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: Lane3 who wrote (24412)	7/31/2012 7:25:25 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 42652

I think in specific cases government trying to control costs can increase costs, indirectly, in the long run. Reduce innovation by pushing down prices for drugs, devices, and procedures, and some people will face long and expensive treatment because they don't get those new treatments. But This would normally be a case where costs later on then they otherwise would have been, for the treatment of that patient. But since the actual treatments the patient gets will get less expensive, it looks like cost saved, its only less expensive compared to a hypothetical lower cost situation (with "lower cost" perhaps meaning that the cost didn't rise as much, not necessarily that its dropping) Also specific treatments being disallowed to save money, could wind up costing more money later on, where more expensive treatments are required. But those would be an examples of how cost controls can increase costs for some patients and conditions, not so much for health care overall. Another possible route for this to happen would be the Obamacare requirement for a medical loss ratio of at least 80 to 85%, could result in more insurance fraud and borderline or unnecessary treatments that aren't actually fraudulent. Efforts to stop that treatment are a cost that goes in to the allowable 20 to 25%. Payment for fraudulent or unnecessary treatment counts toward the 80 to 85%. Then there is the cost of the cost containment effort itself, and the cost of people to comply with it and any associate reporting requirements Still you have to be pretty inept at cost containment to have the effort actually increase costs.