5 ms·

You can't be surprised when industries that are shackled to the government through payment and/or regulations end up inefficient. Saddens me to think about, bu

You can't be surprised when industries that are shackled to the government through payment and/or regulations end up inefficient. Saddens me to think about, but imagine if American healthcare and innovation was nearly as "free market" as smart phones, LLMs, etc.

lr4444lr 1y ago
We see that already with LASIK and other cosmetic procedures. They are not cheap, but often an order of magnitude lower than medically necessary insurance-covered work.
ceejayoz 1y ago
Except the rest of the developed world has more shackling, half the costs, and similar outcomes. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OECD_health_expenditure_per_capita_by_country.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OECD_health_expendit... > Saddens me to think about, but imagine if American healthcare and innovation was nearly as "free market" as smart phones, LLMs, etc. That sounds horrid.
- lr4444lr 1y ago
  That's because the monopsony of universal health care fixes the prices. We're kinda caught in the middle in the US.
  - ceejayoz 1y ago
    The assertion was that the high-regulation approach is inefficient, though. Cheaper, universally accessible, and same outcomes seems more efficient, yes?
    - lr4444lr 1y ago
      I'd say we have an easy way to compare this: look only at Medicare and Medicaid spend vs. the other countries.
      - ceejayoz 1y ago
        Medicare is restricted to the elderly and the disabled; Medicaid is limited to very low-income folks. That would be a problematic comparison. That said: https://cepr.net/publications/can-we-just-admit-were-wasting-money-on-medicare-advantage/ https://cepr.net/publications/can-we-just-admit-were-wasting... > Traditional Medicare has significantly lower administrative costs than private insurance with 1.1 percent of spending in 2024 going towards administration compared to between roughly 12-18 percent for private insurers in previous years. Coincidentally, the bloated administrative spending of American health care is one of the factors contributing to why the United States spends around twice as much per person compared to other developed nations even though we have worse health outcomes.
fkyoureadthedoc 1y ago
I'm sure it would be if I could get open source surgery online from dabbling amateurs. Unfortunately for most people they have to go the hospital and don't exactly have a plethora of options there.
zukzuk 1y ago
We have two unavoidable necessities in life — food and healthcare (and housing, but i’ll leave that out because it’s an odd fit in this analogy). The food system is basically a free market (with some weak safety regulations). The apparent end-state of this free market that America has arrived at is tragic. Sure, people like me are free to select healthy, nutritious food at reasonable prices, but at a population level, 70% are overweight and 30% are obese, with all the risk and disease that comes with that. This is where free markets (in necessary goods) tend to end up. Perfect for ensuring the concentration of capital, disastrous for the average consumer (and never mind the “externalities“…)

lr4444lr 1y ago

We see that already with LASIK and other cosmetic procedures. They are not cheap, but often an order of magnitude lower than medically necessary insurance-covered work.

ceejayoz 1y ago

Except the rest of the developed world has more shackling, half the costs, and similar outcomes. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OECD_health_expenditure_per_capita_by_country.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OECD_health_expendit... > Saddens me to think about, but imagine if American healthcare and innovation was nearly as "free market" as smart phones, LLMs, etc. That sounds horrid.

lr4444lr 1y ago
That's because the monopsony of universal health care fixes the prices. We're kinda caught in the middle in the US.
- ceejayoz 1y ago
  The assertion was that the high-regulation approach is inefficient, though. Cheaper, universally accessible, and same outcomes seems more efficient, yes?
  - lr4444lr 1y ago
    I'd say we have an easy way to compare this: look only at Medicare and Medicaid spend vs. the other countries.
    - ceejayoz 1y ago
      Medicare is restricted to the elderly and the disabled; Medicaid is limited to very low-income folks. That would be a problematic comparison. That said: https://cepr.net/publications/can-we-just-admit-were-wasting-money-on-medicare-advantage/ https://cepr.net/publications/can-we-just-admit-were-wasting... > Traditional Medicare has significantly lower administrative costs than private insurance with 1.1 percent of spending in 2024 going towards administration compared to between roughly 12-18 percent for private insurers in previous years. Coincidentally, the bloated administrative spending of American health care is one of the factors contributing to why the United States spends around twice as much per person compared to other developed nations even though we have worse health outcomes.

fkyoureadthedoc 1y ago

I'm sure it would be if I could get open source surgery online from dabbling amateurs. Unfortunately for most people they have to go the hospital and don't exactly have a plethora of options there.

zukzuk 1y ago

We have two unavoidable necessities in life — food and healthcare (and housing, but i’ll leave that out because it’s an odd fit in this analogy). The food system is basically a free market (with some weak safety regulations). The apparent end-state of this free market that America has arrived at is tragic. Sure, people like me are free to select healthy, nutritious food at reasonable prices, but at a population level, 70% are overweight and 30% are obese, with all the risk and disease that comes with that. This is where free markets (in necessary goods) tend to end up. Perfect for ensuring the concentration of capital, disastrous for the average consumer (and never mind the “externalities“…)