3 ms·
The solution is to have universal catastrophic insurance for all citizens automatically, say $100k or some number. Combine that with tax-deductible health savin
by monero-xmr 3y ago
The solution is to have universal catastrophic insurance for all citizens automatically, say $100k or some number. Combine that with tax-deductible health savings accounts and a competitive retail healthcare market, you find a sweet spot between universal and for-profit.
Anyone who thinks the universal model standard in Canada and the UK is actually working has a hole in their head. The solution is a combo.
- lotsofpulp 3y agoIt is not as easy as that because supply is heavily constrained. You need a lot more people able and willing to become doctors, nurses, people who change bedpans and clean hospital rooms, so on and so forth. Add in aging populations with fewer proportionate working age people, and the equation does not balance. That is not something any policy change can fix until far in the future. In the short term, all that is possible is deciding who gets allocated the available healthcare.
- monero-xmr 3y agoNurse practitioners have been allowed by states to handle more and more services. Telehealth primary care has enabled more scaling - I know because I use such a service for my whole family. I’m much, much more confident in the US to handle an influx of immigrants and aging retirees than Canada or the UK with their rigid services.
- lotsofpulp 3y agoYes, one of the ways that the limited resource of doctor time will be allocated is to simply have increasing portions of the population see people less qualified than doctors (perhaps not bad from a systems point of view if it is diagnosing conjunctivitis, but from an individual point of view, you can see where this is going.). You pay more, you get people who have met a higher standard of education/experience, e.g. concierge care and direct primary care practices.
- monero-xmr 3y agoYes the reality is harsh. But much better than waiting 12 months to get in cancer care and then dying while you wait.
- pedrosorio 3y ago> The solution is to have universal catastrophic insurance for all citizens automatically > It is not as easy as that because supply is heavily constrained I don't think this argument works when the data shows 90%+ of the population has health insurance.
- lotsofpulp 3y agoMy assumption is that the many people, if not the majority, still avoid seeking healthcare due to a doctor visit costing a minimum of $250+. You can give everyone the $100k deductible insurance, which is great, but the issue in this thread is that a regular consultation with a doctor costs so much, that a $29 telehealth option (probably with someone less qualified than a doctor) is better.
- anon291 3y agoCompletely agree. I am fairly conservative in my thinking, and this is a strategy I could get behind.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 3y agoYou mean above $100K they pay? Per year or what? Because a $99K/year bill for ongoing treatment is still going to bankrupt people.
- monero-xmr 3y agoConsidering the average family cost for insurance is $22.5k https://www.kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2022-section-1-cost-of-health-insurance/#:~:text=The%20average%20annual%20premiums%20in,and%20%2422%2C463%20for%20family%20coverage https://www.kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2022-section-1-cost-.... It is quite feasible that redirecting all of that to a tax-free savings account could pay for itself in no time.
- erhaetherth 3y agoThat much? Makes the $2600/yr that I pay sound good. I have a high deductible though ($3K). I don't know if putting $23K aside each year and not having any insurance would work for everyone... I think we should just give that money to the gov't and they should cover pretty much everything. With a pool that big I think the economics would work.
- troupo 3y ago> a competitive retail healthcare market What's a "competitive healthcare market" for diabetes? Or cancer? Or childbirth? > Anyone who thinks the universal model standard in Canada and the UK is actually working has a hole in their head. The UK has a population of 67 million. There are half a billion patient contacts in any given year. I've yet to hear stories like "I can't afford my insulin" or "we had a child, the bill was 200k and we were also charged for holding the baby"
- astrange 3y agoOne thing I've noticed about the UK is that I've had to stop reading every British author I've read in my life because they've all died young. Some of them did manage to release statements about how much they support the NHS before dying. I'd be more impressed if they lived though.
- troupo 3y ago[flagged]
- TylerE 3y agoTolkien lived to 81. Agatha Christie 86. John La Carre 91. Jackie Collins 77. Ken Follet is 74 and still very active. Anthony Burgess 76. PD James 94. If you're talking about Douglas Adams, he died of a massive heart attack...in California, where he'd lived for years. So, in summary, uh wot mate?
- lostlogin 3y agoThis is a pretty hot take. The NHS has been run into the ground. That doesn't mean socialised healthcare is not possible. I don't look at broken old car and say "no cars work".