3 ms·

Sounds like a failure of regulation to me. I can't imagine how it would be possible to just rely on the moral compass of whoever ends up setting policy at a hug

by Y_Y 2y ago

Sounds like a failure of regulation to me. I can't imagine how it would be possible to just rely on the moral compass of whoever ends up setting policy at a huge insurance company. It's one thing to try to live a good life, but you can't fight incentives, and it's far more likely that each cog in the machine doesn't have a particularly hard time justifying their own contribution. I'd ideally like to see decisions about medical necessity made by a third party who isn't financially tied to the outcome of a payout decision, but failing that the insurance companies should be held to a high standard which is obviously not happening. (This may be because many consumers have their insurer chosen for them by their employer, and will change insurer only when changing job.)

grecy 2y ago
> Sounds like a failure of regulation to me Which is a direct result of corporations lobbying with billions of dollars. Every other country calls it bribery for a reason
- sgammon 2y ago
  Lobbying exists in many countries and in many forms does not constitute bribery. Lobbying is already regulated in countless ways. Without lobbying, elected officials would have a much harder time understanding the real impacts of policy. While, yes, Big Tobacco has lobbyists, so does the Cancer Society. Complicating the morality of the equation, a good lobbyist specializing in that industry might work (at different times) for both sides, just like many types of attorneys or other professionals.
  - grecy 2y ago
    In no other country in the world is money considered speech, and in no other country in the world is there remotely as much money in politics as the USA. I understand you want to justify it's existence, but that doesn't mean it's good for society as a whole.
    - sgammon 2y ago
      Money and lobbying are not the same thing. Nice try though
dqv 2y ago
It is a failure of regulation, but that regulation was promulgated by the regulated through lobbying. They come out and say "no, we want to fix healthcare too, we get your frustration and anger!" (only after a CEO was shot and killed) while they slip money and a wish list into the politicians' pockets. It's not a "can't" fight incentives situation; they won't fight them because they created them! Then through their PR departments, they sow discord by trying to persuade everyone to think it's everyone else's fault. It's the pharmaceutical companies (it is). It's the providers (true, but they are also the providers). It's the politicians (yes, the one's they lobbied). What they don't want people to think is that they are all working together to fuck us over. So the pharmaceutical companies and the providers and the politicians likewise, through their PR departments, blame everyone else. THEN, in this entirely unworkable system, the one they have control of, where they get to decide what is and isn't considered murder, the ruling class has the audacity to chastise the public for cheering on the death of an avatar that represents the system.
figassis 2y ago
Lobbying, like for example every big tech now donating $1m to Trump’s inauguration. That’s just the start. What do you think is the motivation for that?
- sgammon 2y ago
  Donations are not the same as lobbying, especially within the context of a campaign or inaugural committee. Obviously the motivation is to curry favor / build influence.

by Y_Y 2y ago

grecy 2y ago

> Sounds like a failure of regulation to me Which is a direct result of corporations lobbying with billions of dollars. Every other country calls it bribery for a reason

sgammon 2y ago
Lobbying exists in many countries and in many forms does not constitute bribery. Lobbying is already regulated in countless ways. Without lobbying, elected officials would have a much harder time understanding the real impacts of policy. While, yes, Big Tobacco has lobbyists, so does the Cancer Society. Complicating the morality of the equation, a good lobbyist specializing in that industry might work (at different times) for both sides, just like many types of attorneys or other professionals.
- grecy 2y ago
  In no other country in the world is money considered speech, and in no other country in the world is there remotely as much money in politics as the USA. I understand you want to justify it's existence, but that doesn't mean it's good for society as a whole.
  - sgammon 2y ago
    Money and lobbying are not the same thing. Nice try though

dqv 2y ago

It is a failure of regulation, but that regulation was promulgated by the regulated through lobbying. They come out and say "no, we want to fix healthcare too, we get your frustration and anger!" (only after a CEO was shot and killed) while they slip money and a wish list into the politicians' pockets. It's not a "can't" fight incentives situation; they won't fight them because they created them! Then through their PR departments, they sow discord by trying to persuade everyone to think it's everyone else's fault. It's the pharmaceutical companies (it is). It's the providers (true, but they are also the providers). It's the politicians (yes, the one's they lobbied). What they don't want people to think is that they are all working together to fuck us over. So the pharmaceutical companies and the providers and the politicians likewise, through their PR departments, blame everyone else. THEN, in this entirely unworkable system, the one they have control of, where they get to decide what is and isn't considered murder, the ruling class has the audacity to chastise the public for cheering on the death of an avatar that represents the system.

figassis 2y ago

Lobbying, like for example every big tech now donating $1m to Trump’s inauguration. That’s just the start. What do you think is the motivation for that?

sgammon 2y ago
Donations are not the same as lobbying, especially within the context of a campaign or inaugural committee. Obviously the motivation is to curry favor / build influence.