3 ms·
It’s interesting. The regulation ostensibly protects vulnerable classes from exploitation and lets them use reimbursement structures to defray cost. At the same
by vrc 2y ago
It’s interesting. The regulation ostensibly protects vulnerable classes from exploitation and lets them use reimbursement structures to defray cost. At the same time it causes costs to go up and allows people to buy their way across the moat.
I wonder if regulation that stipulated that a change of ownership of some percentage would require recertification of the entity would stem this a bit. Or restrictions on buying HIPAA covered businesses with patient data. Might pose a problem to folks in the business today, but could slow down the massive acquire-and-merge train in these industries.
- wolverine876 2y agoNot all regulation causes costs to go up. Some causes costs to go down, for example, by correcting inefficiencies created by raw game-theory market competition. Some reduce costs by creating a safer environment for investment, reducing risk. Regulation serves market participants too.
- johngladtj 2y agoRegulation always increases costs, it's just that not all costs are easily visible
- jhawleypeters 2y agoWhat's the invisible cost when cigarette advertising is banned, eliminating the arms race to out-advertise the competition?
- wolverine876 2y agoIs that established theoretically by someone?
- vrc 2y agoIn this case it’s regulation on who can sell DME paired with how payor negotiations are handled. So even if you had cash to buy many DME, you still need a prescription and sometimes forced to pay the contracted price if you are known to have insurance.