Support NeoGAF

[jason10mm]

The problem we have in the US is that the Healthcare system is almost completely cut-off from market pressure. Doctors charge higher and higher rates - the insurance companies push back, but only so far because as Healthcare ....

Very true about the market pressure. Aint a lot of start up health insurance systems robust enough to handle a couple of stem cell treatments or heart transplants.

As for doctor payments, those are largely set by the insurance companies already, the docs know what the insurance companies will pay for specific codes so they can decide if they will accept those plans or not. Of course if everyone in your town is on blue cross/blue shield, then you either live with their payments or try ro charge the patient directly and provide something to offset that versis the other docs in town. The real floor for payments is medicaid because a lot of docs have to see patients with that coverage. Only a few can really pick and chose their patients with a high level of psyment capability, hence why the plastic surgeons are driving porsches. And even those guys will often do stuff pro Bono just to help the less fortunate because, surprise, heath care folks got into the field to help people, not just make a quick buck.

 

[E-Cat]

I think the term these days is “systemic”.

Yeah, for sure systemic.

 

[poppabk]

Very true about the market pressure. Aint a lot of start up health insurance systems robust enough to handle a couple of stem cell treatments or heart transplants.

Even if there was - we wouldn't be able to just choose that insurance, at least not without leaving employer insurance behind and roughly 15 - 20k of hidden salary on the table.

 

[DragoonKain]

Quality of care is rubbish and unexpected disease will bankrupt you. C'mon man, just do some homework. I did 5-month chemo + radiotherapy of absolutely no fault of mine (my cancer was not linked at all to my lifestyle), I paid exactly ZERO for a series of treatments. US healthcare is social darwinism (where the fittest have money) in practice.

Basically this.

So if I get this right for 500k bill you will first pay $1200 from your pocket then you will pay $49 880 (500 000 - 1200, take 10%) in addition?

You know how much I will pay for treatment that costs this much? 0€.

I think the best healthcare system possible has people paying nothing. I don't believe people should have to take out loans and sell property to pay for medical care. But that doesn't mean everything about the US healthcare system sucks. The US probably has more great hospitals and doctors than any other country. There can be a nuanced view rather than shitting on the US healthcare and saying everything about it is awful, because that's simply untrue. There's a reason 8 out of 10 Americans are satisfied with their quality of care and not 1 out of 10, and almost everyone knows the flaws of the US healthcare system.

A handful of years ago I had a medical issue that one of my doctors was concerned about and he ordered a list of tests. Individual unique tests that I had to get done at different facilities. I got 5 tests done in about 6 weeks. And these were invasive tests not like blood tests getting your nose swabbed. It was bad enough sitting in limbo waiting for the results of all these tests to make sure nothing was seriously wrong with me. If I was in a country with longer wait times, who knows how long it would've taken for me to get all those tests done.

You can acknowledge that it's great to not have to pay anything for your healthcare and the US having good things about its healthcare too.

 

[Davey Cakes]

So, if a malfunctioning AI, directly or indirectly approved by a CEO condemns you or a family member to an unnecessary death, what then? Just roll over and take it?

If a CEO had stolen a car outside a bar, I wonder if people would be more accepting of a shooting arising from that than if they'd stolen someone's life by refusing to give them medical care.

I'm not advocating for either shooting CEOs or car thieves, but there's something to be considered in how we view the actions and responses to actions of individuals and those of corporations.

We have a term for it.

Social murder: "The knowing causing of the inevitable premature death of members of an oppressed class by deliberately and structurally exposing them to potentially lethal conditions."

These companies that put profit over people are doing something completely legal that happens to lead to death and hardship for many. Society turns a blind eye to social killing because it's an accepted part of the systems that we currently have in place. Someone getting shot in the street is an outrage, but millions of people being negatively impacted by policy decisions is somehow just fine.

I don't think anyone is truly celebrating the fact that Brian Thompson specifically is dead and is leaving behind a wife and kids. They're celebrating that someone in power faced repercussions, and that this may serve as a shot across the bow for other entities that continually break the social contract.

When you squeeze someone enough, they will let a little bit of that rage spill out in ways that are a tad unsavory. It's human nature.

