Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That's rational.

We are getting older, and more broken.

We are currently 'shifting' what we value in life.

If we spend more on doctors, it may be that they provide more value to us.

If we'd rather invest in new surgical procedures over some new kind of social network, well, that's what we want, apparently.

Of course with healthcare it's always more complicated, but it's rational that we spend more on health if that's what society values.



The US spends the most per capita on healthcare out of every industrialized country, with worse outcomes.

The only place wages are growing (healthcare compensation) is being siphoned away by parasitic for-profit health insurance companies.


Maybe a solution is to stop using insurance for things insurance shouldn't be involved with?

Do you use your car insurance to pay for a new air freshener? Do you use your home owner's insurance to get a new throw rug? Of course not.

Yet, we are using insurance to pay for things like birth control and penis pills. We don't use our car insurance to cover a tune-up or inspection, but we expect our health insurance to cover our check-ups.

Stop mandating that the insurance companies cover everything and pay for regular health care out of pocket.

Or, you know, go with single payer - which is what I'd suggest. But, expecting insurance to cover regular care just means it is one more avenue where an intermediary is profiting without adding real benefit. Insurance is for when things go wrong, not for regular care.

Really, though, I'd strongly suggest single payer.


It turns out that covering basic preventative care for "free" actually creates better outcomes. People feel obligated to go for the checkup when they've already paid for it, or more accurately are not discouraged from going because they can't afford it this month. Preventing disease is a lot cheaper than treating it in many cases, and creates a better quality of life for the patient. This is one reason countries with socialized medicine fare so much better on their health outcomes at lower cost.


Sure, but it's not free. They are paying for it with their insurance premiums.


" with worse outcomes."

No.

I completely disagree.

The stats on 'bad outcomes' relate to 'life expectancy' etc. - but those are only indirectly related to healthcare.

If you have cancer - and could be anywhere in the world - it would be under an American health-insurer.

America has the #1 healtchare system in the world for those who are covered. For those who are not - it's terrible, obviously. And, it's crazy expensive as you pointed out.

But 'direct outcomes' are not bad - they're good.

Due to all the 'inner city violence' + Medics coming back from the war - American emergency rooms have become goddam miracle centres.

The number of people dying from gun wounds has dropped dramatically due to the amazing ability of the American healthcare system (perverse reasoning, but hey).

It's a crazy situation, but it's not irrational that 'cutting edge healthcare' is 2x expensive as 'socialized healthcare' that we receive here in Canada. 10% improvement (for those covered) at 2x the cost seems about right actually.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: