A Modest Proposal (Think Jonathan Swift) on Health Insurance and Health Costs

[Dadoalex]

No, I don't. You're just making shit up.

Please clarify.
What have I made up?

Be specific.

 

[dblack]

Please clarify.
What have I made up?

You said I was defending greed. I'm not. I'm just trying to discuss the factors driving health care inflation.

Be specific.

Be specific? You can stow the pedantic posturing.

 

[Dadoalex]

You said I was defending greed. I'm not. I'm just trying to discuss the factors driving health care inflation.

Be specific? You can stow the pedantic posturing.

You, in fact, are defending greed.
You may not like being called on it but that is exactly what you have been doing.

and

You said I was "making stuff up" e.g. calling me a liar.
I don't think it is unfair of me to ask you for specifics when making such an accusation.

Of course, since I'm not lying and you are, in fact, embarrassed by your position in this discussion I can understand your attempt, invalid and incorrect, as it is at insulting.

 

[dblack]

You, in fact, are defending greed.

Quote it then.

You may not like being called on it but that is exactly what you have been doing.

and

You said I was "making stuff up" e.g. calling me a liar.

You are a liar. You said I'm defending greed. You just did it again.

 

[Dadoalex]

Quote it then.

You are a liar. You said I'm defending greed. You just did it again.

"Yet the profit motive exists in every market and we don't see the kind of spiraling costs we see in health care."

There ya go LIAR.
Lying about CLEARLY defending greed and blaming the consumer WHO HAS LITTLE CHOICE IF ANY in choosing they type of care, the provider, and ESPECIALLY THE COST.

Defend greed? It's in your nature.
Ly about defending greed? It's also in your nature, LIAR.

 

[dblack]

"Yet the profit motive exists in every market and we don't see the kind of spiraling costs we see in health care."

Yep. That's what I typed. But it's not defending greed. It's an observation of fact.

There ya go LIAR.
Lying about CLEARLY defending greed and blaming the consumer

Wtf? I'm not blaming the consumer. Maybe you're not a liar. Maybe your poor reading comprehension is the problem.

WHO HAS LITTLE CHOICE IF ANY in choosing they type of care, the provider, and ESPECIALLY THE COST.

You're right about that, at least. They don't have much choice. The government and the insurance lobby have colluded to take away viable alternatives and herd is into the "group insurance" pens.

Defend greed? It's in your nature.

Good grief. Now you have insight into my "nature"? Get lost. And stop lying about my posts, jackass.

 

[Dadoalex]

Yep. That's what I typed. But it's not defending greed. It's an observation of fact.

Wtf? I'm not blaming the consumer. Maybe you're not a liar. Maybe your poor reading comprehension is the problem.

You're right about that, at least. They don't have much choice. The government and the insurance lobby have colluded to take away viable alternatives and herd is into the "group insurance" pens.

Good grief. Now you have insight into my "nature"? Get lost. And stop lying about my posts, jackass.

Defending greed and blaming the consumer.

"They get away with all this " GREED
" because no one cares how much their health care costs. " Blaming the consumer.

You nature? Sure. A person who defends greed because you think uncontrolled capitalism is the American dream when, for the overwhelming majority of Americans, uncontrolled capitalism is the American nightmare.

Just ask people trying to rent an apartment or buy insurance for their house in Florida.

If you don't want me to call you a liar, stop lying, LIAR.

 

[dblack]

Defending greed and blaming the consumer

Nope. Go fuck yourself.

 

[Greenbeard]

That's because the ACA was NOT a good idea to begin with. It attempted to fund the insurance industry instead of bypassing it, and no one was surprised when all it did was drive up costs.

Except in reality cost growth fell substantially after the ACA passed, saving trillions. Health care right now comprises a slightly smaller share of the economy than it did when the ACA passed, which is unheard of.

 

[dblack]

Except in reality cost growth fell substantially after the ACA passed, saving trillions. Health care right now comprises a slightly smaller share of the economy than it did when the ACA passed, which is unheard of.

Ahhh... The insurance lobby has arrived! Gotta protect that turf!

 

[Dadoalex]

Nope. Go fuck yourself.

You first. You are after all the genitals in any conversation.

