5 ms·
But they'd pay a lot, lot less in a more efficient system that wasn't ruthlessly optimized in about 20 ways for max profit and nothing else.
by Bud 5y ago
But they'd pay a lot, lot less in a more efficient system that wasn't ruthlessly optimized in about 20 ways for max profit and nothing else.
- giantg2 5y agoDo you have some data on that? My assumption is that removing costly litigation could save money, but I haven't seen any case studies on it.
- Bud 5y agoSure. The US pays far more than other first-world countries for health care and gets much worse health outcomes out of it. This is very well documented. https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2021/aug/mirror-mirror-2021-reflecting-poorly?gclid=CjwKCAjwrqqSBhBbEiwAlQeqGjNDhvZg6-mdQKnmS4aYFEXf89NellyyWgglQpE3CAl8HOL4VzmnXhoCpqwQAvD_BwE https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2... https://healthsystemsfacts.org/ https://healthsystemsfacts.org/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/08/08/how-us-healthcare-spending-per-capita-compares-with-other-countries-infographic/?sh=75c776a5575d https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/08/08/how-us...
- giantg2 5y agoI'm aware of that stuff from the general healthcare standpoint. I'm asking about from healthcare expenses from these sorts of lawsuits. I'm wondering if just having costs covered would prevent the suits from happening or if people would still go after pain/suffering, lost wages, etc. It seems I didn't understand that you were just talking about the healthcare part.