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.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dybdahl who wrote (18276)	7/9/2010 6:44:38 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

I still believe that costs would have increased a lot, because people live less healthy lives these days and technology has improved a lot, which means that many more things can be saved. This would be true only if prices had escalated at a similar rate and people used medical services at a similar rate. But neither of those would have occurred. People would likely not have sought medical treatment for most of the effects of unhealthy lives because they would not have been thought of as medical problems and, for actual medical problems, would have been more circumspect in their use of medical services.

To: dybdahl who wrote (18276)	7/9/2010 10:02:17 AM
From: i-node	Respond to of 42652

I still believe that costs would have increased a lot, because people live less healthy lives these days and technology has improved a lot, which means that many more things can be saved. Only 10-20 years back, a knife-stabbing into vital organs, 75% burns or 4 minutes under warm water would kill a patient. Today, these two can easily be survived without any significant consequence for the future life. This doesn't come for free. About this we agree, and American health care is responsible for a lot of innovation that brings about these results. But still, our government's involvement is a destablizing factor that creates havoc with our health care finance system. And it serves to drive costs up over time by shifting costs to the private health insurance system. If a physician must collect $85 for a given office visit in order to meet profitability goals, yet Medicare/Medicaid average only $49 for that visit, it puts upward pressure on the amount that must be billed in order to bring the average fee up to a level that will yield the $85. It may be necessary to bill $140 this year, and perhaps $160 next year. Yet, MC/MA are totally out of money here, so everyone understands the need to keep costs down. Ultimately, the quality of care will suffer. Instead of seeing doctors we'll see lesser qualified individuals. Instead of the best medical equipment we'll get older technology, etc. I don't think that has happened in most places yet, but I think it is in the process now. Over a few years, we are apt to see a degradation in the quality of care delivered in the US to the point we're not better than other countries, principally because the reimbursement system has gotten so out-of-whack.