ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags health care issues , obamacare

Reply
Old 16th June 2013, 12:49 PM   #41
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 15,903
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
Given that we are coming from a starting point of paying substantially more per capita for health care than citizens of modern civilized nations, why is it so hard to believe that we can reform the system to make it cheaper?
Okay, I'll bite. What provisions in the ACA are going make health care cheaper? The way I see it, there are several ways to make it cheaper. You can pay doctors and hospitals less. Or you can reduce demand on the system, by, for example, denying some care to patients who are dying. This is probably the smartest solution, but politically it's a hard sell.

But from what I can see, the ACA will not decrease demand; instead it will increase it. If more people are insured (the stated goal of the program) then presumably more people will seek care more frequently. Increased demand means higher prices; that's micro-economics 101.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 12:57 PM   #42
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Okay, I'll bite. What provisions in the ACA are going make health care cheaper? The way I see it, there are several ways to make it cheaper. You can pay doctors and hospitals less. Or you can reduce demand on the system, by, for example, denying some care to patients who are dying. This is probably the smartest solution, but politically it's a hard sell.

But from what I can see, the ACA will not decrease demand; instead it will increase it. If more people are insured (the stated goal of the program) then presumably more people will seek care more frequently. Increased demand means higher prices; that's micro-economics 101.
So you are going to ignore the facts and keep up with your philosophical argument?

Fact: America pays the most money and gets the least amount of care. That just shouldn't be according to your logic.

Fact: Poor Americans who cannot afford insurance/and or health care get treated in the ER (very expensive treatment option).

You act as if there isn't demand already. As if people are suddenly going to get sick more often and need health care more often. No, they need it now and they get it now. They get it at the ER.

Guess who really pays for health care? - CNN.com
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 12:57 PM   #43
SonOfLaertes
Muse
 
SonOfLaertes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
A worthy objective, I have no doubt. But the part that gets me is that you somehow think all this can be accomplished and yet still end up cheaper. We're going to make sure that pre-existing conditions are covered and birth control and we're going to make sure that older folks don't have to pay much higher premiums. And it's going to cost everybody less, and reduce the deficit as well! Heck, Obamacare will even wash and wax your car on alternate Sundays.

This isn't skepticism, it's rank boosterism. Everything in life involves tradeoffs. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
I'm sure this has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere but what, briefly, is your counter to the analysis (recently updated) put forward by the Congressional Budget Office which has stated since 2010 that the Affordable Care Act will do exactly that?

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44176


Quote:
Taking the coverage provisions and other provisions together, CBO and JCT have estimated that the ACA will reduce deficits over the next 10 years and in the subsequent decade. (We have not updated our estimate of the total budgetary impact of the ACA since last summer; for that most recent estimate, see Letter to the Honorable John Boehner providing an estimate for H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act.)"
I don't need a long screed, I have simply not seen a credible counter to the analysis put forward from a source which I trust and which I have found to be spot on in the past - and fiercely non-partisan. If your reply is that you believe that the CBO is partisan, then so be it.
__________________
Best concise summary of Intelligent Design's never-changing key argument: “ the improbability of assembly of functional sequence all at once from scratch by brute chance” (Nick Matske, Panda's Thumb).
SonOfLaertes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 01:02 PM   #44
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
BTW:

Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Okay, I'll bite. What provisions in the ACA are going make health care cheaper? The way I see it, there are several ways to make it cheaper. You can pay doctors and hospitals less. Or you can reduce demand on the system, by, for example, denying some care to patients who are dying. This is probably the smartest solution, but politically it's a hard sell.

But from what I can see, the ACA will not decrease demand; instead it will increase it. If more people are insured (the stated goal of the program) then presumably more people will seek care more frequently. Increased demand means higher prices; that's micro-economics 101.
Once you figure out why America pays the most for health care you will have answered your own question.

Quote:
According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an international organization of 30 developed countries, the United States spent 16 percent of its national income (GDP) on health care in 2007. This amount is by far the largest of any participating OECD nation. By comparison, Japan spent just over half that amount at 8.1 percent (in 2006), Turkey spent the lowest at 6.8 percent (in 2005) and France, the nation with the second-largest expenditure, spent 11 percent. Canada, our neighbor to the north, spent nearly 6 percent less on health care.
So explain, using your logic, why does America spend so much on health care?
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 01:18 PM   #45
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Obama care is just a creative way to spread the high cost out.

It's not going to reduce the cost of healthcare. The cost will be the same but, everyone will share it. Goods and services (along with everything else) will cost more.

