4 ms·

This is overly-simplified. I’ve worked in healthcare IT, specifically billing and coding. The reforms needed are much, much more than simply setting Medicare’s

This is overly-simplified. I’ve worked in healthcare IT, specifically billing and coding. The reforms needed are much, much more than simply setting Medicare’s enrollment age to 0, especially with the thousands of pages of weird exclusions and conditions enshrined into Medicare over the years. Also this is slightly pedantic, but your examples are NOT national health systems. The closest thing in the U.S. is military medicine, which is (mostly) federally funded with doctors working for and paid by the government.

cogman10 3y ago
> This is overly-simplified. Not really. The comment I was responding to argued there couldn't be a national healthcare system in the US. I wasn't arguing that those systems are perfect. > The reforms needed are much, much more than simply setting Medicare’s enrollment age to 0 Agree > especially with the thousands of pages of weird exclusions and conditions enshrined into Medicare over the years. I agree to an extent. The thing is, healthcare is messy regardless. I simply could not imagine any healthcare payment system that wasn't fairly complex to code out. > Also this is slightly pedantic, but your examples are NOT national health systems. The closest thing in the U.S. is military medicine, which is (mostly) federally funded with doctors working for and paid by the government. Agree, and honestly if I had my way I'd nationalize healthcare top to bottom. Capitalism is a race to the bottom with healthcare. There's no real incentive to produce quality (you have a captured market). That incentive is to raise prices as high as possible and cut staff as lean as possible.
- snapetom 3y ago
  > argued there couldn't be a national healthcare system in the US. That is an strange and reactionary misconstruction. My whole comment was talking about the misunderstanding of US Federalism. Healthcare was a flippant comment as an example in the closing sentence.

cogman10 3y ago

> This is overly-simplified. Not really. The comment I was responding to argued there couldn't be a national healthcare system in the US. I wasn't arguing that those systems are perfect. > The reforms needed are much, much more than simply setting Medicare’s enrollment age to 0 Agree > especially with the thousands of pages of weird exclusions and conditions enshrined into Medicare over the years. I agree to an extent. The thing is, healthcare is messy regardless. I simply could not imagine any healthcare payment system that wasn't fairly complex to code out. > Also this is slightly pedantic, but your examples are NOT national health systems. The closest thing in the U.S. is military medicine, which is (mostly) federally funded with doctors working for and paid by the government. Agree, and honestly if I had my way I'd nationalize healthcare top to bottom. Capitalism is a race to the bottom with healthcare. There's no real incentive to produce quality (you have a captured market). That incentive is to raise prices as high as possible and cut staff as lean as possible.

snapetom 3y ago
> argued there couldn't be a national healthcare system in the US. That is an strange and reactionary misconstruction. My whole comment was talking about the misunderstanding of US Federalism. Healthcare was a flippant comment as an example in the closing sentence.