|
Why the free market is a disaster in health care
|
|
Topic Started: May 7 2016, 01:40 PM (790 Views)
|
|
Two a.m.
|
May 7 2016, 07:43 PM
Post #21
|
|
- Posts:
- 4,133
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #9
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 06:36 PM
So yeah - this thread is a disaster.
Well, then the government must be at fault somehow. The free market would never create a disastrous thread.
Edited by Two a.m., May 7 2016, 07:44 PM.
|
|
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
May 7 2016, 07:52 PM
Post #22
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,739
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 07:43 PM
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 06:36 PM
So yeah - this thread is a disaster.
Well, then the government must be at fault somehow. The free market would never create a disastrous thread. I am surprised you would post this s**t.
But i'll give you a fair shake - go for the recovery.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
Two a.m.
|
May 7 2016, 09:32 PM
Post #23
|
|
- Posts:
- 4,133
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #9
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 07:52 PM
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 07:43 PM
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 06:36 PM
So yeah - this thread is a disaster.
Well, then the government must be at fault somehow. The free market would never create a disastrous thread.
I am surprised you would post this s**t. But i'll give you a fair shake - go for the recovery.
The video makes a valid point. The free market is great but it simply doesn't work for everything. How hard is that to admit? Health care is not a business structured with free market incentives. If someone get sick and needs their coverage, the company's only profit motive lies in losing that customer as fast as possible. There is zero incentive to provide price transparency or good service.
It should be noted by the way that if the free market and comparison shopping could work anywhere in health care, it should work with having a baby. That's something where the hospital you visit is planned out well ahead of time. A lot of medical care doesn't work that way. A significant proportion of it takes place with the person injured, unconscious or screaming in pain in the back of an ambulance. People don't comparison shop under such circumstances.
But even with planned procedures, it simply doesn't function. There are too many moving pieces and too much money flowing around between too many parties. There is no transparency and most patients don't even ask for it since insurance handles everything.
Is it really that hard to admit that in some specific areas under certain limited circumstances, capitalism just can't cope perfectly and flawlessly with every situation?
Edited by Two a.m., May 7 2016, 09:33 PM.
|
|
"The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them." - George Orwell, 1984
|
| |
|
Mr. Tik
|
May 7 2016, 11:14 PM
Post #24
|
|
- Posts:
- 8,993
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #102
- Joined:
- Mar 20, 2016
|
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 06:17 PM
- Adolph Hipster
- May 7 2016, 06:13 PM
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 06:06 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep Big Pharma knowingly created prescription drug epidemic and raked in billions: reporthttp://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/big-pharma-knowingly-created-prescription-drug-epidemic-and-raked-in-billions-report/‘YOU WANT A DESCRIPTION OF HELL?’ OXYCONTIN’S 12-HOUR PROBLEMhttp://static.latimes.com/oxycontin-part1/The Times investigation, based on thousands of pages of confidential Purdue documents and other records, found that:
Purdue has known about the problem for decades. Even before OxyContin went on the market, clinical trials showed many patients weren’t getting 12 hours of relief. Since the drug’s debut in 1996, the company has been confronted with additional evidence, including complaints from doctors, reports from its own sales reps and independent research.
yabut, its da gubmint fault!
The company has held fast to the claim of 12-hour relief, in part to protect its revenue. OxyContin’s market dominance and its high price — up to hundreds of dollars per bottle — hinge on its 12-hour duration. Without that, it offers little advantage over less expensive painkillers.
yabut, its da gubmint fault!
When many doctors began prescribing OxyContin at shorter intervals in the late 1990s, Purdue executives mobilized hundreds of sales reps to “refocus” physicians on 12-hour dosing. Anything shorter “needs to be nipped in the bud. NOW!!” one manager wrote to her staff.
yabut, its da gubmint fault!