No one really thinks that an employer is just going to suck up the cost. Right?

Brainsters right, there is no free lunch.

The only way to reduce cost (to the end user) is to reduce demand. Wellness programs would go along way if people only gave a crap. Americans love to get fixed once we break ourselves. That's why we pay so much for healthcare. God (or whatever you chose) bless us.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 16th June 2013 at 01:20 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 01:27 PM   #46
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Cool example that a close friend is involved with. And yes, it's getting good results.

http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/...th_weight.html
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 01:28 PM   #47
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Okay, I'll bite. What provisions in the ACA are going make health care cheaper? The way I see it, there are several ways to make it cheaper. You can pay doctors and hospitals less. Or you can reduce demand on the system, by, for example, denying some care to patients who are dying. This is probably the smartest solution, but politically it's a hard sell.

But from what I can see, the ACA will not decrease demand; instead it will increase it. If more people are insured (the stated goal of the program) then presumably more people will seek care more frequently. Increased demand means higher prices; that's micro-economics 101.
Did you read that TIME Magazine cover story that came out about our health care system? Many of our costs are artificially high due to what can only reasonably be described as price gouging. People with insurance generally end up paying less than Chargemaster costs, and Medicare and Medicaid usually pays far less. People who have no insurance usually have little to no leverage with which to reduce their medical bills to reasonable levels.
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 01:29 PM   #48
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
The only way to reduce cost (to the end user) is to reduce demand.
Wrong. We can reduce cost by eliminating price gouging. Whether the ACA accomplishes this is a legitimate question though.
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 01:40 PM   #49
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
Wrong. We can reduce cost by eliminating price gouging. Whether the ACA accomplishes this is a legitimate question though.
Part of this "price gouging" is because a large percentage of ER visits and uninsured billings are never paid. That's really not all that significant (it's an excuse for the root problem)

The higher cost is due to higher risk of collection (sucks, huh). Insured cost are not fixed either. Hospitals normally charge for uninsured (under). payments.

Supply and demand is really simple to understand. We (I include myself) Americans are not exactly the healthiest people on the planet. Because of that we pay more to live longer.

Obama care spreads out the high cost. It's a stop gap band-aid for a much larger problem no one likes to address. Living like we do is costly (for all of us).
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 16th June 2013 at 01:41 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 01:41 PM   #50
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
Wrong. We can reduce cost by eliminating price gouging. Whether the ACA accomplishes this is a legitimate question though.
I will concede that point.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 01:51 PM   #51
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Part of this "price gouging" is because a large percentage of ER visits and uninsured billings are never paid. That's really not all that significant (it's an excuse for the root problem)

The higher cost is due to higher risk of collection (sucks, huh). Insured cost are not fixed either. Hospitals normally charge for uninsured (under). payments.

Supply and demand is really simple to understand. We (I include myself) Americans are not exactly the healthiest people on the planet. Because of that we pay more to live longer.

Obama care spreads out the high cost. It's a stop gap band-aid for a much larger problem no one likes to address. Living like we do is costly (for all of us).
No, it really is just price gouging. Chargemaster rates are almost arbitrarily set and are often one or two orders of magnitude more expensive than the actual materials or procedure should be. Charging $84 for a saline solution that sells for $5/liter online is not done to make up for the cost of the uninsured. It's price gouging in an industry where the typical laws of supply and demand don't really apply.

And I don't buy for a second the claim that our staggering health care costs are due to our collective unhealthy lifestyle. Our costs really didn't start to soar until relatively recently, and I doubt you can come up with a study to show that our lifestyle suddenly because comparatively unhealthier than that of all other modern nations at around that time.
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe

Last edited by maxpower1227; 16th June 2013 at 01:55 PM.
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:00 PM   #52
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
No, it really is just price gouging. Chargemaster rates are almost arbitrarily set and are often one or two orders of magnitude more expensive than the actual materials or procedure should be. Charging $84 for a saline solution that sells for $5/liter online is not done to make up for the cost of the uninsured. It's price gouging in an industry where the typical laws of supply and demand don't really apply.

And I don't buy for a second the claim that our staggering health care costs are due to our collective unhealthy lifestyle. Our costs really didn't start to soar until relatively recently, and I doubt you can come up with a study to show that our lifestyle suddenly because comparatively unhealthier than that of all other modern nations at around that time.
You don't really think if this was fixed it would be all rainbows with healthcare, right?

The POTUS speech I would love to see, the one where he says "you pay a lot because you need a lot. You ignore your health then expect this not to bite you in the ass."