 

[jason10mm]

Even if there was - we wouldn't be able to just choose that insurance, at least not without leaving employer insurance behind and roughly 15 - 20k of hidden salary on the table.

You'd almost need something like the "School voucher" where your employer just agrees to pay a certain amount and you can "Spend it" at any insurance company. But of course companies negotiate rates based on their employee pool so that's not gonna work. But more transparency about how "good" an insurance company really is (and this probably has a regional variance based on the humans working claims in each area) would at least let employees judge job offers better and maybe direct company choice.

 

[jason10mm]

We have a term for it.

Social murder: "The knowing causing of the inevitable premature death of members of an oppressed class by deliberately and structurally exposing them to potentially lethal conditions."

But insurance companies are not exposing people to anything. And they are not an absolute gate on health care, anyone can start up a go-fund-me to try to get $$$ for care, take loans, or cash out a retirement plan. Or just not get certain care, but that doesn't mean the insurance company GAVE them a disease. An unsafe metal works plant...THAT'S social murder.

 

[notseqi]

Might as well murder every ceo of every insurance company then, because in the end they don't care about the people, they care about running a succesful business.

nah that's just your fantasy

 

[Blade2.0]

Normies always posture as good guys loudly, when i reality they are blood hungry savages.

We talking about the CEO or the assassin here?

 

[jason10mm]

I think the best healthcare system possible has people paying nothing. I don't believe people should have to take out loans and sell property to pay for medical care.

The problem here is that health care is theoretically unlimited. I could spend ALL THE MONEY on health care. So at some point you need a brake on care, rationing who gets it, some way to determine where the doctors, nurses, and facilities go. Especially if you want excess capacity to do things like surge for another pandemic. We found out REAL FAST that virtually no city had surplus ICU beds because of course "the system" as it is is really efficient in making sure the number of unused ICU beds is really low because that's losing money.

And western medicine at least has gotten really good at salvaging folks from disease, but does very little to PREVENT disease in the first place. Thats kinda a society issue, not really directly the role of medical systems in our model. So the salvage therapy costs go up and up but there are very few attempts to stop folks from developing these problems in the first place.

Are we all gonna be forced to have intermittent fasting? Be in a sugar and salt ration? No alcohol? And for who, since we have some ability to predict who is and isn't susceptible to various lifestyle issues.

 

[Blade2.0]

Ah now he's not running a company now he's a scammer.

Cmon man stop rationalizing murder!

Healthcare in the USA is a state sanctioned scam. It's the truth. We are not a care-first society. We're a profit first and if there's a little left over we'll help the richer people society.

 

[diffusionx]

There are some interesting "who's the bigger criminal?" Debates to be had, but I guess you could say that when the deck is stacked in favour of the corporations as much as they are, people aren't left with any form of pushback that is acceptable when a corporation doesn't hold up their end of the bargain.

After pleading with customer services, You could challenge a corporation in court, of course. You could spend a decade having their lawyers slowly bankrupt you (or quickly if you aren't wealthy or have assets you can risk/sell) through protracted legal wrangling. In the case of trying to force a healthcare company to deliver the service you think is appropriate, you might not have a decade. You might not have 6 months. Outcomes could be worsening daily.

At the point where people have paid into an insurance plan for decades and then need to use it, if the insurance company says they won't support you then you might be in a position where the timescales make it impossible for you to fight back legally and get justice, even if you have the resources and know well enough how the system works. Even if you're 100% right, by the time your case progresses to a hearing you could have been in the grave for a while.

So, if a malfunctioning AI, directly or indirectly approved by a CEO condemns you or a family member to an unnecessary death, what then? Just roll over and take it?

If a CEO had stolen a car outside a bar, I wonder if people would be more accepting of a shooting arising from that than if they'd stolen someone's life by refusing to give them medical care.

I'm not advocating for either shooting CEOs or car thieves, but there's something to be considered in how we view the actions and responses to actions of individuals and those of corporations.

The health insurance company cannot "condemn you or a family member to an unnecessary death", lol, all they can do is say they won't pay. Yes it sucks and it shouldn't happen to the extent it does, but let's be, ahem, reasonable here.