Purdue tells doctors to prescribe stronger doses, not more frequent ones, when patients complain that OxyContin doesn’t last 12 hours. That approach creates risks of its own. Research shows that the more potent the dose of an opioid such as OxyContin, the greater the possibility of overdose and death.
yabut, its da gubmint fault!
More than half of long-term OxyContin users are on doses that public health officials consider dangerously high, according to an analysis of nationwide prescription data conducted for The Times.
yabut, its da gubmint fault! they deliberately LIED about it so they could maker more $$$$$$$
But hey..they have their shareholders to think about, eh?
Or were they granted monopoly status by the FDA? Checkmate statist. Boy..you don't even read the links or what I have posted
The selling point for Oxycontin was the (false) slow release that differentiated their product from the pain relief products of their competitors. They lied to give them an edge against their business rivals, to capture a larger market share. So your talking point about a monopoly does not apply here.
|
You may be a conservative republican..if you are pro life until you get your mistress knocked up
|
| |
|
Mr. Tik
|
May 7 2016, 11:17 PM
Post #25
|
|
- Posts:
- 8,993
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #102
- Joined:
- Mar 20, 2016
|
You always know when esto is over his head in a debate..he calls you a "statist" and drops a talking point from the Von Misian orthodoxy
|
You may be a conservative republican..if you are pro life until you get your mistress knocked up
|
| |
|
Mr. Tik
|
May 7 2016, 11:19 PM
Post #26
|
|
- Posts:
- 8,993
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #102
- Joined:
- Mar 20, 2016
|
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 09:32 PM
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 07:43 PM
The free market is great but it simply doesn't work for everything. How hard is that to admit? Because it is ideologically incorrect for esto to "admit" such a thing..to do so would shake the foundations of his ideology.
|
You may be a conservative republican..if you are pro life until you get your mistress knocked up
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
May 7 2016, 11:43 PM
Post #27
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,739
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 09:32 PM
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 07:52 PM
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 07:43 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I am surprised you would post this s**t. But i'll give you a fair shake - go for the recovery.
The video makes a valid point. The free market is great but it simply doesn't work for everything. How hard is that to admit? Health care is not a business structured with free market incentives. If someone get sick and needs their coverage, the company's only profit motive lies in losing that customer as fast as possible. There is zero incentive to provide price transparency or good service. It should be noted by the way that if the free market and comparison shopping could work anywhere in health care, it should work with having a baby. That's something where the hospital you visit is planned out well ahead of time. A lot of medical care doesn't work that way. A significant proportion of it takes place with the person injured, unconscious or screaming in pain in the back of an ambulance. People don't comparison shop under such circumstances. But even with planned procedures, it simply doesn't function. There are too many moving pieces and too much money flowing around between too many parties. There is no transparency and most patients don't even ask for it since insurance handles everything. Is it really that hard to admit that in some specific areas under certain limited circumstances, capitalism just can't cope perfectly and flawlessly with every situation? You didn't read my first post on this thread about how the government caused this.
Look past your bias for anti-government types and read it.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
May 7 2016, 11:47 PM
Post #28
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,739
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Adolph Hipster
- May 7 2016, 11:17 PM
You always know when esto is over his head in a debate..he calls you a "statist" and drops a talking point from the Von Misian orthodoxy Cherry picking issues in the market place doesn't substantiate your position.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
Mr. Tik
|
May 8 2016, 12:00 AM
Post #29
|
|
- Posts:
- 8,993
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #102
- Joined:
- Mar 20, 2016
|
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 11:47 PM
- Adolph Hipster
- May 7 2016, 11:17 PM
You always know when esto is over his head in a debate..he calls you a "statist" and drops a talking point from the Von Misian orthodoxy
Cherry picking issues in the market place doesn't substantiate your position. Using my real name here is a big no no here Please contact a mod and ask for a courtesy edit.
