4 ms·

Regulations provide increased safety but at an extremely high cost. In the absence of regulation companies need to build trust with consumers through their repu

Regulations provide increased safety but at an extremely high cost. In the absence of regulation companies need to build trust with consumers through their reputation and third party auditing. Consumer protection is vastly overrated IMHO. Better to have more affordable healthcare for all than high liability healthcare that only the rich can afford.

jleyank 4y ago
Without rather strict drug regulation, healthcare of any kind will waste a lot of time dealing with drug overdoses and side-effects-gone-wild. How many unregulated business "build trust" with customers. Walmart sells on cost not trust. And there's simple solutions to healthcare that all nations except the US have found.
fzeroracer 4y ago
I don't understand how people can say this when the pre-existing condition insurance nightmares occurred before regulation stepped in to stop it. For reference: My parents went bankrupt back in 2003 because my mother had a stroke and insurance denied her claims because they called it a pre-existing condition. I think people that claim consumer protection is vastly overrated have never found themselves in a situation where they get fucked over by under-regulated corporations.
- jleyank 4y ago
  Being pregnant was a pre-existing condition before ACA, forcing people to carry COBRA for the length of the pregnancy and some more time to allow for complications. Or, you could not switch work until the child was 3-6months old.
  - anamax 4y ago
    I'm having trouble seeing why encouraging women to maintain health insurance throughout pregnancy is a bad thing. Same with chronic problems.
    - jleyank 4y ago
      Maintaining health insurance is fine. Maintaining the original one from the former employer is expensive. The ACA requires the new work-provided insurance to accept the pregnancy. Avoids carrying two insurances.
      - anamax 4y ago
        The "if you were covered, it's not a pre-existing condition" rule when switching providers was the law in various states, including CA, before ACA. Did those states see the predicted effects?
Broken_Hippo 4y ago
Better to have more affordable healthcare for all than high liability healthcare that only the rich can afford. Oh, see, I moved out of the US to a place with socialized health care, so I don't have to worry about that. Turns out that you can do a lot of cost saving measures when you pool money together. In other words, it isn't consumer protection making the prices high, but rather it is being sold like a good. Consumer protection, if it were really strong in the US would protect you by making sure that you get what the label says is inside. In other words, keeps you from eating a product with eggs when you have an egg allergy. That cost isn't so high, either. None of us are ever going to be knowledgeable enough to check everything and we know that things like "third party auditing" and "reputation" can really be gamed. And we know that it doesn't matter if your local hospital is bad if it is the only one in the area - and that sort of thing happens all the time. Regulation isn't perfect, but I would rather not live in an era without it.

jleyank 4y ago

Without rather strict drug regulation, healthcare of any kind will waste a lot of time dealing with drug overdoses and side-effects-gone-wild. How many unregulated business "build trust" with customers. Walmart sells on cost not trust. And there's simple solutions to healthcare that all nations except the US have found.

fzeroracer 4y ago

I don't understand how people can say this when the pre-existing condition insurance nightmares occurred before regulation stepped in to stop it. For reference: My parents went bankrupt back in 2003 because my mother had a stroke and insurance denied her claims because they called it a pre-existing condition. I think people that claim consumer protection is vastly overrated have never found themselves in a situation where they get fucked over by under-regulated corporations.

jleyank 4y ago
Being pregnant was a pre-existing condition before ACA, forcing people to carry COBRA for the length of the pregnancy and some more time to allow for complications. Or, you could not switch work until the child was 3-6months old.
- anamax 4y ago
  I'm having trouble seeing why encouraging women to maintain health insurance throughout pregnancy is a bad thing. Same with chronic problems.
  - jleyank 4y ago
    Maintaining health insurance is fine. Maintaining the original one from the former employer is expensive. The ACA requires the new work-provided insurance to accept the pregnancy. Avoids carrying two insurances.
    - anamax 4y ago
      The "if you were covered, it's not a pre-existing condition" rule when switching providers was the law in various states, including CA, before ACA. Did those states see the predicted effects?

Broken_Hippo 4y ago

Better to have more affordable healthcare for all than high liability healthcare that only the rich can afford. Oh, see, I moved out of the US to a place with socialized health care, so I don't have to worry about that. Turns out that you can do a lot of cost saving measures when you pool money together. In other words, it isn't consumer protection making the prices high, but rather it is being sold like a good. Consumer protection, if it were really strong in the US would protect you by making sure that you get what the label says is inside. In other words, keeps you from eating a product with eggs when you have an egg allergy. That cost isn't so high, either. None of us are ever going to be knowledgeable enough to check everything and we know that things like "third party auditing" and "reputation" can really be gamed. And we know that it doesn't matter if your local hospital is bad if it is the only one in the area - and that sort of thing happens all the time. Regulation isn't perfect, but I would rather not live in an era without it.