Funny thing, in my company. We reduced our premiums and held cost steady because we all quit smoking.(this is over 4 years ago, eight for me). Side effect, productivity is up.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 16th June 2013 at 02:02 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:06 PM   #53
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
You don't really think if this was fixed it would be all rainbows with healthcare, right?

The POTUS speech I would love to see, the one where he says "you pay a lot because you need a lot. You ignore your health then expect this not to bite you in the ass."

Funny thing, in my company. We reduced our premiums and held cost steady because we all quit smoking.(this is over 4 years). Side effect, productivity is up.
That's great, but can you show me some data that suggest that the dramatic increase in our health care costs correlates with some quantifiable change in the healthiness of our lifestyle?
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:24 PM   #54
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 15,903
Originally Posted by SonOfLaertes View Post
I'm sure this has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere but what, briefly, is your counter to the analysis (recently updated) put forward by the Congressional Budget Office which has stated since 2010 that the Affordable Care Act will do exactly that?

I don't need a long screed, I have simply not seen a credible counter to the analysis put forward from a source which I trust and which I have found to be spot on in the past - and fiercely non-partisan. If your reply is that you believe that the CBO is partisan, then so be it.
That CBO estimate shows the cost going from about $0 to about $160 billion from 2013 to 2016. It's true that it does say:

Quote:
Those amounts do not reflect the total budgetary impact of the ACA. That legislation includes many other provisions that, on net, will reduce budget deficits.
I'm just a little skeptical. True there are some provisions (like the tax penalty for not getting insurance) that will act to reduce the deficit, but do they really total more than $160 billion?
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:27 PM   #55
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
That's great, but can you show me some data that suggest that the dramatic increase in our health care costs correlates with some quantifiable change in the healthiness of our lifestyle?
Odd request.

It's supply and demand 101. The higher the demand the the higher the cost giving a fix supply. Think gas prices, same thing.

In the US we have created a huge demand on a fixed supply. Reducing the demand reduces the price the supplier can command for the supply.

Every "healthcare reform" I see does not address the supply. It expects the supply to command less for the demand.

All well and good but, try convincing someone to do eight years of med school so they can get minimum wage.

Less demand produces less loss through non payment and also drives competition.

This is a sore subject because it breaches the idea we created this ourselves. Back to the idea it's cheaper to maintain something than to fix it once it's broken.

Obamacare is a stop gap, It does not address the root problem.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:35 PM   #56
Ausmerican
Illuminator
 
Ausmerican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Odd request.

It's supply and demand 101. The higher the demand the the higher the cost giving a fix supply. Think gas prices, same thing.

In the US we have created a huge demand on a fixed supply. Reducing the demand reduces the price the supplier can command for the supply.

Every "healthcare reform" I see does not address the supply. It expects the supply to command less for the demand.

All well and good but, try convincing someone to do eight years of med school so they can get minimum wage.

Less demand produces less loss through non payment and also drives competition.

This is a sore subject because it breaches the idea we created this ourselves. Back to the idea it's cheaper to maintain something than to fix it once it's broken.

Obamacare is a stop gap, It does not address the root problem.
You are looking at the wrong part of the supply chain in cutting costs. It is not the Doctors, Nurses and Techs that are doing the price gouging, it is the materials suppliers.
People being charged hundreds of dollars for a pill they could buy a whole bottle of for $10 outside the hospital environment.
Thousands of dollars for products that cost cents to make. Supplying to the medical field has been lucrative for years because if it is medical, you can add a couple of zeros to the price and it'll get paid. That is the area where change has to take place and where the gouging is going on.
__________________
Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau
Ausmerican is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:44 PM   #57
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by Ausmerican View Post
You are looking at the wrong part of the supply chain in cutting costs. It is not the Doctors, Nurses and Techs that are doing the price gouging, it is the materials suppliers.
People being charged hundreds of dollars for a pill they could buy a whole bottle of for $10 outside the hospital environment.
Thousands of dollars for products that cost cents to make. Supplying to the medical field has been lucrative for years because if it is medical, you can add a couple of zeros to the price and it'll get paid. That is the area where change has to take place and where the gouging is going on.
How much does it cost to develop the drug that cost cents to make?

Some of these drugs take years to develop and to get to market. Should the company just absorb this cost, along with wages of the people that worked on it?

What's the total cost? The part of the equation you are ignoring.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 16th June 2013 at 02:46 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:47 PM   #58
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Odd request.