And shooting CEOs isn't going to change this dynamic anyway, this guy has already been replaced on an interim basis and UHC will chug on exactly as it did before.

Also the actions of the insurance company need to be placed within this context:

The problem here is that health care is theoretically unlimited. I could spend ALL THE MONEY on health care. So at some point you need a brake on care, rationing who gets it, some way to determine where the doctors, nurses, and facilities go. Especially if you want excess capacity to do things like surge for another pandemic. We found out REAL FAST that virtually no city had surplus ICU beds because of course "the system" as it is is really efficient in making sure the number of unused ICU beds is really low because that's losing money.

And western medicine at least has gotten really good at salvaging folks from disease, but does very little to PREVENT disease in the first place. Thats kinda a society issue, not really directly the role of medical systems in our model. So the salvage therapy costs go up and up but there are very few attempts to stop folks from developing these problems in the first place.

Are we all gonna be forced to have intermittent fasting? Be in a sugar and salt ration? No alcohol? And for who, since we have some ability to predict who is and isn't susceptible to various lifestyle issues.

There really is no limit to the amount of the health insurance company's money that we would spend to keep ourselves alive. That's just kind of how it is in our culture and as human beings. No matter how much you pay into the health insurance system, you could easily blow through it in a few weeks depending on the nature and the severity of your health incident (of course this isn’t how insurance works, but it is how people seem to think of it). This is why HMOs were originally developed, hence the M in the middle (maintenance), to try to control costs while still ensuring people got the care they needed, but political pressures and the dynamics of this basic reality quickly meant they were left less able to do that.

 

[ResilientBanana]

Looks like this move and the comments changed BSBC's mind on anesthesia.

Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield halts anesthesia payment policy after backlash

The health insurer planned to cap the length of time anesthesia can be covered during medical procedures in three states, prompting outrage.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

 

[Shifty1897]

In the last year nearly every claim from my insurance provider has been denied. I have spent hours on hold disputing them.

He fucked around and found out.

 

[Dural]

Ok, so it's first $5000 in fees per year you pay out of your pocket, correct? Is the deductible the monthly fee for this coverage? So that's $14.4k per year?

Yes, of course I pay taxes for health coverage.

$5000 is the maximum out of pocket we pay, once we hit that it's all free (when we had our last kid we started getting checks back from the insurance company for overpaying). We've only ever hit the maximum out of pocket when the kids are born, we'll hit the deductible but that usually isn't until around fall with a family of 6. Total yearly is probably around $3500-$4000 for us (this includes what we pay monthly for the coverage through my wife's work, $50/paycheck).

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Looks like this move and the comments changed BSBC's mind on anesthesia.

Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield halts anesthesia payment policy after backlash

The health insurer planned to cap the length of time anesthesia can be covered during medical procedures in three states, prompting outrage.

www.nbcnews.com

It looks like the new policy that would had taken effect was to more accurately bill anesthesia usage.

Currently, it is time based on the doctor/surgeon thinks, not what the anesthesia worker actually does.

So it sounds like if a new building is going up taking 2 years to build, a concrete worker would get paid for the entire two years, even though he only did concrete foundation work for 6 months. At least thats how I interpret it. No wonder the Anesthesia Organization (what it's called in the article) was mad. Their billings will go down as they cant max out their pay based on the total time needed by the doc.

 

[FullMetalx117]

Imagine this CEO’s dramatic death is finally what leads to legitimate health care reform, bipartisan conversations, other insurance companies not screwing over.

From a pure capitalististic, health insurance version of valuing life, assassin may have just created a lot of “value” for people.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

Honestly people need to read up on what was happening in America during the First Gilded Age if this event was a shock to anyone.

I'm shocked it didn't happen sooner.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Quality of care is rubbish and unexpected disease will bankrupt you. C'mon man, just do some homework. I did 5-month chemo + radiotherapy of absolutely no fault of mine (my cancer was not linked at all to my lifestyle), I paid exactly ZERO for a series of treatments. US healthcare is social darwinism (where the fittest have money) in practice.

Basically this.

