Why does the Republican party exist?
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
That is the price of care givers and drugs. Medical devices have actually seen price erosion of late. Over the past few years, it is not uncommon to see a 2-3% decline in price, which does not include inflation.
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Which is normal, deflation is good and to be expected as technologies mature.
I don't know if you can lay it all on caregivers and drugs, though. In the pregnancy example there is much less care given now than in the past, yet the cost has outpaced inflation by 10 times?
People used to be able to get house calls from their family physician. Mine certainly won't do that for a $150 office visit, heh.
The scorpion anti-venin thing is a great example of how boned we are, too.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1152754
I don't know if you can lay it all on caregivers and drugs, though. In the pregnancy example there is much less care given now than in the past, yet the cost has outpaced inflation by 10 times?
People used to be able to get house calls from their family physician. Mine certainly won't do that for a $150 office visit, heh.
The scorpion anti-venin thing is a great example of how boned we are, too.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1152754
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Scorpion venom is drugs. The pregnancy example I think is very much on care givers. You say that you get much less care now than in the past, but in talking to people I find that very much the opposite. You certainly spend a lot less time at the hospital, but the number of people that actually care for you while you are there is quite a bit higher. And the level is quite a bit higher. It wasn't that long ago when it would be a mid-wife for 90% of the time, then a doctor (and maybe a nurse too) to help for the last stretch. The nurse would check on you a couple times a day, the baby would be in a nursery with 20 other kids fora couple days, and the doc would check in a couple times in total. It is very different today. Much more labor-(no pun intended)-intensive.Dan H wrote:Which is normal, deflation is good and to be expected as technologies mature.
I don't know if you can lay it all on caregivers and drugs, though. In the pregnancy example there is much less care given now than in the past, yet the cost has outpaced inflation by 10 times?
People used to be able to get house calls from their family physician. Mine certainly won't do that for a $150 office visit, heh.
The scorpion anti-venin thing is a great example of how boned we are, too.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1152754
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Nodack wrote:
Ladmo, I haven't spoke to you in ages. From all our history here over the years I decided to avoid all interaction with you to avoid confrontations. I have been lurking a little and I have to say that I have been very impressed with your demeanor here since you have come back. I don't know what has changed in your life, but whatever it is I approve and am happy for you.
I saw you and Dan talking politics and expected the worst outcome since you guys are from opposite sides, but was shocked that you guys have both been totally respectful towards each other and I can't tell you both how impressed I am.
My intentions were to praise you, not insult you. Sorry you took it as an attack. Like I said, I normally avoid chat with you to avoid confrontations, but was so impressed I decided to break my rule just to let you know how proud I was and sure enough it turned into a confrontation some how. I don't consider myself superior to any other human being.Ladmo wrote:
That sure sounds awful superior of you, dude. But don't let that take make you hate me.
Listen, you don't want me here, fine. I don't gotta' come around. I neither need your support nor your negativity. I just am, dude. If you need me to be the bad guy, go for it, I don't care. I'm not here to tear ya' down, I'm really not trying to hurt anybody, and I doubt you could produce a cruel thing I've ever said. I'm just a casual observer who says what he says because it is the take that he found most amusing. That's it.
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Why Does Health Care Cost so Much in America?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sens ... cost-so-m/
Let me give you three reasons why. The first one is because the administrative costs of running our health care system are astronomical. About one quarter of health care cost is associated with administration, which is far higher than in any other country.
The second reason health care costs so much in America is that the U.S. spends more than other countries do on many of the same things. Drugs are the most commonly noted item, where a branded drug will cost much more in the U.S. than in other countries. But, for example, doctors also earn more for doing the same thing in the U.S. than they do in other countries, and a lot of suppliers charge more for things like durable medical equipment in the U.S. than in other countries.
The third one is Americans receive more medical care than people do in other countries, not so much in terms of doctor visits, but if a person has a heart attack in the United States, they’re much more likely to get open heart surgery than they are in most other countries.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... ve/274425/
(1) Unlike other countries, the U.S. government doesn't manage prices; and (2) the complications created by our for-profit system adds tremendous costs.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... hetic.html
America has flunked yet another health care test, finishing dead last in a Commonwealth Fund comparison of 11 industrialized nations across a wide range of health measures.