It's supply and demand 101. The higher the demand the the higher the cost giving a fix supply. Think gas prices, same thing.

In the US we have created a huge demand on a fixed supply. Reducing the demand reduces the price the supplier can command for the supply.

Every "healthcare reform" I see does not address the supply. It expects the supply to command less for the demand.

All well and good but, try convincing someone to do eight years of med school so they can get minimum wage.

Less demand produces less loss through non payment and also drives competition.

This is a sore subject because it breaches the idea we created this ourselves. Back to the idea it's cheaper to maintain something than to fix it once it's broken.

Obamacare is a stop gap, It does not address the root problem.
It's odd that you choose two commodities for which demand is fairly inelastic to lecture us about supply and demand curves.

And I made the request because you seemed to be suggesting that our high health care costs were driven by an unhealthy collective lifestyle.
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:52 PM   #59
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
How much does it cost to develop the drug that cost cents to make?

Some of these drugs take years to develop and to get to market. Should the company just absorb this cost, along with wages of the people that worked on it?

What's the total cost? The part of the equation you are ignoring.
What you are ignoring is that many prescription drugs are sold at much lower prices in foreign markets which don't allow price gouging.

Seriously, read the TIME cover story: Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 02:54 PM   #60
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
It's odd that you choose two commodities for which demand is fairly inelastic to lecture us about supply and demand curves.

And I made the request because you seemed to be suggesting that our high health care costs were driven by an unhealthy collective lifestyle.
How does the US lifestyle compare when you use it to compare healthcare cost? Do we live a healthier lifestyle? How about obesity statistics?

Want to go there?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:08 PM   #61
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by Ausmerican View Post
Thousands of dollars for products that cost cents to make. Supplying to the medical field has been lucrative for years because if it is medical, you can add a couple of zeros to the price and it'll get paid. That is the area where change has to take place and where the gouging is going on.
I'm interested.

Are you in favor of abolishing the USDA, FDA and the requirements it takes to get a drug certified for use in the US?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 16th June 2013 at 03:10 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:10 PM   #62
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
That CBO estimate shows the cost going from about $0 to about $160 billion from 2013 to 2016. It's true that it does say:

I'm just a little skeptical. True there are some provisions (like the tax penalty for not getting insurance) that will act to reduce the deficit, but do they really total more than $160 billion?
Have you figured out yet why America pays more than any other nation for health care? If there is any reason to be skeptical of a premise it's that.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:14 PM   #63
Ausmerican
Illuminator
 
Ausmerican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
How does the US lifestyle compare when you use it to compare healthcare cost? Do we live a healthier lifestyle? How about obesity statistics?

Want to go there?
It depends what you want to base obesity statistics on.
Sadly for the most part the term is determined by using the BMI, a totally outdated and inaccurate measure. BMI is only a measure of height vs weight and recognizes no difference between a 240 pound 6 footer that is 5% body fat and the rest lean muscle and a 240 pound 6 footer that is 45% body fat. According to BMI measurements Arnold was morbidly obese when he was Mr Olympia.
Also the requirements for a lap-band surgery were lowered last year to a 30 BMI. At 5'9" and 225lbs I would easily qualify for a lap-band under the current requirements, despite the fact that I have a 34" waist.
Sadly, most of the people getting bariatric surgery these days do so not because they need it but because they see it as a quick easy alternative to diet and exercise.
It isn't.
And many of those same people are going to run up more costs afterwards when they are back in the hospital for revisions, reversals and various other problems.
Obesity statistics are therefore highly misleading. Do we have a lot of overweight people in this country? Absolutely. But we also have a lot of very fit, muscular people in this country as well.
__________________
Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau
Ausmerican is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:23 PM   #64
Ausmerican
Illuminator
 
Ausmerican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I'm interested.

Are you in favor of abolishing the USDA, FDA and the requirements it takes to get a drug certified for use in the US?
I can't for the life of me see what your question has to do with my earlier comment and no I am not in favor of that. I would rather see an additional branch of these departments charged with watch-dogging price gouging.

You are still talking about drugs like the gouging is going on at the high end of drug supply. You were already shown how much a patient is charged for a bag or saline solution compared to the actual cost. The pills I was referring to that are charged so highly for were Motrin and aspirin, not specialized anti-virals or cancer drugs.
You think they are still recouping the R&D costs for Motrin? Or aspirin?
A plastic splint in a hospital can easily cost you in the hundreds.