So if I get this right for 500k bill you will first pay $1200 from your pocket then you will pay $49 880 (500 000 - 1200, take 10%) in addition?

You know how much I will pay for treatment that costs this much? 0€.

US quality of care IMO isnt as good as it thinks. US health and life expectancy is lousy vs. pretty much every other western rich country in the world. If the healthcare was so good keeping people alive, they'd be at the top of the game.

Someone will say that US citizens are over zealous people eating bad or doing drugs, so that's issues that counteracts the "best healthcare in the world", but I think that's BS. People in other countries are fat, smoke, drink and do drugs too.

 

[jason10mm]

US quality of care IMO isnt as good as it thinks. US health and life expectancy is lousy vs. pretty much every other western rich country in the world. If the healthcare was so good keeping people alive, they'd be at the top of the game.

Someone will say that US citizens are over zealous people eating bad or doing drugs, so that's issues that counteracts the "best healthcare in the world", but I think that's BS. People in other countries are fat, smoke, drink and do drugs too.

How many european countries got charts like this???

(parts of the) Uk for example

and the EU at large

probably a combination of reporting deaths in various ways, access to care variability (rural vs urban etc), and ODing on things other than fent for some places but as you can clearly see, the US goes big on things that can lead to lowered total life expectancy that doesn't really reflect on the overall quality of health care.

 

[poppabk]

$5000 is the maximum out of pocket we pay, once we hit that it's all free (when we had our last kid we started getting checks back from the insurance company for overpaying). We've only ever hit the maximum out of pocket when the kids are born, we'll hit the deductible but that usually isn't until around fall with a family of 6. Total yearly is probably around $3500-$4000 for us (this includes what we pay monthly for the coverage through my wife's work, $50/paycheck).

Plus what the company pays that could be part of the salary otherwise and is likely in the thousands a month.

 

[Meicyn]

Honestly people need to read up on what was happening in America during the First Gilded Age if this event was a shock to anyone.

I'm shocked it didn't happen sooner.

Yep, and it’s interesting watching some folks type up extensive paragraphs on behalf of a 21st century robber baron but leave a mere sentence or two towards folks that have been fucked over with a casual “it’s just business”. I came out of lurking status again because of this thread.

While I don’t condone vigilantism, I sure as hell understand it. You can only push people so far before they realize they have nothing left to lose.

Relevant reading from 2014:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014/

“And so I have a message for my fellow filthy rich, for all of us who live in our gated bubble worlds: Wake up, people. It won’t last.

If we don’t do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us. No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality. In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn’t eventually come out. You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising. There are no counterexamples. None. It’s not if, it’s when.”

 

[The Pleasure]

I

 

[Toons]

I can understand and even symparhize with the killers motives and still think that killing the guy was wrong on principle.

 

[E-Cat]

Healthcare in the USA is a state sanctioned scam. It's the truth. We are not a care-first society. We're a profit first and if there's a little left over we'll help the richer people society.

Some things should be left out of the profit motive, like healthcare. Most countries realize this.

 

[12Goblins]

It's been wildly fascinating seeing all the reactions from both sides of the isle on this. I wonder what CEOs are thinking right now; entire country watching somebody getting gunned down on the street and nobody shedding a tear. This is the most united I've seen the US in a long time

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

It looks like the new policy that would had taken effect was to more accurately bill anesthesia usage.

Currently, it is time based on the doctor/surgeon thinks, not what the anesthesia worker actually does.

So it sounds like if a new building is going up taking 2 years to build, a concrete worker would get paid for the entire two years, even though he only did concrete foundation work for 6 months. At least thats how I interpret it. No wonder the Anesthesia Organization (what it's called in the article) was mad. Their billings will go down as they cant max out their pay based on the total time needed by the doc.

No, you misunderstand. The insurance company was trying to do the opposite of what you wrote out.

The anesthesia "worker" is a doctor. When you have surgery, you have a surgeon doing the procedure and an anesthesiologist keeping you under sedation and making sure you stay alive.

