6 ms·

I don't know, maybe the government should regulate the predatory behaviors or business instead of weird libertarian strategy that is already not working for peo

I don't know, maybe the government should regulate the predatory behaviors or business instead of weird libertarian strategy that is already not working for people who have no insurance and their life is destroyed when they get sick?

giantg2 6y ago
You really think the current situation is libertarian? There is so much regulation around anything even remotely medically related. Just look at the HIPPA mess. Edit: why are you downvoting without rebuttal? Its utterly false to claim the system is libertarian.
tdfx 6y ago
There's nothing libertarian about the US healthcare system. If anything, it's a great example of regulatory capture by the AMA and insurance industry.
deelowe 6y ago
What? I went to a specialist today. My doctor scheduled the appointment. I had no say in it. This doctor is at one of two offices that I am allowed to choose from based on my insurance's negotiated contracts. This is insurance that is provided by my employer that I had no choice in. When I first saw the doctor, he prescribed meds that I had no choice in. The specific meds he prescribed were chosen as these are what the insurance company would prefer from a clinical perspective although they were extremely unlikely to help. And, on top of all of this, not once was I informed of the cost prior to services being rendered and if I had asked, I would have been told this wasn't possible. How is any of this libertarian? The libertarian solution would be that only individuals would be allowed to purchase insurance, that insurance would distribute funds to the individual (not the doctor or pharmacy), all fees would be provided prior to service being rendered and individuals would purchase meds without a prescription.
- munk-a 6y ago
  > The specific meds he prescribed were chosen as these are what the insurance company would prefer from a clinical perspective although they were extremely unlikely to help. I work close enough to healthcare that I can say that while insurers do take cost of treatment into account they are looking to minimize ongoing treatment costs - if there is a 5$ pill and a 500$ pill available for treatment the insurer may prefer to trial you initially on the 5$ pill if it's been proven effective for a good proportion of patients, but they do use calculations to minimize those ongoing costs that includes costs from condition escalation (i.e. if you have a boil you're absolutely going to get antibiotics covered since dealing with a septic boil is an emergency room visit.
  - deelowe 6y ago
    That's pretty much what I described. I was prescribed antibiotics for a chronic issue. It made no sense at all, but the DR said it's what he must to do to follow the hospitals guidelines (which are determined by what the insurers want to see). I have gastro issues and modern antibiotics cause me all sorts of problems, so of course I had to deal with the pain and discomfort for 2 weeks all for something that made no difference whatsoever.
    - RHSeeger 6y ago
      Did you try saying no, that you weren't comfortable with this solution, and you'd like to discuss other options? You can always discuss what options are available with your doctor and then reach out to your insurance to see what and why they will do about it. You may not get the answer you want, and it will use up a lot of your time, but it is an option. Note: I've spent on the order of 30 hours on the phone over the past couple months trying to get things sorted out between my doctor, my insurance, and the provider of the drug that I need for my vision. The folks at the insurance can't always help, but they've always been willing to discuss things and see what they _can_ do.
      - deelowe 6y ago
        Given the issue I'm dealing with, I'm more interested in getting it resolved than dealing with debates between insurance, dr, etc. This was the quickest path to getting an ultrasound scheduled, so I complied. What should have happened is that they should do the ultrasound right there, on the spot. But, the dr's office can't do ultrasounds. That has to go to the imaging department, which had to be scheduled 4 weeks out. Sigh... I won't keep going, but this whole situation is stupid and engineered to extract as much money as possible.
- megablast 6y ago
  What?? You had no say in it?? Your doctor forced you to accept the pill he chose??? Didn’t even talk to you about it?? Give you options?? That is weird.
warkdarrior 6y ago
The libertarian angle does not work in real life, even if we ignore the regulatory capture practiced by insurers. Because there are not enough doctors/nurses in the country, you as a patient will always compete for medical attention with other patients. This will only drive prices up.
- lostapathy 6y ago
  Libertarians would also allow more doctors to be educated. We don't have enough doctors now because the AMA acts as a cartel to limit supply of doctors. Libertarians don't like that either.
  - aj7 6y ago
    I doubt this. To me, libertarianism is simply “might makes right,” with the liberty part being everyone has the opportunity to grow into a bully. I’ve never seen a SINGLE libertarian policy that couldn’t be interpreted this way, and I’m quite open to being corrected.
    - GurnBlandston 6y ago
      What? Libertarianism basically sees two possible crimes: force and fraud. Totally incompatible with "might makes right".
      - aj7 6y ago
        So libertarians support laws making legal subtle force and fraud, ca. carried interest, private prisons, private ownership of everything, with no commons.
        vidarh 6y ago
        Libertarianism started on the far left, explicitly opposed to private property, largely overlapping with anarchism. Modern US-style right-wing libertarianism basically cribbed most of it but added a property right fetish. (Dejaque, the founder of libertarianism called Proudhon, the founder of anarchism, a "moderate anarchist, liberal, but not libertarian")
BurningFrog 6y ago
Healthcare already is the most regulated industry in the US. Calling it libertarian shows you know nothing about either healthcare regulation or libertarianism.
strken 6y ago
The "weird libertarian strategy" came about through 20th-century gatekeeping by the AMA to prevent mutual aid societies and unions from paying for medical services, and it makes actual libertarians furious: https://reason.com/2020/04/05/how-doctors-broke-health-care/ https://reason.com/2020/04/05/how-doctors-broke-health-care/ In general, the US has a problem where it pretends to love free markets, but when you look under the hood there's horrific regulatory capture and crony capitalism.

