Ok, that's horrific. I have the good fortune of being at the other end of the spectrum, Horizon BC/BS who can't seem to be happier to provide comprehensive coverage.
Oh, maybe I was thinking of Falling Down with the "Not economically viable" guy?
More like Sarah Connor from T2. She says "You're already dead, Silberman. Everybody dies."
I indeed do not live in US. I have location under my name (on the left, btw. more people should us that function). US has problem with unregulated (or very poorly regulated) healthcare system, where all the components cooperate to maximize prices and profits.
But I don't trust Elon. I use to. But he's proven himself to be a self centered cretin.
Yes to smear his bovine excrement.
We could run them down in order, starting from social.security as a spitshined Ponzi scheme, to the grossly overfunded military and its highly disputable benefits to most of civilization, but the resulting quagmire of derail would be insufferable.
They do. Whether they are better, worse, or some of each is again, a long discussion. Convincing American doctors to take a 75% pay cut will be amusing to hear proposed as seriously required to make it happen.
In...what? Making less money?
First off, what are you basing their rejection percentage on? And does it even purport to consider plan differences? I do not take this stuff as given, so to even concede this common argument I'd like to see what it is based on.
We can all hate insurance. Some will even hate doctors. But are you brave enough to hate nurses, pa's and every other service provider that also is paid extraordinarily more than any other country?
No, it proves that the threat of violence made an evil insurance company shut up and pay for health care:
Well...maybe. My money says there will be short term PR stunts, followed by business as usual. Very likely the insurance guys will subtley encourage a redirection of public anger, till the American public is inevitably distracted by something else. Our upcoming presidential admimistration is literally the best thing corporations could ask for, in that sense. Favorable to corps while at the same time distracting from what the corps are up to.
In Western Europe, the solution has been to not educate more doctors and instead let Eastern Europe pay for educating more doctors that can then be imported to work at hospitals in Western Europe:
Even MAGA voters may notice that Trump is filling his administration with CEOs.
You are buying the PR. Insurance companies were basically trying to match payment to medicare payment terms. When they try to combat fraud and overpayment, people don't want it.
If you believe that crap sandwich, go ahead and consume it.
And which do you think would be a better analogy for the CEO of a health insurance company that maximizes shareholder profits by denying coverage to those who need it the most ,i.e. people who are dying (or whose family members are dying)- camp guard, or decision maker?
-recently uttered by every CEO in the USA
It's perfectly true that the average American anesthesiologist pulls around $400,000 per year, and the Euros under single payer pull 1/4th or less than that. I mean, you can google that ◊◊◊◊, man.
Yes it is, but there's more than one.
Are you vaguely familiar with the US? We do the opposite. Massive medical industry, massive costs.
Couldn't agree more, bro. I just like to shine a light on it so everyone gets what we are really talking about. A lot of posters think this can be solved in a vacuum. Just as a contractor, I'd lose a sizable chunk of my client base, who suddenly couldn't afford their beach house anymore. My gross would drop substantially, even though I'm not even in the health care industry.
It works perfectly, just not that simply. When some players stick together (doctors, lawyers, whoever) and basically refuse to lower their prices, we get a bit of a cartel sitch. And that's exactly what they do, unabashedly.
Yup. Your proposal is soooooo twentieth century, relying on ethics in business. Welcome to the 21st.
It is 100% reliable, just not in the outdated model you suggest. Or jokingly mock. Fine line.
It can still work, just needs a bit of regulation and anti-trust/monopoly work done to it. It could stay for-profit, but regulate obscene level profit through progressive taxation. You make more than a quarter mil in the US? Welcome back to 50%+ tax rates. It's actually the simplest solution, and would solve all our sociopathic CEO problems across the board: Fix the tax code and reset the normalcy bar. Easier said than done, but whatever.