 

[dblack]

You first. You are after all the genitals in any conversation.

Piss off, troll.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Except in reality cost growth fell substantially after the ACA passed, saving trillions. Health care right now comprises a slightly smaller share of the economy than it did when the ACA passed, which is unheard of.

Ever wonder why so many health care stats get supplied by the Kaiser Family rather than by a government agency charged with overseeing the entire industry? The KFF was instrumental in sticking us all with employer based / HMO insured health care "plans" from the very beginning. Only they understood the value of filling the niche between pure HC provider and pure insurance provider and stuck with it. Did both. As a result the left coast has enjoyed better care at a better price than most of the country. That doesn't mean any of it was ever a good idea or cheaper on the "consumer" end than just sticking with fee for service, for example. A private-public partnership no one ever voted for that's cost us all far too much both financially and in terms of freedom.

 

[Greenbeard]

Ever wonder why so many health care stats get supplied by the Kaiser Family rather than by a government agency charged with overseeing the entire industry?

National Health Expenditures data is supplied by the government.

 

[dblack]

National Health Expenditures data is supplied by the government.

Well, there's a trustworthy source.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Government owned hospitals, clinics, testing facilities, staffed by government employed doctors, nurses, technicians and support personnel.

Funded by tax dollars.

This doesn't mean that there can't be private hospitals, doctors, etc. and even insurance but, as shown by comparing the US system to systems around the world such a system would reduce health care costs by 50% or more while providing better outcomes for patients.

We have had lots of both and neither works perfectly or without waste. So I don't see any 50% savings just from making more provider facilities public ones. Cheaper, undoubtedly. But I believe people in this country value private, independent service providers more than elsewhere. They would be screaming communism in a heartbeat with little prompting from the billionaires. I've gone to one of these local drive-in HC places several times now and been treated as well or better than at my family doctor's office. They ain't half bad.

What there can't be is private HC insurance for routine HC or emergencies. Cosmetic care? No problem.

 

[Grumblenuts]

National Health Expenditures data is supplied by the government.

Exactly what I expected from you. Nothing.

You posted an image of what's obviously a KFF supplied chart containing some government data underneath their own. So now which data is whose? Can't tell, right? Why not? Because you posted a snapshot instead of the actual image from its source. Supplied no links either. So damned helpful. You work for Kaiser or what?

 

[Grumblenuts]

How much is health spending expected to grow? - Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker

This chart collection explores how health spending is expected to grow in coming years, based on National Health Expenditure (NHE) projections from federal actuaries. A related chart collection explores how U.S. health spending has changed over time using historical data, and an interactive tool...

www.healthsystemtracker.org

Wow. One can't even find a link to the original data anywhere. Oh, but just look at all the silly charts! Wow, wow, there's even a nifty KFF projection Tool!

 

[Greenbeard]

How much is health spending expected to grow? - Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker

This chart collection explores how health spending is expected to grow in coming years, based on National Health Expenditure (NHE) projections from federal actuaries. A related chart collection explores how U.S. health spending has changed over time using historical data, and an interactive tool...

www.healthsystemtracker.org

Wow. One can't even find a link to the original data anywhere. Oh, but just look at all the silly charts! Wow, wow, there's even a nifty KFF projection Tool!

Good to see you learned that bright blue underlined text is a hyperlink.

Now: all National Health Expenditures data, historical and projected, is also available online. National Health Expenditure Data | CMS

Actual spending over the past thirteen has come in well below expectations because cost growth fell so sharply for so long after the ACA passed.

Anyway, what are you disputing? The post-ACA slowdown in health care spending growth is quite well-known and well-documented in every corner of the health care system (e.g., the halt in Medicare per beneficiary spending growth in 2010--after 45 years of steady growth up to that point--when the ACA passed has saved nearly $4 trillion so far just on that program).

 

[dblack]

The OP still stands, unchallenged. And I think it really hits the mark. Our problem isn't lack of insurance. It's over insurance, incentivized and even mandated, by the government. The first, best, steps to undo the damage would be to repeal the laws requiring employers to provide health insurance and the tax incentives encouraging them to do so, and abolish the state regulatory fiefdoms (utterly controlled by the insurance industry) that limit our choices in the interests of the insurance companies that control them.