3 ms·

Look up the prices charged by non-profit hospice care. It's not much different from investor owned hospice care.

simfree 3y ago
But is the staffing and standard of care different? Do the patients of investor owned hospices suffer with a higher incidence of bed sores? Do they suffer longer?
- emodendroket 3y ago
  The article suggests the nonprofits are getting sicker patients the for-profits don't want to take.
forgetfreeman 3y ago
Accurate, and it does nothing to address the central issue, namely someone is making a fucking killing off of individuals at their most vulnerable.
- missedthecue 3y ago
  Unless they are defrauding these people, I don't see the issue in profits off of hospice. Hospice availability is a huge issue. The only thing worse than paying a lot for hospice is not getting hospice because there are no vacancies. If the profit incentive to run a nursing home or palliative care facility were eliminated, supply would fall through the floor creating a bigger issue than someone having the gall to earn money. And supply would fall because no one is doing this sort of work out of the goodness of their own hearts, unless they are religious. And there are quite a few religious facilities out there but the numbers are dwindling.
  - forgetfreeman 3y ago
    When the simple majority of Americans are priced out of this kind of care from bloated profit margins how does that differ substantively from a lack of vacancies? While you're grappling with that here's another one: Mondragon and it's constellation of affiliate co-ops rather soundly puts the lie to the notion that profit motive is the sole driver of human activity. Apparently the world isn't entirely populated by sociopaths so it's still possible to get shit done without making a handful of individuals grotesquely wealthy in the process.
    - missedthecue 3y ago
      Mondragon is absolutely a for-profit, money-motiviated firm. It doesn't do things for free. The difference is that the shareholders are the employees rather than investors. There is nothing illegal about starting a co-op, but in practice they are quite difficult because of the capital needed up front to start a business. That is to say, it's much easier to ask a VC for $5 million in series A funding than it is for the 10 devs running the thing to put up $500,000 each of their own money.
      - forgetfreeman 3y ago
        You're pretending financial institutions don't exist (business loans are absolutely a thing) and that all forms of profit-taking are ethically equivalent. What, exactly, are you stanning here?

But is the staffing and standard of care different? Do the patients of investor owned hospices suffer with a higher incidence of bed sores? Do they suffer longer?

emodendroket 3y ago
The article suggests the nonprofits are getting sicker patients the for-profits don't want to take.

forgetfreeman 3y ago

Accurate, and it does nothing to address the central issue, namely someone is making a fucking killing off of individuals at their most vulnerable.

missedthecue 3y ago
Unless they are defrauding these people, I don't see the issue in profits off of hospice. Hospice availability is a huge issue. The only thing worse than paying a lot for hospice is not getting hospice because there are no vacancies. If the profit incentive to run a nursing home or palliative care facility were eliminated, supply would fall through the floor creating a bigger issue than someone having the gall to earn money. And supply would fall because no one is doing this sort of work out of the goodness of their own hearts, unless they are religious. And there are quite a few religious facilities out there but the numbers are dwindling.
- forgetfreeman 3y ago
  When the simple majority of Americans are priced out of this kind of care from bloated profit margins how does that differ substantively from a lack of vacancies? While you're grappling with that here's another one: Mondragon and it's constellation of affiliate co-ops rather soundly puts the lie to the notion that profit motive is the sole driver of human activity. Apparently the world isn't entirely populated by sociopaths so it's still possible to get shit done without making a handful of individuals grotesquely wealthy in the process.
  - missedthecue 3y ago
    Mondragon is absolutely a for-profit, money-motiviated firm. It doesn't do things for free. The difference is that the shareholders are the employees rather than investors. There is nothing illegal about starting a co-op, but in practice they are quite difficult because of the capital needed up front to start a business. That is to say, it's much easier to ask a VC for $5 million in series A funding than it is for the 10 devs running the thing to put up $500,000 each of their own money.
    - forgetfreeman 3y ago
      You're pretending financial institutions don't exist (business loans are absolutely a thing) and that all forms of profit-taking are ethically equivalent. What, exactly, are you stanning here?