The surgeon gets paid by procedure traditionally. On the other hand, anesthesiologists ("anesthesia workers") get paid based on time increments - usually increments of 15 minutes. The rationale behind this is partially because the surgeon ultimately determines how long the procedure takes - having them paid by procedure incentivizes them to be productive and do more cases. The anesthesiologist has no control over the length of procedure and can potentially be detained indefinitely through no fault of their own. The insurance company wanted to change this so if a procedure that normally takes 30 minutes ends up taking 45 or 60 minutes, the anesthesiologist would not get paid for the extra work. At that point the anesthesiologist can either decide to work for free or send the bill to the patient directly.

 

[Scary_Larry]

Whatever side you're on, the next 4 years of the incoming administration will be very interesting with what they have planned for healthcare.

Not a great time for the USA and they're the butt of jokes abroad for good reason.

 

[Kraz]

The biggest killer in the U.S is not cancer, not smoking, it's cholesterol aka heart problems from fatty and sugary foods. So the following companies CEOs would be on a hit list:

- Coca Cola
- Kellogs
- McDonalds
- Hersheys
- Idaho Potatoes

Those aren't equivalent to some of the other suggestions.
They're unforced, optional personal choices, and are recommended for moderation.

Maybe there's some environmental concerns with their practices, but aren't tearing up the environment and poisoning people indiscriminately like some industries pushing for deregulation. Which may be more suitable for a hypothetical list.

 

[Krathoon]

The guy got totally wacked. That was pretty brutal. I mean, yikes.

 

[SF Kosmo]

I don't know if taking one guy out is going to change how the industry runs, but man, sometimes it takes a revolutionary act to get the conversation going, and the way I hear people talking about healthcare this week is something I haven't heard before. The American health model is dysfunctional by design and getting worse, costs are out of control and individuals are shouldering more of them.

And we know how to fix it. Every other country does it. We can too. The problem is winning the public conversation. Everyone hates our healthcare system but we've all been gaslit to believe single payer is worse or that it's communism or something.

 

[diffusionx]

I don't know if taking one guy out is going to change how the industry runs, but man, sometimes it takes a revolutionary act to get the conversation going, and the way I hear people talking about healthcare this week is something I haven't heard before. The American health model is dysfunctional by design and getting worse, costs are out of control and individuals are shouldering more of them.

And we know how to fix it. Every other country does it. We can too. The problem is winning the public conversation. Everyone hates our healthcare system but we've all been gaslit to believe single payer is worse or that it's communism or something.

Most countries are not single player. Only a handful, like the UKand Canada, and they are hardly perfect. Most have a mixture of public and private, but thr USA does too.

 

[jason10mm]

No, you misunderstand. The insurance company was trying to do the opposite of what you wrote out.

The anesthesia "worker" is a doctor. When you have surgery, you have a surgeon doing the procedure and an anesthesiologist keeping you under sedation and making sure you stay alive.

The surgeon gets paid by procedure traditionally. On the other hand, anesthesiologists ("anesthesia workers") get paid based on time increments - usually increments of 15 minutes. The rationale behind this is partially because the surgeon ultimately determines how long the procedure takes - having them paid by procedure incentivizes them to be productive and do more cases. The anesthesiologist has no control over the length of procedure and can potentially be detained indefinitely through no fault of their own. The insurance company wanted to change this so if a procedure that normally takes 30 minutes ends up taking 45 or 60 minutes, the anesthesiologist would not get paid for the extra work. At that point the anesthesiologist can either decide to work for free or send the bill to the patient directly.

I wonder how much that anesthesiologist is doing when 6 CNAs are running the cases and they are just popping into each room to check

Standardizing anesthesia billing to surgical case is probably more of a prediction model issue and an attempt to eliminate the need for the anesthesia provider to carefully itemize their time and then the need for a coder to account for it in increments and the insurance company to audit that for accuracy.

But no doubt someone would lose $$$ in this and thats who drummed up the mob Pretty much any change proposed by an insurance company is assumed to be at the expense of the docs or the patient. An assumption that is sadly often correct

 

[Krathoon]

Heath Insurance is really bad about screwing people over. The cost of my medicine jumped up from $7 to $20 for some reason.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

$5000 is the maximum out of pocket we pay, once we hit that it's all free (when we had our last kid we started getting checks back from the insurance company for overpaying). We've only ever hit the maximum out of pocket when the kids are born, we'll hit the deductible but that usually isn't until around fall with a family of 6. Total yearly is probably around $3500-$4000 for us (this includes what we pay monthly for the coverage through my wife's work, $50/paycheck).

