5 ms·
Those are two separate questions: whether the payer has enough power to bully the providers into reforming, and whether it actually chooses to use that power to
by CharlesColeman 7y ago
Those are two separate questions: whether the payer has enough power to bully the providers into reforming, and whether it actually chooses to use that power to do so. Medicare may have the power, but may not have the will to use it (for instance, IIRC, it's forbidden by law to use its market power to secure better drug prices). A payer reform like single-payer will get us a lot closer to solving provider cost problem, but it won't get us all the way there.
- tptacek 7y agoThat's a dodge. How does it get us any closer to solver provider costs, when the evidence available suggests it has never done so before despite having enormous authority to do so in the existing system? Remember that the argument isn't that single-payer is bad. It's that it's not actually relevant to the current problem. There may be a variety of reasons why single-payer is better than private; "will automatically solve provider-side costs" can't, from what I see, be one of them. If there's some reform that occurs after M4A that gets provider costs in line, let's just do that reform first.
- CharlesColeman 7y agoIt isn't a dodge, and I'm not claiming a single-payer system "will automatically solve provider-side costs" (which is an odd thing for you to put in quotes, since I said no such thing). What I am saying is that such a system opens up avenues to pressure providers that aren't available in other systems (or are more easy for providers to escape [1]), and that potential gets us closer to solving those problems. After that, it's a question of political will to use those powers. [1] e.g. by refusing to accept Medicare patients or by charging non-Medicare patients more to compensate. The alternatives to the single-payer for providers (e.g. concierge medicine) are likely to be far more limited.
- tptacek 7y agoSorry, I didn't mean to attribute those words to you, but I could have been clearer. What I'm saying is that there's no evidence that an M4A system would have any more ability to push back on provider costs than new federal regulations that didn't switch to a single payer model wouldn't be able to do, and further, no evidence that any of the existing M4A plans really target costs at all.