High cost for health care in America

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoeShlabotnik
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not all people in this country are fast-food eating slobs.
There are a lot of people who contract one or any number of diseases through no fault of their own.
My sister has never smoked a day in her life. She stays in shape and runs a lot. Yet, somehow she contracted lung cancer. There is no family history of this in our family.
Fortunately, she has some money. She can pay for what she needs.
I worry about all those folks who don’t have that kind of money.
This is where our lack of a legitimate health care system in this country is at fault.
Good health care share should not just be available for those who can afford it.
 
So there are more people in America than in New Zealand.
What does that have to do with anything?
 
I never said all people in the US are slobs, though a good number of people do suffer from diet-related illness. Just look at our stats.

Thanks for the anecdote, but it undermines the truth that we don’t have access to good health care unless we can afford it. It’s just not true.
 
A few hard points to consider:
  1. Insurance companies often drive the increases, due to their reimbursement schedules. Medical facilities will charge up to what is going to be paid.
  2. For single payer advocates: I will die under a single payer system. Such ‘socialistic’ systems sound good and may work for the majority, but I am a minority. Therefore, DOA. Workman’s Comp is “single payer” Anyone enjoy that system?
  3. Drug prices? It is fact that America bears the burden of drug development cost. Drugs are cheaper elsewhere because we pay the major cost of development. Canada, et al, then benefit from our investment.
  4. It cost between 2-5 BILLION dollars to take a drug from concept to FDA approval and marketing. BILLION. And no, the federal government cannot and will not spend that kind of money on a single drug. Once again, I am DOA.
  5. Cash health-care systems are far cheaper, for reasons mentioned in point 1.
  6. Most UK-based nations have single payer. Great. I live in the cancer world and I survive on drugs that are not available in their single payer systems for 4 or 5 years after. That’s a lot of dead cancer patients. The horror stories in Britain’s National Health System are legendary - but true. For that reason, a private and parallel system has developed out of necessity.
  7. There are no easy, sweeping reforms that will not cost human lives.
These are not purely political, polemic statements. I have skin in the game. In fact my life hangs in the balance.
 
Last edited:
Explain to me the higher costs for Epi pens. They charge more, because they can make more $$$$. It has nothing to do with research and development. That is just drug company malarkey.
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
So there are more people in America than in New Zealand.
What does that have to do with anything?
Click to expand...
Quite a bit. It’s . . . misguided . . . to think you can administer and govern the same way for a population of 5 million and 330+ million. . . . If that’s the case, go to any mom and pop store and ask them if they could run a multi-national company in the same fashion. . . .
 
Last edited:
I can tell you that the average working class person could not pay the bills that my sister currently pays. They would be bankrupted in a matter of years…probably less.
 
Please do not call me or others here, ignorant, just because they do not agree with your assessment of things. The people who manage this site do not like name calling.
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
NO, the reason to stick with the present program is to make money.
Click to expand...
What’s the difference? 😉
aper1 said:
Just because we aren’t healthier or living longer doesn’t mean it’s the result of our health care system or insurance.
Click to expand...
People without health insurance have a 40% higher mortality rate.
aper1 said:
Ah, yes… for all 5 million of you - how quaint. NYC alone has a population of just under 9 million.
Click to expand...
You’re aware much larger countries than New Zealand have universal healthcare, right?
po18guy said:
Drug prices? It is fact that America bears the burden of drug development cost. Drugs are cheaper elsewhere because we pay the major cost of development. Canada, et al, then benefit from our investment.
Click to expand...
To be clear the American taxpayer pays those R&D costs, then pharmaceutical companies profit. Great scam they’ve got going.
 
That is a single case, and shame on that CEO for being a money-grubber. We cannot stereotype an entire industry based on one man’s avarice. And I carry an Epipen, as does my son.

Stereotyping does not work for race, it does not work for occupation. Also remember that we are just as flawed as any other human - regardless of their power or authority.

Best to be thankful for each day of life, rather than constantly look for evil and corruption. It surrounds us - always has and always will. We are fallen creatures.

In any event, for years I was hyper-political and profoundly unhappy. Where possible I dumped the politics, strove to increase my faith and am much more at peace now.
 
Last edited:
How do you know? Also, maybe she is requesting for more care than required. There are so many variables, but you just want to dilute down to your sister being well-off so that proves none of the plebeians could afford it.

Ever ponder that others would qualify for care based on income?
 
I feel for your needs, Friend. Mainly for your son!
But back to the subject, if there is one group that is abusing the system, there could be many others.
If I have painted to broad a stroke with my brush here, that was not my intent.
I just want to see justice done for people like your son. You should not have to pay too much, just because someone want to overcharge you!
 
The bottom line to all this discussion is that most are not satisfied with the current healthcare system.
What they have in Europe and other places around the world might not work here.
But we might give it a shot. You never know. Maybe we could learn something from the Germans, the French, the Brits, the Japanese, and others?
 
people die from a myriad of reasons that are no fault of their own.
I support the govt providing/enabling affordable basic care, but not covering all the expenses of the latest treatments.
 