Ok, still not very clear but we are getting there. I guess I could just ask Perplexity for the answer.

 

[Dural]

Plus what the company pays that could be part of the salary otherwise and is likely in the thousands a month.

Well, yes, but aren't businesses in countries that have universal health care also paying a certain amount per employee in taxes for their health care?

Since I'm getting my health care through my wife's work, you'd think the company I'm at would throw me a little more compensation since I'm saving them a bunch of money.

 

[Sardaukarama]

My son is currently training for an Airline at their campus , He said the CEO looked like he was surrounded by half of Delta force when he walked into the Bar

 

[EviLore]

The CEO does not have the power to transform a massive public corporation into something completely different. He is beholden to the board and shareholder interests. If he fails to operate within those interests, he will be removed and replaced with someone who will.

Is that absolving the Unitedhealthcare CEO of his responsibilities to society? No. But it doesn’t make him the architect of mass suffering, either. Public corporations are machines. They will attempt to maximize profit within the bounds of the law. If you want corporations to reform and act to a different standard that better represents society’s interests, you must change the law.

Health care reform is the only solution, not intimidating CEOs via murder. They will just hire more bodyguards and demand higher compensation packages for the personal risks.

 

[Dural]

Ok, still not very clear but we are getting there. I guess I could just ask Perplexity for the answer.

Most people in the US get their health insurance through their employer. At my work there are multiple plans to choose from and at my wife's there is only the one. Once you choose your coverage, a certain amount comes out of every paycheck for the coverage (it's different everywhere, my wife's is really good at only $50/pay period). If you don't go to the doctor a lot and don't get injured, you might not ever hit that $1200 deductible and all you're out is what you pay monthly. If something major happens, you'll hit your deductible then pay 80/20 or 90/10 up to the maximum out of pocket ($5000 for us). There are all different plans though, this is just what ours is through my wife's work.

And like I've said earlier there is also Medicaid for those making under a certain amount of money, it's pretty much universal healthcare for the poor. From what I've heard from people I've known that were on it, Medicaid pretty much covers everything, you pay nothing. I looked up statistics for it and it looks like ~20% of the US is on Medicaid.

 

[SF Kosmo]

Most countries are not single player. Only a handful, like the UKand Canada, and they are hardly perfect. Most have a mixture of public and private, but thr USA does too.

The US's system is uniquely bad, no other country has the costs that we do, no other country outs as much of those costs on the individual, and we have worse outcomes.

Sure not every country is exclusively single payer, but they all have universal coverage at a much lower individual cost.

Our system is essentially deregulated into a non-functional state. Companies have a profit incentive to deny care the maximum extent possible and very little accountability. It can't function unless those abuses are disincentivized and there are mechanisms to hold them accountable for abuse.

 

[Melon Husk]

 

[Grildon Tundy]

Tell me how I'm right or wrong, but when we talk about how expensive healthcare is in the US for the return we get versus countries with nationalized (and cheaper) healthcare...

The US is expensive because we're subsidizing the technological advancement/the R&D for the pharma/medical supply companies. Then those other countries get to implement those same advancements for cheaper since they aren't paying for the upfront R&D.

I wish I could provide more details and stats for however that idea got Inceptioned in to my head.

 

[notseqi]

The CEO does not have the power to transform a massive public corporation into something completely different. He is beholden to the board and shareholder interests. If he fails to operate within those interests, he will be removed and replaced with someone who will.

Is that absolving the Unitedhealthcare CEO of his responsibilities to society? No. But it doesn’t make him the architect of mass suffering, either. Public corporations are machines. They will attempt to maximize profit within the bounds of the law. If you want corporations to reform and act to a different standard that better represents society’s interests, you must change the law.

Health care reform is the only solution, not intimidating CEOs via murder. They will just hire more bodyguards and demand higher compensation packages for the personal risks.