We are at the bottom of the barrel on just about every outcome one can measure, from lifespan after 60 years of age to care access—aka being insured—and having a regular doctor or place to be seen when sick or well.
The simple answer is that it is not simple. Certainly there is evidence that we have two types of health care—really good care for people with money, and mediocre at best care for those without. And this widening and immoral disparity surely may drag down our national numbers from the mediocre to the bad.
But it is not necessarily lack of money alone that is exacerbating the problem. Poverty may appear to be the driver, but obesity, smoking, lack of access to a safe, empty field to run around, enough free time to exercise, and other risks for poor health abound among the less wealthy as compared to those on Park Avenue. Simply rejiggering the economic disparities would do little to undo the health disparities, at least for a long generation.
http://www.creators.com/opinion/daily-e ... nsive.html
The first reason is that we're rich. Richer countries can afford to spend more on health care, and they do.
But that is only part of the answer. Princeton University's Uwe Reinhardt, one of the nation's leading health care economists, calculated what U.S. health spending would be if the size of the economy were the only factor. Then he compared it to what we actually spent in 2008. The difference? A whopping $650 billion.
That's almost six times what it would cost to reform health care and insure every American.
Some of the extra costs are caused by the legal system, which can encourage doctors to practice defensive medicine. But other factors play a bigger role.
Higher prices are one. The same goods and services — drugs, for example — cost much more here than they do in other countries. Why? Because they can. Neither the government nor the free market controls them.
Another big reason is paperwork. We spent about $156 billion on insurance company overhead in 2007. A study in The New England Journal of Medicine estimates that Americans spent $1,059 per person on administrative costs, almost 3 1/2 times more than Canadians.
Americans are more likely to receive intensive treatment — often involving expensive, high-tech equipment and procedures — than people in other countries. Supply drives demand.
You won't find that in Europe. But in Austria and Germany, average life expectancy is two years longer than it is in the United States. It's three years longer in France, and four years longer in Switzerland.
That raises another deceptively simple question: What are we getting for all that money we spend on health care?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sens ... cost-so-m/
Let me give you three reasons why. The first one is because the administrative costs of running our health care system are astronomical. About one quarter of health care cost is associated with administration, which is far higher than in any other country.
The second reason health care costs so much in America is that the U.S. spends more than other countries do on many of the same things. Drugs are the most commonly noted item, where a branded drug will cost much more in the U.S. than in other countries. But, for example, doctors also earn more for doing the same thing in the U.S. than they do in other countries, and a lot of suppliers charge more for things like durable medical equipment in the U.S. than in other countries.
The third one is Americans receive more medical care than people do in other countries, not so much in terms of doctor visits, but if a person has a heart attack in the United States, they’re much more likely to get open heart surgery than they are in most other countries.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... ve/274425/
(1) Unlike other countries, the U.S. government doesn't manage prices; and (2) the complications created by our for-profit system adds tremendous costs.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... hetic.html
America has flunked yet another health care test, finishing dead last in a Commonwealth Fund comparison of 11 industrialized nations across a wide range of health measures.
We are at the bottom of the barrel on just about every outcome one can measure, from lifespan after 60 years of age to care access—aka being insured—and having a regular doctor or place to be seen when sick or well.
The simple answer is that it is not simple. Certainly there is evidence that we have two types of health care—really good care for people with money, and mediocre at best care for those without. And this widening and immoral disparity surely may drag down our national numbers from the mediocre to the bad.
But it is not necessarily lack of money alone that is exacerbating the problem. Poverty may appear to be the driver, but obesity, smoking, lack of access to a safe, empty field to run around, enough free time to exercise, and other risks for poor health abound among the less wealthy as compared to those on Park Avenue. Simply rejiggering the economic disparities would do little to undo the health disparities, at least for a long generation.
http://www.creators.com/opinion/daily-e ... nsive.html
The first reason is that we're rich. Richer countries can afford to spend more on health care, and they do.
But that is only part of the answer. Princeton University's Uwe Reinhardt, one of the nation's leading health care economists, calculated what U.S. health spending would be if the size of the economy were the only factor. Then he compared it to what we actually spent in 2008. The difference? A whopping $650 billion.
