3 ms·

Most of the time the "we oughta do" ideas are so simple that they wouldn't work as a law "it should be illegal to charge too high prices!" so it's sort of a non

Most of the time the "we oughta do" ideas are so simple that they wouldn't work as a law "it should be illegal to charge too high prices!" so it's sort of a non-solution as it factually wouldn't work in the real world. Real talk, the US spends more on socialized medicine per capita than all of Europe, nobody should get reelected, no foreign aid rendered nor bombs dropped until we receive what has been long paid for. They want you to focus on the former sort of "solution" than the one I provide and that's why you probably are first hearing of mine now.

vundercind 2y ago
> it should be illegal to charge too high prices! Funnily enough, as far as I have been able to figure, this is basically the unifying element of all developed-country healthcare systems outside the US, which have a lot of variety but all seem to do this, one way or another. Some do it with comprehensive direct price controls that are pretty much exactly “it’s illegal to charge too-high prices” (Japan), some through state monopsony (Great Britain), some through limited price controls but the very-credible threat of adding more if providers get too greedy (Singapore), and many through some combo of the above, but the effect always boils down to price controls.
- willcipriano 2y ago
  You misunderstand. In nations with socialized medicine (and this includes the US) there is really only one primary buyer of healthcare products and services. If that buyer decides your price is too high, you sell around 0 units. You can often receive these treatments if you wish to pay privately. Only the very wealthy do this, a small market. Drug companies in the US prefer to sell units at the prices that the buyers in those nations are allowing them VS not selling them at all. That's why they do it. Then turn around and say they can't do the same in the US as it would bankrupt them. The difference is in the US, Medicaid is quite happy to pay prices that are multiples of what other nations are paying. They sort of pretend this is all some sort of accident or due to some complexity that you wouldn't understand but it's just theft.
  - vundercind 2y ago
    If your point is that the US government is tantalizingly close to being able to throw its weight around and drop healthcare prices a bunch with only minimal changes in policy and law, due in large part to its very-high spending on healthcare, but is just choosing not to, I agree. [edit] apologies if I’ve misunderstood, though—the above is not intended as one of those “rephrase your point into something you definitely weren’t saying” sarcastic things people do sometimes, I’m really trying to follow along.
    - willcipriano 2y ago
      If you look at the investment portfolios of politicians you'll quickly understand why there is no interest in using Medicare to reduce prices. Watch a single commercial break during the nightly news to understand why they will never cover it, drug companies are half their advertisers (more worrying a quarter of them sell bombs) Reimports of drugs produced in the United States back from Canada are prohibited for safety reasons. You know because those Canadians are famous for tampering with drugs for unclear reason and benefit. It's all a farce.

vundercind 2y ago

> it should be illegal to charge too high prices! Funnily enough, as far as I have been able to figure, this is basically the unifying element of all developed-country healthcare systems outside the US, which have a lot of variety but all seem to do this, one way or another. Some do it with comprehensive direct price controls that are pretty much exactly “it’s illegal to charge too-high prices” (Japan), some through state monopsony (Great Britain), some through limited price controls but the very-credible threat of adding more if providers get too greedy (Singapore), and many through some combo of the above, but the effect always boils down to price controls.

willcipriano 2y ago
You misunderstand. In nations with socialized medicine (and this includes the US) there is really only one primary buyer of healthcare products and services. If that buyer decides your price is too high, you sell around 0 units. You can often receive these treatments if you wish to pay privately. Only the very wealthy do this, a small market. Drug companies in the US prefer to sell units at the prices that the buyers in those nations are allowing them VS not selling them at all. That's why they do it. Then turn around and say they can't do the same in the US as it would bankrupt them. The difference is in the US, Medicaid is quite happy to pay prices that are multiples of what other nations are paying. They sort of pretend this is all some sort of accident or due to some complexity that you wouldn't understand but it's just theft.
- vundercind 2y ago
  If your point is that the US government is tantalizingly close to being able to throw its weight around and drop healthcare prices a bunch with only minimal changes in policy and law, due in large part to its very-high spending on healthcare, but is just choosing not to, I agree. [edit] apologies if I’ve misunderstood, though—the above is not intended as one of those “rephrase your point into something you definitely weren’t saying” sarcastic things people do sometimes, I’m really trying to follow along.
  - willcipriano 2y ago
    If you look at the investment portfolios of politicians you'll quickly understand why there is no interest in using Medicare to reduce prices. Watch a single commercial break during the nightly news to understand why they will never cover it, drug companies are half their advertisers (more worrying a quarter of them sell bombs) Reimports of drugs produced in the United States back from Canada are prohibited for safety reasons. You know because those Canadians are famous for tampering with drugs for unclear reason and benefit. It's all a farce.