The gouging is endemic and covers everything from cheap disposables to simple OTC meds up to the top end. There is often actually LESS gouging on the high end items simply because they start out that high to begin with.
__________________
Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau
Ausmerican is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:32 PM   #65
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
How does the US lifestyle compare when you use it to compare healthcare cost? Do we live a healthier lifestyle? How about obesity statistics?

Want to go there?
Sure, was there a sudden increase in obesity that correlates in time with the time during which our health care costs started to skyrocket?
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:32 PM   #66
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by RandFan View Post
It's amazing how people can make this argument. My son for the first time will be able to afford health insurance.
Can he afford the hospital bill?
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:34 PM   #67
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by Ausmerican View Post

The gouging is endemic and covers everything from cheap disposables to simple OTC meds up to the top end. There is often actually LESS gouging on the high end items simply because they start out that high to begin with.

OK. Show me how to fix this without cutting the wages of all involved across the board? You're not claiming that it's just the greedy pharmaceutical companies?

Tell me, what are the regulations each step along the process has to go through to safely get that saline to the hospital while complying to regulations? Toss it in the mail?

Don't forget post use disposal, you can't just toss that in the trash.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 16th June 2013 at 03:40 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:43 PM   #68
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Tell me, what are the regulations each step along the process has to go through to safely get that saline to the hospital while complying to regulations? Toss it in the mail?
Yes, I imagine that's about all it takes to get a supply of saline to a hospital. Why would it require any tremendous amount of special handling, let alone enough to increase the cost by an order of magnitude or more?

You are stretching quite a bit here. $7 for an alcohol prep pad that you can buy in bulk for less than a penny a piece. That's a 70,000% markup. There's a 36x markup for diabetes testing strips. 480x markup on niacin pills. A box of gauze pads will cost you $77. For ****'s sake, read the article, and quit trying to excuse obvious price gouging.
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:44 PM   #69
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
Sure, was there a sudden increase in obesity that correlates in time with the time during which our health care costs started to skyrocket?
Tip of the iceberg.

The regulation governing anything medical and the liability for anyone that deals with it. We really need more government involvement.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:45 PM   #70
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
Yes, I imagine that's about all it takes to get a supply of saline to a hospital. Why would it require any tremendous amount of special handling, let alone enough to increase the cost by an order of magnitude or more?

You are stretching quite a bit here. $7 for an alcohol prep pad that you can buy in bulk for less than a penny a piece. That's a 70,000% markup. There's a 36x markup for diabetes testing strips. 480x markup on niacin pills. A box of gauze pads will cost you $77. For ****'s sake, read the article, and quit trying to excuse obvious price gouging.
The hospital charges that because they have to pay the doctors and nurses and administrators and lots of other workers.
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:46 PM   #71
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,653
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
Yes, I imagine that's about all it takes to get a supply of saline to a hospital. Why would it require any tremendous amount of special handling, let alone enough to increase the cost by an order of magnitude or more?

You are stretching quite a bit here. $7 for an alcohol prep pad that you can buy in bulk for less than a penny a piece. That's a 70,000% markup. There's a 36x markup for diabetes testing strips. 480x markup on niacin pills. A box of gauze pads will cost you $77. For ****'s sake, read the article, and quit trying to excuse obvious price gouging.
No problem. When a shipment shows up contaminated, you'd accept "how the hell should I know how that happened. Sorry your Mom died".
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 16th June 2013 at 03:48 PM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:50 PM   #72
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
The hospital charges that because they have to pay the doctors and nurses and administrators and lots of other workers.
Don't forget the 7-figure executive salaries and the staggering amount of money they spend on lobbying Congress.
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:51 PM   #73
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
It's pretty amazing the lengths conservatives in this country will go to to defend and protect excessive corporate profits. This is why we can't have nice things, like a decent universal health care system that every other modern nation manages to provide for their citizens.
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:51 PM   #74
Ausmerican
Illuminator
 
Ausmerican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
OK. Show me how to fix this without cutting the wages of all involved across the board? You're not claiming that it's just the greedy pharmaceutical companies?

Tell me, what are the regulations each step along the process has to go through to safely get that saline to the hospital while complying to regulations? Toss it in the mail?

Don't forget post use disposal, you can't just toss that in the trash.
You cant just toss saline solution in the trash? It is water with a little salt in it, you can pour it down the drain.
And yes it gets delivered normally, not by mail but only because of the quantity. It is not a drug.
Do you imagine that everything that gets delivered to a hospital is delivered by guys in Steri-suits using special sterile transports or something? Even surgical equipment that needs to be sterile is delivered by those great surgery specialists, UPS and FedEx. They simply put the product inside a sterile package inside a non sterile package.

