What? No, it’s oligopolized. Completely end-stage capitalist. The successful insurance companies have made it very difficult or impossible for competition to exist.
It’s normal capitalism happening when not properly regulated.
13 Likes
13 Likes
Its not really a monopoly because there are so many companies involved, unless you count the government as the monopoly, in which case its communist or socialist, thought I would accept fascism or corporatism.
What stops competitors undercutting established health care providers? I suspect regulation, registration requirements, and the necessity to either deal with established infrastructure or build your own.
The system has insufficient competition and is not open enough. People who argue for socialism are pushing the wrong way, IMHO, which is why they are not making any progress.
Health care in my country is called socialized, but I can still pay cash for services if I want.
1 Like
You can pay cash here, too… but it will bankrupt you unless you are wealthy.
This is not a socialist system, in any meaningful way. Insurance companies run how it operates and I suspect there is a fair amount of collusion behind the scenes to keep us from having a system that has fewer layers of bureaucracy between us and our doctors, making it an effective monopoly, because the insurance companies work together to keep prices higher than they need to be. They pay lobbyist millions of dollars each year to ensure that a public option is right off the table (it happened during the ACA negotiation, with a public option being the the first thing to go).
As someone who has a parent who went from having no insurance, and drowning in debt/debt collectors phone calls (including WHILE MY STEPFATHER WAS ON HIS FUCKING DEATH BED), to having medicare, it’s a world of difference for her. She can go get the care she needs and not stress about the cost, because other than her co-pay and premium (which is taken out of her social security) it’s pretty much covered. She is FINALLY getting the care she needs so she can enjoy her retirement. We all deserve to be able to go to the doctor without fear of the costs. Health care is a human right, not a commodity.
16 Likes
It’s a cartel. In a way just as ruthless as the ones involved in narcotics.
13 Likes
Yep. That’s really the best way to describe health insurance in america.
The major companies conspire to make sure that their industry remains as profitable as possible with little to no meaningful competition.
12 Likes
That’s the word I was looking for… cartel! Thanks!
10 Likes
What stops you from setting up a parallel system which is not a cartel?
All the barriers to entry like regulatory approval systems put in place by the insurance companies once they’ve already become the national standard.
Additionally, branding, and the fact that even getting this kind of thing setup has such a capital outlay you’d have to be far beyond actually needing insurance yourself if you could afford to build this kind of system.
11 Likes
Yeah part of it is regulation but one factor you didn’t mention is that investors will support the more profitable system, so you may not get enough investment to may for your capital. Medicine requires high initial capital outlay.
That… what? This is the most parent thing I’ve said, but do you think I’m made of money or that it comes off a fucking tree? How am I as an individual meant to do that?
As for the government doing that, considering the amount of corporate control over congress right now, medicare for all seems unlikely without a big push from the electorate.
Do you not really understand how American politics is so captured by corporate interests at the expense of the public?
10 Likes
For all I know you could be Bill Gates, so then the question would be What stops Bill Gates from…
I am trying to explore the reasons why US health care is stuck in this particular rut, and what could be done to get it out of that rut. Up to this point I have discussed regulation (and yes, politics and political fund raising are a problem there). I also suggested that limited investment makes it difficult for competitors to enter the market.
That’s silly, clearly, I’m not Bill Gates, nor would Bill Gates likely be hanging out on the BBS.
Several people have explained the major part of the problem (corporate cartels and lobbyist activity that makes a public option relatively unlikely at this point). Try going back and reading replies to you which illustrate these points.
10 Likes
9 Likes
That’s right on the money, honey!
7 Likes
Not to mention medical professional licensing and med school admissions. Specialists in the US earn 3 times what their counterparts in Germany or Norway do, yet we have a doctor shortage.
3 Likes
And you have a problem with malpractice, particularly how easy it is to sue a doctor into oblivion for something that would be dealt with very differently in most places.
1 Like
To be fair, they also have a very heavy debt load coming out of medical school in the US - often in the hundreds of thousands, because of schools not being supported by public funds like they are in Germany and Norway. Many people who do go to med school make the decision to go into more lucrative fields instead of less well paying fields like family medicine, or working in public hospitals.
7 Likes
I think suing a doctor into oblivion is actually quite difficult. Moreover, malpractice insurance is not very expensive.
There’s a heavy debt load coming out of school with practically any major nowadays. Yes, it is very expensive to educate a medical student in the US, as it is done with a level of personal attention that educators in your field and mine can only dream about, from people with salaries that educators in your field and mine can only dream about. On my public campus, where I have been on the relevant budget committee, a large fraction of that cost is heavily subsidized by the same budget pot that funds undergraduate education.
If the medical profession in the US had the desire to reform this, they could.
Well that explains it./s
4 Likes