giantg2 6y ago

You really think the current situation is libertarian? There is so much regulation around anything even remotely medically related. Just look at the HIPPA mess. Edit: why are you downvoting without rebuttal? Its utterly false to claim the system is libertarian.

tdfx 6y ago

There's nothing libertarian about the US healthcare system. If anything, it's a great example of regulatory capture by the AMA and insurance industry.

deelowe 6y ago

What? I went to a specialist today. My doctor scheduled the appointment. I had no say in it. This doctor is at one of two offices that I am allowed to choose from based on my insurance's negotiated contracts. This is insurance that is provided by my employer that I had no choice in. When I first saw the doctor, he prescribed meds that I had no choice in. The specific meds he prescribed were chosen as these are what the insurance company would prefer from a clinical perspective although they were extremely unlikely to help. And, on top of all of this, not once was I informed of the cost prior to services being rendered and if I had asked, I would have been told this wasn't possible. How is any of this libertarian? The libertarian solution would be that only individuals would be allowed to purchase insurance, that insurance would distribute funds to the individual (not the doctor or pharmacy), all fees would be provided prior to service being rendered and individuals would purchase meds without a prescription.

munk-a 6y ago
> The specific meds he prescribed were chosen as these are what the insurance company would prefer from a clinical perspective although they were extremely unlikely to help. I work close enough to healthcare that I can say that while insurers do take cost of treatment into account they are looking to minimize ongoing treatment costs - if there is a 5$ pill and a 500$ pill available for treatment the insurer may prefer to trial you initially on the 5$ pill if it's been proven effective for a good proportion of patients, but they do use calculations to minimize those ongoing costs that includes costs from condition escalation (i.e. if you have a boil you're absolutely going to get antibiotics covered since dealing with a septic boil is an emergency room visit.
- deelowe 6y ago
  That's pretty much what I described. I was prescribed antibiotics for a chronic issue. It made no sense at all, but the DR said it's what he must to do to follow the hospitals guidelines (which are determined by what the insurers want to see). I have gastro issues and modern antibiotics cause me all sorts of problems, so of course I had to deal with the pain and discomfort for 2 weeks all for something that made no difference whatsoever.
  - RHSeeger 6y ago
    Did you try saying no, that you weren't comfortable with this solution, and you'd like to discuss other options? You can always discuss what options are available with your doctor and then reach out to your insurance to see what and why they will do about it. You may not get the answer you want, and it will use up a lot of your time, but it is an option. Note: I've spent on the order of 30 hours on the phone over the past couple months trying to get things sorted out between my doctor, my insurance, and the provider of the drug that I need for my vision. The folks at the insurance can't always help, but they've always been willing to discuss things and see what they _can_ do.
    - deelowe 6y ago
      Given the issue I'm dealing with, I'm more interested in getting it resolved than dealing with debates between insurance, dr, etc. This was the quickest path to getting an ultrasound scheduled, so I complied. What should have happened is that they should do the ultrasound right there, on the spot. But, the dr's office can't do ultrasounds. That has to go to the imaging department, which had to be scheduled 4 weeks out. Sigh... I won't keep going, but this whole situation is stupid and engineered to extract as much money as possible.
megablast 6y ago
What?? You had no say in it?? Your doctor forced you to accept the pill he chose??? Didn’t even talk to you about it?? Give you options?? That is weird.

warkdarrior 6y ago

The libertarian angle does not work in real life, even if we ignore the regulatory capture practiced by insurers. Because there are not enough doctors/nurses in the country, you as a patient will always compete for medical attention with other patients. This will only drive prices up.

lostapathy 6y ago
Libertarians would also allow more doctors to be educated. We don't have enough doctors now because the AMA acts as a cartel to limit supply of doctors. Libertarians don't like that either.
- aj7 6y ago
  I doubt this. To me, libertarianism is simply “might makes right,” with the liberty part being everyone has the opportunity to grow into a bully. I’ve never seen a SINGLE libertarian policy that couldn’t be interpreted this way, and I’m quite open to being corrected.
  - GurnBlandston 6y ago
    What? Libertarianism basically sees two possible crimes: force and fraud. Totally incompatible with "might makes right".
    - aj7 6y ago
      So libertarians support laws making legal subtle force and fraud, ca. carried interest, private prisons, private ownership of everything, with no commons.
      - vidarh 6y ago
        Libertarianism started on the far left, explicitly opposed to private property, largely overlapping with anarchism. Modern US-style right-wing libertarianism basically cribbed most of it but added a property right fetish. (Dejaque, the founder of libertarianism called Proudhon, the founder of anarchism, a "moderate anarchist, liberal, but not libertarian")

BurningFrog 6y ago

Healthcare already is the most regulated industry in the US. Calling it libertarian shows you know nothing about either healthcare regulation or libertarianism.

strken 6y ago

The "weird libertarian strategy" came about through 20th-century gatekeeping by the AMA to prevent mutual aid societies and unions from paying for medical services, and it makes actual libertarians furious: https://reason.com/2020/04/05/how-doctors-broke-health-care/ https://reason.com/2020/04/05/how-doctors-broke-health-care/ In general, the US has a problem where it pretends to love free markets, but when you look under the hood there's horrific regulatory capture and crony capitalism.