All I did here was demonstrate an example of moral hazard from the private sector
Now..you could man up and say "yeah..thats messed up" ..but instead..you use arguments that are not applicable to the example I am providing. You get personal and call me a statist and drop a non sequitur..it doesn't do much for your credibility.
|
You may be a conservative republican..if you are pro life until you get your mistress knocked up
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
May 8 2016, 12:57 AM
Post #30
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,739
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Adolph Hipster
- May 8 2016, 12:00 AM
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 11:47 PM
- Adolph Hipster
- May 7 2016, 11:17 PM
You always know when esto is over his head in a debate..he calls you a "statist" and drops a talking point from the Von Misian orthodoxy
Cherry picking issues in the market place doesn't substantiate your position. Using my real name here is a big no no here Please contact a mod and ask for a courtesy edit.
All I did here was demonstrate an example of moral hazard from the private sector
Now..you could man up and say "yeah..thats messed up" ..but instead..you use arguments that are not applicable to the example I am providing. You get personal and call me a statist and drop a non sequitur..it doesn't do much for your credibility. Right - which is why you start bawing about OxyCotins in a thread about the inflated costs of maturity care?
Moral hazards exist everywhere humans apply themselves - its how we correct those hazards that matters.
And sorry about the name - I had no idea you were sensitive to that.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
Right-Wing
|
May 8 2016, 01:43 AM
Post #31
|
|
- Posts:
- 5,652
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #118
- Joined:
- Mar 22, 2016
|
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 09:32 PM
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 07:52 PM
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 07:43 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I am surprised you would post this s**t. But i'll give you a fair shake - go for the recovery.
The video makes a valid point. The free market is great but it simply doesn't work for everything. How hard is that to admit? Health care is not a business structured with free market incentives. If someone get sick and needs their coverage, the company's only profit motive lies in losing that customer as fast as possible. There is zero incentive to provide price transparency or good service. It should be noted by the way that if the free market and comparison shopping could work anywhere in health care, it should work with having a baby. That's something where the hospital you visit is planned out well ahead of time. A lot of medical care doesn't work that way. A significant proportion of it takes place with the person injured, unconscious or screaming in pain in the back of an ambulance. People don't comparison shop under such circumstances. But even with planned procedures, it simply doesn't function. There are too many moving pieces and too much money flowing around between too many parties. There is no transparency and most patients don't even ask for it since insurance handles everything. Is it really that hard to admit that in some specific areas under certain limited circumstances, capitalism just can't cope perfectly and flawlessly with every situation? So because capitalism (as you say) cannot cope perfectly and flawlessly in every situation we should scrap it in healthcare?? What will you replace it with that is more perfect, more flawless?
|
|
Donald Trump is Barack Obama's President!
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
May 8 2016, 12:44 PM
Post #32
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,739
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Right-Wing
- May 8 2016, 01:43 AM
- Two a.m.
- May 7 2016, 09:32 PM
- estonianman
- May 7 2016, 07:52 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
The video makes a valid point. The free market is great but it simply doesn't work for everything. How hard is that to admit? Health care is not a business structured with free market incentives. If someone get sick and needs their coverage, the company's only profit motive lies in losing that customer as fast as possible. There is zero incentive to provide price transparency or good service. It should be noted by the way that if the free market and comparison shopping could work anywhere in health care, it should work with having a baby. That's something where the hospital you visit is planned out well ahead of time. A lot of medical care doesn't work that way. A significant proportion of it takes place with the person injured, unconscious or screaming in pain in the back of an ambulance. People don't comparison shop under such circumstances. But even with planned procedures, it simply doesn't function. There are too many moving pieces and too much money flowing around between too many parties. There is no transparency and most patients don't even ask for it since insurance handles everything. Is it really that hard to admit that in some specific areas under certain limited circumstances, capitalism just can't cope perfectly and flawlessly with every situation?
So because capitalism (as you say) cannot cope perfectly and flawlessly in every situation we should scrap it in healthcare?? What will you replace it with that is more perfect, more flawless? Here's the deal, somewhere along the line a company sold a s**tty product.
So we have scrap the whole market place and have the US government manage it.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|