That's almost six times what it would cost to reform health care and insure every American.
Some of the extra costs are caused by the legal system, which can encourage doctors to practice defensive medicine. But other factors play a bigger role.
Higher prices are one. The same goods and services — drugs, for example — cost much more here than they do in other countries. Why? Because they can. Neither the government nor the free market controls them.
Another big reason is paperwork. We spent about $156 billion on insurance company overhead in 2007. A study in The New England Journal of Medicine estimates that Americans spent $1,059 per person on administrative costs, almost 3 1/2 times more than Canadians.
Americans are more likely to receive intensive treatment — often involving expensive, high-tech equipment and procedures — than people in other countries. Supply drives demand.
You won't find that in Europe. But in Austria and Germany, average life expectancy is two years longer than it is in the United States. It's three years longer in France, and four years longer in Switzerland.
That raises another deceptively simple question: What are we getting for all that money we spend on health care?
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
I am cherry picking here since this was at the end, but... Based on my travels in those countries, people there are much, much more healthy on average. I would have guess that the difference was 5 years. I would think with how unhealthy we Americans are, that is where some of that money is going. We probably should have a life expectancy in the high 60s, low 70s with how we treat our bodies.You won't find that in Europe. But in Austria and Germany, average life expectancy is two years longer than it is in the United States. It's three years longer in France, and four years longer in Switzerland.
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Well, of course! You mean to say that we should expect physicians in the US to make the same as physicians in Malaysia, or even Ireland? That just doesn't make sense.But, for example, doctors also earn more for doing the same thing in the U.S. than they do in other countries, and a lot of suppliers charge more for things like durable medical equipment in the U.S. than in other countries.
Same for medical supplies. You charge what the market will bear. It would be stupid (and undermining to your shareholders if you are a public company) to cut into your margins just because.
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Government regulation creates a lot of the complexity that Atlantic article decries. And prices could be lower without cost controls. A nationwide insurance company has to offer 50 different policies. In many of those states there are de facto monopolies. Eliminate the state-line barrier to purchasing insurance, competition enters the market, pricing begins to go down.
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
That's why we need to do two things:
1) Limit the power of the insurers. I know several medical service professionals that have tiered pricing, with the non-insurance based plans being much, much cheaper.
2) As consumers, expect evidenced-based data to support the treatments you need. That would include not only the drugs, devices, and procedures, but also the actual care givers.
Unfortunately, I have no great ideas on how to actually get these things implemented.
1) Limit the power of the insurers. I know several medical service professionals that have tiered pricing, with the non-insurance based plans being much, much cheaper.
2) As consumers, expect evidenced-based data to support the treatments you need. That would include not only the drugs, devices, and procedures, but also the actual care givers.
Unfortunately, I have no great ideas on how to actually get these things implemented.
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
That could very well just lead to larger monopolies.Dan H wrote:Government regulation creates a lot of the complexity that Atlantic article decries. And prices could be lower without cost controls. A nationwide insurance company has to offer 50 different policies. In many of those states there are de facto monopolies. Eliminate the state-line barrier to purchasing insurance, competition enters the market, pricing begins to go down.
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Maybe, maybe not. It would lower the cost of entry into the business and would be an incentive for new competition. It's not a panacea but it's a start.
I think Denninger's suggestions are good ones as well.
How about a law requiring hospitals to post pricing and charge all patients the same price regardless of payment method?
I think Denninger's suggestions are good ones as well.
How about a law requiring hospitals to post pricing and charge all patients the same price regardless of payment method?
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Most hospitals in the US are operating on 2-3% profit margins. Actually, I think that is the average, because many are under 1%, so I am sure some are around 5%. Either way, there isn't a lot to cut there.Dan H wrote:Maybe, maybe not. It would lower the cost of entry into the business and would be an incentive for new competition. It's not a panacea but it's a start.
I think Denninger's suggestions are good ones as well.
How about a law requiring hospitals to post pricing and charge all patients the same price regardless of payment method?
Re: Why does the Republican party exist?
Surgery Center of Oklahoma seems to be doing just fine and they're significantly cheaper than most others. I'd be interested to see what their margin is.