Being self responsible could cull some of this.

Every day something like obesity is said to be the cause for a good portion of illnesses. Heart disease, various cancers, diabetes, kidney issues, etc. I’ve got an overweight cousin about 51 years old with diabetes. Doctor’s advice was to cut out eating sweets altogether and exercise 2-3 times a week. Simple enough?

Ran into her at the grocery store and the cart was chock full of sweets. Ice cream bars, cupcakes, sugary sodas, etc. Now, when premiums go through the rough for the American people, shouldn’t individuals like my cousin exercise a bit more control?
 
aper1 said:
Ah, yes… for all 5 million of you - how quaint. NYC alone has a population of just under 9 million.
Click to expand...
In America, there are 330 million people who can pay taxes so that the government can pay for universal health care.

America is a low tax country. NZ is a high tax country. It’s not about population. It’s about the fact that Americans aren’t willing to pay more tax so neither major political party wants to lose votes by suggesting that citizens would have to pay much more tax.

America has a higher rate of poverty than New Zealand and NZ is also higher on the Human Development Index. Perhaps if the tax rate was higher, then America would not be in that position.

I don’t support high taxes by NZ standards. The New Zealand National Party, which I support, is our conservative party. Even when it lowers taxes, we still have a good health system.

Raising taxes and establishing a public health care system will fix many issues in the US.

I am a faithful, orthodox Catholic and I support public health care.
 
CatholicSooner said:
I understand where you are coming from but from what I’ve read, studies show that Americans, health wise, are not better off than other countries.

So I don’t think that “you get what you pay for” is applicable. We aren’t healthier, we aren’t living longer, etc.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s because of poor health care. I think it’s because many Americans eat way too much junk, eat out (a Big Mac meal is around 1200 calories–close ti an entire day’s worth of calories for an average sized woman!), and we are way, way too sedentary. Many of us are also experiencing major stress, which is a factor in high blood pressure, which is a major cause of debilitation and death.

HALF of all African Americans have Type II Diabetes and don’t know it. This leads to losing limbs, heart attacks, and strokes, which leaves a person in need of almost constant care.

Opioid addiction and alcohol abuse are also rampant among regular Americans–these conditions are not just happening among “street people.” Chances are good that at least one of your middle-class friends is hiding a substance abuse problem.

And then there’s mental illness, including the neuroses and the psychoses–and sadly, in some folks these lead to suicide.

And there’s crime–although other countries do seem to be catching up with us, there are still a lot of street crimes (shootings, sexual assault, beatings, etc.) that put a person in the hospital or even lead to permanent disability.

AND to top it all off, our antibiotics are becoming less and less useful against the “superbugs.” When we get a potential superbug in our microbiology department, we have to set up a collection of additional antibiotics, usually by hand (the old “Kirby Bauer” drop the antibiotic disc or the E test strip), which takes a lot more of our time. Time is money, especially when you’re short-staffed and and on the overtime clock!

So it’s not just the greedy big pharma or insurance companies. We are a very sick nation.
 
Last edited:
Various countries have systems that could be studied so as to pick what’s best for the US. I heard this is what Taiwan did to create its system.
One does not need to look very far to find the much lower level of care received by a great many of we Americans and realize that eventually - probably not 2020 - we will elect a president that wants single payer. They probably won’t get it while they’re in office, but it will have unstoppable momentum at that point. At some point we should start seeing candidates that support single payer along with religious freedom, pro-life, etc. The false dichotomy cannot last forever.
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
Now since ACA, my rates are twice as high (after only 5 years), with twice the deductible and fewer doctors and hospitals in my network.
Click to expand...
Wow, you got off easy.

My HSA plan that “you can keep if you like it” got canceled after writing refund checks for a couple of year (its overhead is higher as a percentage, as it still has all the claims just to tell when it his the deductible). The only HSA in the new system has me paying just under four times as much, and the coverage isn’t as good (but, hey, I get a “free” flue shot and a minimal visit . . .and four times as much is for just four of us, not the six that were on the family plan I had for ten years . . .

As an economics professor, the whole thing was an exercise in fantasy. It doesn’t control costs, while handing out increased access. It’s taken away the ability of the market to function.

I’ve suggested elsewhere ways that would work, but . . .
Theo520 said:
ACA failed because two reasons:
  • they overestimated the number of wealthy and health people that would join up and pay the subsidies.
  • They also grossly underestimated the cost of people with pre-existing conditions.
Click to expand...
Those are the most significant, yes. The smart thing for a twenty-something to do is to pay the (now gone) penalty, and pick up coverage after coming up with. condition, in the unlikely event it happens.

It left a huge hole in out of network issues for emergency care.

It added no price transparency or discoverability.

And it added a whole new problem with way the deductibles work, in that for most people (at least on the Nevada policies that were the predictable result), it’s pretty much our out of pocket payments until hitting the deductible, and then no out of pocket (thus discouraging early needed care, while encouraging later un-needed care).

And that whopper of an off-budget transfer for high losses, so as to create payments from the government without appearing in the budget (some would call this a “fraud” by the authors . . .)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top