And again this has nothing to do with just pharmaceutical companies, much of the inflated prices are on things like slings and splints and screws and a multitude of things that come from common everyday manufacturers.
And as for cutting wages across the board, many clinical staff in hospitals have seen stagnant wages for years now. The money isn't going there.
The huge amount of non clinical staff in administration that are getting their raises every year as well as annual bonuses larger than some nurses annual pay would be a good place to start cutting.
__________________
Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau
Ausmerican is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:55 PM   #75
Ausmerican
Illuminator
 
Ausmerican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
No problem. When a shipment shows up contaminated, you'd accept "how the hell should I know how that happened. Sorry your Mom died".
Yeah, because when a package shows up opened or damaged the hospital just uses it anyway. It isn't like they have any quality control programs in place or anything.
__________________
Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau
Ausmerican is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 03:56 PM   #76
maxpower1227
Master Poster
 
maxpower1227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,998
Originally Posted by Ausmerican View Post
You cant just toss saline solution in the trash? It is water with a little salt in it, you can pour it down the drain.
And yes it gets delivered normally, not by mail but only because of the quantity. It is not a drug.
Do you imagine that everything that gets delivered to a hospital is delivered by guys in Steri-suits using special sterile transports or something? Even surgical equipment that needs to be sterile is delivered by those great surgery specialists, UPS and FedEx. They simply put the product inside a sterile package inside a non sterile package..
Thank you. You handled that post much better than I did. I was just so stunned by the sheer idiocy of suggesting that price gouging on freaking salt water was due to some special shipping requirements.
__________________
Warning. If you don't want to see your treasured "evidence" completely pwned in public, don't show it to the posters at JREF.
- Rolfe

Last edited by maxpower1227; 16th June 2013 at 03:58 PM.
maxpower1227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 04:00 PM   #77
Ausmerican
Illuminator
 
Ausmerican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
The hospital charges that because they have to pay the doctors and nurses and administrators and lots of other workers.
Almost every department in every hospital has to justify their man hours against their productivity hours. Generally if it drops below 100% someone is getting sent home to flex out some time and make up the shortfall.
Except of course for administration. Not that it would matter if they went home since they are salaried anyway.
Also most doctors don't work for hospitals anymore, they work for a physicians group that contracts with various hospitals.
__________________
Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau
Ausmerican is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 04:02 PM   #78
Ausmerican
Illuminator
 
Ausmerican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
Thank you. You handled that post much better than I did. I was just so stunned by the sheer idiocy of suggesting that price gouging on freaking salt water was due to some special shipping requirements.
De nada. I sat there blinking and re-reading it a few times too.
__________________
Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau
Ausmerican is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 04:43 PM   #79
Delvo
الشيطان الأبيض
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 7,550
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
The POTUS speech I would love to see, the one where he says "you pay a lot because you need a lot. You ignore your health then expect this not to bite you in the ass."
Ignoring our own health is exactly what people are forced to do by high prices.

You're saying the "need" or "demand" is much greater in the USA than in other countries with practically the same health standards but lower costs. Why? I've seen the old "Americans are fat" stereotype thrown around, but the actual numbers for that claim were never anywhere near as severe as the stereotype, even before the USA got bumped to second place behind a country with significantly lower health care costs, and even then, the timing was wrong because the growth in people's size didn't relate to the growth in costs.

Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
Yes, I imagine that's about all it takes to get a supply of saline to a hospital. Why would it require any tremendous amount of special handling, let alone enough to increase the cost by an order of magnitude or more?
No more need for imagining: I've worked in a hospital storage area. It was no different from working in either of a couple of other storage rooms or warehouses I've worked at. Supplies (including saline bags) came in in cardboard boxes on trucks. We unloaded the trucks and put the boxes on shelves. We took items off of the shelves and delivered them to various departments throughout the hospital, sometimes using an obscure piece of technology known as a "cart". We often brought garbage back down with us and threw it in garbage dumpsters.

There's no place that the idea that there's anything special to this to legitimize prices (and somehow only in the USA, not other comparable countries) could possibly have come from, other than purely making it up. That was a truly desperate move.
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2013, 06:10 PM   #80
RandFan
Mormon Atheist
 
RandFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 60,134
Once the govt mandates that people cannot be turned away and hospitals can charge whatever they want to cover their shortfall then you have a problem.

Personally I'm not happy with the ACA. I'd rather have UHC but it's a move in the right direction.
__________________
Ego, ain't it a bitch?
RandFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:10 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.