5 ms·
One reason you may need to continually plead with people about this is because so many of us have had lived experiences with valid medical claims that should be
by mw1 2y ago
One reason you may need to continually plead with people about this is because so many of us have had lived experiences with valid medical claims that should be covered under our policy, denied outright. Not a health insurance company saying “oh, that’s too expensive, go here for less,” but outright denial of coverage. And if we eventually succeed in having these claims covered, it is because we were willing to spend countless hours combing through paperwork, initial delays, and denials.
Also, the same CMS statistics you cite can be combined with other reports to conclude that 500 billion dollars of excess administrative costs PER YEAR are attributable to our lack of a single payer system — something UHC has lobbied heavily against in order to protect their profits over the improved health care of the average American. You can read the numbers here:
https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2024/12/10/health-care-administration-wastes-half-a-trillion-dollars-every-year/ https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2024/12/10/health-care-...
“private insurers currently have administrative costs that are 1,000 percent what they would be under single-payer while hospitals currently have administrative costs that are 158 percent what they would be under single-payer. The excess administrative expenses of both the payers and the providers are because of the multi-payer private health insurance system that we have.
When you add it all up, excess administrative expenses — defined as administrative expenses we have under the current system that we would not have under single-payer — are equal to 1.8 percent of GDP, or $528 billion per year.”
Another reason your pleading falls on deaf ears is that, sure, provider payments can be reduced (and this addressed in the above article), but at the end of the day, private insurance is a purely rent-seeking enterprise that provides no value to Americans while these “overpaid providers” are actually delivering the care.
- tptacek 2y ago2.21 trillion dollars per year of provider costs, against 279 billion dollars net cost of health insurance. But yeah, the one player in this market that has its profits capped statutorily, they're they're the whole problem, no matter what the numbers say. Sure. I'm not telling you there's no problem. I'm saying that you've been conned into believing the problem is something it isn't.
- mw1 2y agoThe article I posted did not claim they were the whole problem, nor did I. They are, however, a large part of the system that no one likes to deal with and can be fully eliminated without obvious negative consequences. Health insurance doesn’t provide health care and is a purely extractive rent-seeking business. The article I posted even explains how single payer can help drive health care provider rates lower, as you now have a single, powerful entity (Medicare) negotiating against doctors, hospitals and drug companies. And this “one player” (health insurance companies) heavily lobby against the implementation of single payer health care system. And their profit caps ensure that their goal is to grow the cost of medical care so they can take an ever higher profit in absolute dollars.
- tptacek 2y agoYes. They're a part of the problem. Specifically: they are less than 10% of the problem. If you replaced them with Medicare, you would get somewhere between 1-5% off your health care bills, if everything went optimally. Meanwhile: we are commenting on a story about someone murdering a health insurance executive.
- paulryanrogers 2y ago> Meanwhile: we are commenting on a story about someone murdering a health insurance executive. Is this surprising? Motive is always of interest after a high profile crime. And apparently it requires assassination with manifesto to bring these robber barons into the spotlight. The only thing I find surprising is the use of a 3D printed gun instead of just buying one from a show or local gun store.
- mw1 2y agoThe article I posted makes a case that eliminating private health insurance will be VASTLY more than 5% savings and people can read the article to see why. You’re choosing to avoid all of the other cost savings that will come from eliminating private health insurance and having a single payer who can effectively negotiate with providers without the goal of taking a slice of profits from an ever bigger pie.