Healthcare reform never talks about healthcare costs...

[johnlal]

Whenever politicians talk about the cost of healthcare, they immediately begin talking about putting more people on insurance. While this may be part of a good strategy, it should be noted that health insurance doesn't necessarily lower healthcare costs. Adding more high-risk people to the insurance rolls increases costs for the others. It also provides a deep pocket for providers, so that they won't feel bad about padding a bill or charging a little more than they would charge a willing buyer in a free market.

If we really want to lower the cost of healthcare to the average American, it seems to me that the most direct approach would be to put price controls on healthcare providers and pharmaceuticals. Wouldn't that be easier than messing around with insurance?

[blm]

1. Kerry's 2004 healthcare plan included the emphasis on cutting the excess

costs.

http://www.news-medical.net/print_article.asp?id=2775

[jljamison]

2. you are so right

This is a multifaceted beast. Insurance access will not solve the problem in its entirety. Until we address the costs and cost escalation of health care, in the end it won't matter if people have insurance or not.

[johnlal]

6. This is just a side comment, but...

When I was in the hospital recently for appendectomy, I was charged $10 for aspirin. Now I realize that everything in the hospital is expensive, and that when you pay $10 for 2 aspirin tablets, you aren't only paying for the aspirin. But the thing is, I don't remember ever taking any aspirin while I was there! There were a lot of other stuff they tried to put on my bill as well. (The ambulance driver wheeled me directly to a private room. Didn't ask my preference. That was the only available room. The hospital bill charged me extra for a private room).

Now some people would say that since insurance is paying, it doesn't really matter. Not me. I called and had those charges taken off my bill. I wonder how much of this goes on?

[Misskittycat]

3. Absolutely right. n/t

[McCamy Taylor]

4. Price controls wont make a Coronary bypass any easier to afford w/o insurance.

The reason the US pays twice as much per capita as the next most expensive nation on earth (Swizt) for health care that by the health indicators (life expectancy, infant mortality etc) puts us at the bottom of industrialized/first world nations is that we LACK cradle to grave single payer universal health insurance, therefore no single (read government) body has any financial or moral incentive to do serious research or investment in disease prevention.

Instead, we get this bloated system in which Pfizer gets rich if you ignore your health for 60 years then develop diabetes, vacular disease, heart disease, high cholestorel, have a stroke or two but can still walk on your arthritic knees. HCA makes money bypassing your diseased arteries and giving you a couple of new knees. Even if you make them cut their prices by half, they are still costing the country WAY too much money and the quality of life people get with this kind of bandaid medicine is piss poor compared to what they would have had if they had been seeing a doctor every year and if they had been encouraged from their youth to take good care of their bodies.

Take a look at people in Western Europe and Japan. People who eat right and walk places and do not smoke and who live to be 100. That could be us.

So saying "We will pay less for our end of life care" is not going to get us out of the hole we are in. Medicare and Medicaid have already cut reimbusrsements to providers down to the bare minimum, and that has not prevented providers from offering services, because when someone comes in and says "I am having chest pain" the doctor is doing to treat it, no matter how little he is paid.

PS The good news is that after a few years of single payer cradle to grave universal health care, we will begin preventing disease and this will pay off in savings so that our health care per person costs should fall into line with countries like Japan and France--i.e they should eventually become half or less than what they are now.

[GeorgeGist]

5. Because then they would have to,,,

confront the PROFITEERS of the ILLNESS INDUSTRY.

[Vinca]

7. The problem is the insurance companies.

They are making nearly as much money as big oil and have taken the risk out of their business. Try to buy insurance at any price if you're older or have a chronic illness or a history of just about anything. They don't want you. The same is true for homeowner's insurance in hurricane-prone areas. They can't drop the policies fast enough. Take the insurance companies out of the mix, expand Medicare, raise taxes to pay for it and inform hospitals that if they charge $10 for aspirin, they can expect a check for 25 cents.

[Ino]

8. earthquake-prone areas too

After paying an extra premium for earthquake insurance (in St. Louis) for the last 10 years, Allstate dropped the coverage this year. At first my agent said he could point me to another company who'd provide it at increased rate & lower benefits. But after hearing I have a 102-year-old brick house, he said there's no way anyone will cover it for earthquake damage. So if the Madrid fault shatters and swallows my house, I'll just be homeless. It was OK before Katrina though, I guess.

[Vinca]

9. Amazing. I hadn't thought of earthquake areas.

You can live in my house after I die from lack of health insurance.

[antigop]

10. Vinca, I am outraged that we live in a country where you don't have health insurance

What kind of country do we live in, anyway? It angers me to no end. NO ONE SHOULD BE TREATED THIS WAY! NO ONE!