex, and less easily verified arguments.
I should have said western but
Croatia = 14,949
Poland = 14,901
Bulgaria = 9,518
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita
Anyway, a country with 1/3 of the US GDP per capita has higher life expectancy than US...