And by pointing this out I am not defending the health care system. I support Medicare for all, for god’s sake. The guy telling you you’re about to drive off a cliff isn’t “defending the cliff.” Grow up, children.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
You're the one who says we should fight back on vibes! FFS the vibes on this are clear and they benefit Dems!!! If you believe in Medicare for all, then you don't go on here to moralize "oooh private insurance is really not that bad." What are you doing?!
Stick to murder is bad.
The vibes are "private insurance is why health care is expensive and shitty" and it's simply not true. We just watched a professional org for one of the highest paid specialties propagandize their way out of an attempt to lower costs. There are many villains we have to fight, not just the one
To make our system better those are precisely the kind of fights we're going to need to win, and we just failed at that one. The point is to better inform people about what the real challenges are so we can direct our energy in the right places
But it is a big part of why. Medicare overhead is what? 2-3%. What is it for private insurance? 2 or 3x that. It's more expensive. And the outcome is shitty, just look at pregnancy death rates.
Just because a M4A would have to negotiate low rates with medical providers doesn't eliminate that.
A one-time reduction of the profit/admin takes a slice off the top and a few years later we're back in the same place since health care costs grow faster than inflation. We have to tackle the real underlying issue is the point.
Medicare overhead is much lower because they do much less utilization management, and have a fraud problem as a result. Admin costs are not pure loss. We can eliminate all of the admin and profit and we still have the problem of costs and growth of those costs. That's the actual problem
They have the same problem as the IRS did. The same solution is available: for each dollar spent looking for fraud, it will get more than one back (until it reaches a point of diminishing return, which is not near). So it doesn't take anything away my point.
There isn't an objective "this is fraud" detector, there's a lot of gray area, and there are false positives. It would introduce some of the same things people hate about private insurance. And when it's your claim that gets wrongly flagged, you may not care that much whether its insurer or the govt
Yes, and in practice what that means is higher admin costs, and more friction in the process of getting things paid for. Perhaps they do it much better and cheaper, with less pain for people than private insurers. But until we try we are comparing apples and oranges
I think what people want is fairness. Deny according to fine print. OK. But the "ceo" of Medicare doesn't make 10m a year and Medicare doesn't rake in over 1b per month in pure profit. That ain't right. My electric utility company can't make 16b a year. That shit is wrong to society.
Again, I would love to eliminate the 10m salary and the 3-5% profit margins of insurers, but it does very little to solve the problems. It's much deeper than that
And plenty of electric utilities make big profits! A lot of them have a monopoly and make money. Profit motive exists everywhere!
Isn't one lesson from this last election cycle that actual underlying reality doesn't matter as much as truthiness and vibes? Isn't this whole thing an opportunity to drive for real change by riding that wave?
It's absolutely insane how some people will refuse to accept they have a minority view on something. Nobody is telling you you are wrong! Lots of things that are popular aren't correct! Your goal should be to convince people.
Comments
Stick to murder is bad.
Just because a M4A would have to negotiate low rates with medical providers doesn't eliminate that.
And plenty of electric utilities make big profits! A lot of them have a monopoly and make money. Profit motive exists everywhere!
And then you proceed to defend the health care system.