5 ms·

I do wonder if insurance paying for everything under the sun is part of the issue. I remember hearing talk of medicine for some chronic conditions being availab

I do wonder if insurance paying for everything under the sun is part of the issue. I remember hearing talk of medicine for some chronic conditions being available over the counter (migraines, diabetes, asthma, etc.). The way I see it, my car insurance only covers a limited number of issues. Unfortunately, health insurance has historically come on the wrong side of things (e.g.: pre-existing conditions BS)

lotsofpulp 8y ago
Health insurance in the US isn’t insurance. It’s a scheme to try and spread around the costs of providing healthcare to everyone, and everyone tries to pass the buck to those with the least power in the system. Large employers with young, healthy office workers win, and poorer taxpayers who don’t have health insurance or independent contractors who have very little power lose. The people who have nothing get medical care, but it’s not ideal, but they don’t have anything to pay with either. So try not to be in the middle - the ones with enough assets to take, but not enough to defend against having them taken (e.g. not being part of a group that can negotiate out of it). God forbid we actually come out and say we, as a country, want to support each other. A large portion of our fellow citizens would rather play this game of hot potato, but don’t have the balls to turn poor people away from the emergency room and tell them to die.
- ddingus 8y ago
  >God forbid we actually come out and say we, as a country, want to support each other. A large portion of our fellow citizens would rather play this game of hot potato, but don’t have the balls to turn poor people away from the emergency room and tell them to die. This. If we can't actually commit to taking care of our own, just who are we as a nation?
- scarface74 8y ago
  Health insurance in the US isn’t insurance. It’s a scheme to try and spread around the costs of providing healthcare to everyone That by definition is insurance.... https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/insurance.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/insurance.asp
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    The key difference is that the recipients are also others who pay for insurance, whereas in US health insurance, it’s a game of see which provider can collect more from which payer (government, insurance, individual) to make up for the losses on those that can’t pay. Also, chronic and old age health issues don’t even seem like insurable risks, like getting 20 year term life insurance for a 90 year old. You would basically just be paying for someone else to manage your premium money and take a cut before giving it back to you since the insured risk is inevitable and has to be priced accordingly.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      The key difference is that the recipients are also others who pay for insurance, whereas in US health insurance, it’s a game of see which provider can collect more from which payer (government, insurance, individual) to make up for the losses on those that can’t pay. Health costs between what you pay as an individual and what you pay as part of a group is just like anything else. You couldn’t buy the same parts for a computer at the same price as Dell. Dell can get bulk discounts you can’t. A health care provider is willing to charge less for care per person for a group of people through an insurance carrier than you individually. If you have ever signed up for term life insurance, you usually get a fixed premium up to a certain age, and then premiums skyrocket as you get older. You theoretically can price life insurance for a 90 year old based on actuarial data. The cost will be prohibitively expensive.
      - lotsofpulp 8y ago
        An individual isn't paying increased costs for parts for computer because the merchant was forced to sell parts to someone for free. A merchant might be making less on the marginal profit to a large vendor (or accept slight loss to benefit from the marketing of having a large customer), but I don't see it quite as bad for the little guy as it is in US healthcare. Edit: I understand the analogy of a bigger buyer means better prices, but it's a little different too because the merchant of the computer parts can't bill the losses to the government who then pays via increased taxes. The pricing differences are astronomical too between what prices are given to people who want to pay cash versus via insurance or Medicare or Medicaid, it makes no sense. I see the US healthcare market as the middle and lower middle class spending a larger portion of their wealth subsidizing the poor class while the upper middle and upper class spend a smaller portion of their wealth subsidizing the poor class because they can negotiate out of it, and they probably get better care too. And this is all exacerbated because employers get to deduct health insurance premiums from taxes, while independent contractors buying insurance independently don't.

lotsofpulp 8y ago

Health insurance in the US isn’t insurance. It’s a scheme to try and spread around the costs of providing healthcare to everyone, and everyone tries to pass the buck to those with the least power in the system. Large employers with young, healthy office workers win, and poorer taxpayers who don’t have health insurance or independent contractors who have very little power lose. The people who have nothing get medical care, but it’s not ideal, but they don’t have anything to pay with either. So try not to be in the middle - the ones with enough assets to take, but not enough to defend against having them taken (e.g. not being part of a group that can negotiate out of it). God forbid we actually come out and say we, as a country, want to support each other. A large portion of our fellow citizens would rather play this game of hot potato, but don’t have the balls to turn poor people away from the emergency room and tell them to die.

ddingus 8y ago
>God forbid we actually come out and say we, as a country, want to support each other. A large portion of our fellow citizens would rather play this game of hot potato, but don’t have the balls to turn poor people away from the emergency room and tell them to die. This. If we can't actually commit to taking care of our own, just who are we as a nation?
scarface74 8y ago
Health insurance in the US isn’t insurance. It’s a scheme to try and spread around the costs of providing healthcare to everyone That by definition is insurance.... https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/insurance.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/insurance.asp
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  The key difference is that the recipients are also others who pay for insurance, whereas in US health insurance, it’s a game of see which provider can collect more from which payer (government, insurance, individual) to make up for the losses on those that can’t pay. Also, chronic and old age health issues don’t even seem like insurable risks, like getting 20 year term life insurance for a 90 year old. You would basically just be paying for someone else to manage your premium money and take a cut before giving it back to you since the insured risk is inevitable and has to be priced accordingly.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    The key difference is that the recipients are also others who pay for insurance, whereas in US health insurance, it’s a game of see which provider can collect more from which payer (government, insurance, individual) to make up for the losses on those that can’t pay. Health costs between what you pay as an individual and what you pay as part of a group is just like anything else. You couldn’t buy the same parts for a computer at the same price as Dell. Dell can get bulk discounts you can’t. A health care provider is willing to charge less for care per person for a group of people through an insurance carrier than you individually. If you have ever signed up for term life insurance, you usually get a fixed premium up to a certain age, and then premiums skyrocket as you get older. You theoretically can price life insurance for a 90 year old based on actuarial data. The cost will be prohibitively expensive.
    - lotsofpulp 8y ago
      An individual isn't paying increased costs for parts for computer because the merchant was forced to sell parts to someone for free. A merchant might be making less on the marginal profit to a large vendor (or accept slight loss to benefit from the marketing of having a large customer), but I don't see it quite as bad for the little guy as it is in US healthcare. Edit: I understand the analogy of a bigger buyer means better prices, but it's a little different too because the merchant of the computer parts can't bill the losses to the government who then pays via increased taxes. The pricing differences are astronomical too between what prices are given to people who want to pay cash versus via insurance or Medicare or Medicaid, it makes no sense. I see the US healthcare market as the middle and lower middle class spending a larger portion of their wealth subsidizing the poor class while the upper middle and upper class spend a smaller portion of their wealth subsidizing the poor class because they can negotiate out of it, and they probably get better care too. And this is all exacerbated because employers get to deduct health insurance premiums from taxes, while independent contractors buying insurance independently don't.