It's just this:


edit: would be reaaaaally interesting to find out why it happened. Daughter dying to lack of care which should have been provided would be movie material.

 

[Rentahamster]

The US is expensive because we're subsidizing the technological advancement/the R&D for the pharma/medical supply companies. Then those other countries get to implement those same advancements for cheaper since they aren't paying for the upfront R&D.

The next question you should ask then, is if this is true, why is the most powerful country in the world willingly letting itself get played like that?

 

[jason10mm]

Tell me how I'm right or wrong, but when we talk about how expensive healthcare is in the US for the return we get versus countries with nationalized (and cheaper) healthcare...

The US is expensive because we're subsidizing the technological advancement/the R&D for the pharma/medical supply companies. Then those other countries get to implement those same advancements for cheaper since they aren't paying for the upfront R&D.

I wish I could provide more details and stats for however that idea got Inceptioned in to my head.

Thats the story they sell us. It's not the whole picture because there are certainly technologies and therapies that exist outside the US (and can't come here without laborious and expensive FDA approval processes or are even illegal like some stem cell stuff). But I'd say the amount of research dollars that for profit companies have is largely derived from the North American (basically the US) market

As for academics and charity, the US is a big leader there as well. Dry up research money and you dry up innovation. China will probably over take us in human brain horsepower, if they haven't already, but I imagine there will be substantial barriers to getting Chinese tech out to the world in ways that would supplant the current financial model.

AI is really the thing that will throw some body blows to US healthcare. The primary care world in particular is gonna see AI driven algorithms make better diagnoses than a human, provided humans cooperate to train it. Obviously an AI can't deliver a baby but it can be there every day during the pregnancy to remind the mom to take care of herself, do kick counts and kegels, all the stuff docs say to do but can't enforce, as well as catch pre-eclampsia or gestational diabetes far earlier.

 

[jason10mm]

It's just this:


edit: would be reaaaaally interesting to find out why it happened. Daughter dying to lack of care which should have been provided would be movie material.

See, for that to be true they would have had to exhaust all the Chairty networks like St. Judes. It would be more like the daughter didn't get some sort of experimental treatment that wasn't fully FDA approved, which kinda makes sense because there is no obligation for an insurance company to pay for EVERY possible treatment, even experimental ones. Thats usually trhe realm of research clinical trials and those can be hard to get in to.

A more likely scenario would be a family that had someone succumb to a disease after mortgaging all their assets to the hilt to pay for care and now they are financially destroyed and hounded by collection agencies.

 

[EviLore]

It's just this:

Sure, but it should be noted that we do not actually know the killer’s motives or background yet. Many are assuming he is responding to personal tragedy or, as Kosmo called it, perpetrated a “revolutionary act” as if he took the country’s collective suffering on his shoulders and acted for a righteous cause.

Someone willing to do this is probably not a great guy.

 

[notseqi]

See, for that to be true they would have had to exhaust all the Chairty networks like St. Judes. It would be more like the daughter didn't get some sort of experimental treatment that wasn't fully FDA approved, which kinda makes sense because there is no obligation for an insurance company to pay for EVERY possible treatment, even experimental ones. Thats usually trhe realm of research clinical trials and those can be hard to get in to.

A more likely scenario would be a family that had someone succumb to a disease after mortgaging all their assets to the hilt to pay for care and now they are financially destroyed and hounded by collection agencies.

we can workshop the script but no family member of mine would be checking out due to errybody in the family shrugging because the cost is too high, i just kept the motive short n sweet

Someone willing to do this is probably not a great guy.

desperation and deeply held anger due to loss is probably the only thing i could empathize with, thats why I posted the video of Chris Rock saying 'I wouldnt do it but I understand why somebody would'
I think that many posters in here on the side of 'why do you enjoy this guy getting killed' are equating the amount of glee or empathy displayed by others with a 'yeah lets do em, boys' attitude, which I would not accuse all of the good people in here of.

 

[jason10mm]

we can workshop the script but no family member of mine would be checking out due to errybody in the family shrugging because the cost is too high, i just kept the motive short n sweet

Denzel beat us to it!