4 ms·
What does this have to do with socialism? How does drug companies charging for an arm and a leg or insurance companies paying for it and raising premiums relate
by suneilp 11y ago
What does this have to do with socialism? How does drug companies charging for an arm and a leg or insurance companies paying for it and raising premiums relate to socialism?
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- petilon 11y agoSingle-payer is socialized medicine.
- CamperBob2 11y agoIt's all socialized medicine. We all have the same bodies. The only question is whether we get what we pay for. In the US, we don't. The idea that "insurance" is somehow applicable to a scenario where essentially every participant will need to file multiple expensive claims is extremely silly.
- necessity 11y agoHe wants the tax payer to pay for it instead of insurance owners.
- jjoonathan 11y agoBecause single-payer systems have enough bargaining power to get much better deals from drug companies both theoretically and empirically. A few years ago when I was taking a health care policy class and actually looking through the stats, drugs cost ~2X in the US vs G20 averages. Not sure what it is now, but I would be very surprised if it had shrunk. It's one of the reasons for this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_%28PPP%29_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea... Others: having one predominant type of insurance nationwide cuts down on administrative costs (figuring out different plans costs consumers and hospitals money, these costs aren't minimized by competition), the cost of 1/sqrt(n) risk, and "bandwagon" risk (if a market plan is particularly advantageous for any given group of people, those people all sign up and "sink the ship," whereas national boundaries largely prevent such movement).