Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tunica Albuginea who wrote (53414)	6/8/2000 4:33:00 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 99985

Healthcare expenses: 1. The government's (open-ended) obligations to pay healthcare costs, through dozens of different programs, represent a massive lien on present and future taxpayer's income. Politicians buy votes today, and the costs get deferred. 2. I don't know the exact number, but 80% in the last 2 years sounds about right. 3. under the current system, the decision-makers (still mainly doctors, in spite HMO administrators) have zero incentive to control costs. Doctors get paid mainly by piece-work. That is, we get paid more, the more procedures we do, the more pills we hand out, the more patients we see. We don't get paid for results. If we do something, and it doesn't work, then we just do something else (and get paid more). And we don't get paid for being efficient. That means doctors have no incentive to end the heroic end-of-life run-every-test-do-every-procedure routine. As long as those incentives remain in place, patient's (and families') wishes to minimise interventions will often be ignored. 4. in addition to being expensive, those measures are often painful. For instance, CPR (when done correctly) often breaks ribs. The "cost" is not just money. 5. the solution is to give decision-makers incentives to be efficient, and educate everyone about end-of-life choices. If patients knew how painful and invasive (and often useless) these procedures were, many more people would choose minimal supportive-only interventions.