Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
41 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Average health care spend in the US is $10k per person. Somebody still has to pay for it (Original Post) hill2016 Mar 2016 OP
Shorter... HumanityExperiment Mar 2016 #1
Single payer is so much cheaper than what we are doing now we're probably already paying more than Baobab Mar 2016 #29
Agreed HumanityExperiment Mar 2016 #30
Shorter... HumanityExperiment Mar 2016 #2
Shorter... HumanityExperiment Mar 2016 #3
Trillions for war though...No problem SHRED Mar 2016 #4
Public health is a National Security issue. Downwinder Mar 2016 #12
yes, if we could get bernie sanders to stop voting for trillions for war... nt msongs Mar 2016 #18
Nobody bats an eyelid when it's for war - mention health or education nada Rosa Luxemburg Mar 2016 #27
Holy hell... I guess we aren't going to realize Truman's dream GeorgiaPeanuts Mar 2016 #5
you ignore the info provided in another OP: administrative costs are what drive up healthcare costs amborin Mar 2016 #6
that's all of 10% hill2016 Mar 2016 #9
Compound interest. dogman Mar 2016 #11
Maths NWCorona Mar 2016 #22
What compound savings? Expenditure increases will wipe that out within two years, probably day one Hoyt Mar 2016 #31
You may know more about the cost than Bernie or I. dogman Mar 2016 #34
That 10% is just not enough. I think we do agree single payer or something close Hoyt Mar 2016 #37
It seems there is never enough. dogman Mar 2016 #38
Well, there is none if you think Congress is going to enacut single payer and invest Hoyt Mar 2016 #40
Or better yet, Go and die....because you with your sickness are a burden to me and my pocket book. insta8er Mar 2016 #7
So even Mexico can, but we can't...I see SHRED Mar 2016 #8
Fuck it. I agree with you. Let's restore a 35 year life expectancy. Armstead Mar 2016 #10
Send out euthanasia pills. Downwinder Mar 2016 #13
No! You will die naturally of cancer caused by man-made chemical Ed Suspicious Mar 2016 #14
Damn, and here I thought we rejected torture. Downwinder Mar 2016 #16
healthcare or not, the real baby boom is going to hit reddread Mar 2016 #28
Could we please reinstate the dead panels? (sarcasm! don't you dare press that abuse button!) insta8er Mar 2016 #15
No, have to keep Consumers around. Downwinder Mar 2016 #17
As has been pointed out My Good Babushka Mar 2016 #19
$10K -- That won't cover two months of medication! Downwinder Mar 2016 #20
Last year the government spent $66bn on health care. $598bn on killing. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2016 #21
ha ha hill2016 Mar 2016 #23
What don't you understand about single payer? Avalux Mar 2016 #24
So why is it higher as % of GDP here than elsewhere? JackRiddler Mar 2016 #25
So take out the 30% for administrative costs revbones Mar 2016 #26
$3.7 Trillion For U.S. Wars, $12,000 Per Person kgnu_fan Mar 2016 #32
Maybe it ought not to be $10k? lumberjack_jeff Mar 2016 #33
Only if you think our current corrupt system is good. libtodeath Mar 2016 #35
We can negotiate prices down. Way down. reformist2 Mar 2016 #36
How funny Hill fans now hate free health care. nt Logical Mar 2016 #39
Transfer of costs KingFlorez Mar 2016 #41
 

HumanityExperiment

(1,442 posts)
1. Shorter...
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 01:00 PM
Mar 2016

People get sick, it's a negative externality that we all have to contend with both as a society and as individuals

Baobab

(4,667 posts)
29. Single payer is so much cheaper than what we are doing now we're probably already paying more than
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:02 PM
Mar 2016

enough for a health care for everybody with no additional costs to end users (since the government already pays around two thirds of all health care costs)

by Single Payer i mean NO insurance companies, no other payers- thats important- A single payer has to negotiate cost directly, also the cost of bookkeeping is vastly reduced, when people get sick they can go to the doctor immediately without fear of bankruptcy.

 

HumanityExperiment

(1,442 posts)
3. Shorter...
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 01:03 PM
Mar 2016

let's play the game... 'Your health is a commodity' spin the wheel to see if you're covered for X this time....

 

GeorgiaPeanuts

(2,353 posts)
5. Holy hell... I guess we aren't going to realize Truman's dream
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 01:04 PM
Mar 2016

Since when have DINOs decided healthcare at a right was wrong?

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
31. What compound savings? Expenditure increases will wipe that out within two years, probably day one
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:29 PM
Mar 2016

if we are going to pick up copays, coinsurance, deductibles, millions of uninsured people, do nothing to control utilization, etc.

I think we need universal single payer, certainly a public option to see if people will accept it, but somebody has got to be honest about the cost and what it will take to get there. Sanders darn sure isn't.

dogman

(6,073 posts)
34. You may know more about the cost than Bernie or I.
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:03 PM
Mar 2016

Neither he or I are economists. Of course, unlike me, he probably knows some. Maybe you are a better economist than his consultants. I just figure if you save an unnecessary 10% overhead, that is a savings. If your expenditure increases comes along, the 10 % savings would still occur. If they can tack on 10% to an increase, that compounds. I'm not real up to date on the new math and maybe percentages work differently than they used to.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
37. That 10% is just not enough. I think we do agree single payer or something close
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:47 PM
Mar 2016

is worth figuring out how to legitimatelyou pull it off.

dogman

(6,073 posts)
38. It seems there is never enough.
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:05 PM
Mar 2016

But 10%(+-) is still as significant savings, why pay unnecessary overhead?

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
40. Well, there is none if you think Congress is going to enacut single payer and invest
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:33 PM
Mar 2016

the money to build the systems needed to implement the system.

 

insta8er

(960 posts)
7. Or better yet, Go and die....because you with your sickness are a burden to me and my pocket book.
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 01:06 PM
Mar 2016

(sarcasm)

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
10. Fuck it. I agree with you. Let's restore a 35 year life expectancy.
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 01:09 PM
Mar 2016

Healthcare will be much more financially efficient if we don't have tio deal with the ailments of middle and old age.

Grandma -- step onto the ice flow.

Ed Suspicious

(8,879 posts)
14. No! You will die naturally of cancer caused by man-made chemical
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 01:39 PM
Mar 2016

compounds, slowly, in agonizing fashion, without any money. It's the way God intended it.

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
28. healthcare or not, the real baby boom is going to hit
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 04:55 PM
Mar 2016

elderly populations lacking secure retirement prospects will hit us hard. harder still if we dont steer away from the sort of profiteering middlemen mandated to grow fat while increasing premiums, deductibles and co pays.

My Good Babushka

(2,710 posts)
19. As has been pointed out
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 01:51 PM
Mar 2016

a sizeable portion of that is administrative costs, and the drug monopolies , the collusion of insurance, hospitals and pharmaceutical companies to get prices as high as possible. Once the incentive to do that has been eliminated, prices would be more in line with the per capita expenditures of other OECD countries.

The second prong of bringing down health care expenditures is to change the culture that makes people sick. No more overworked, underpaid, no vacation, status quo. You wouldn't work a beast or a machine the way that this country expects low-wage workers to function. The result is they have no rest, inadequate diets, incredible stress, and become disabled and very sick much earlier than a person should. Low wages cost much more in the long run.

Downwinder

(12,869 posts)
20. $10K -- That won't cover two months of medication!
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 03:58 PM
Mar 2016

If you are really concerned about costs, send me 100ml of Pentobarbital and a good bottle of wine.

Otherwise I will consider this faux concern.

 

hill2016

(1,772 posts)
23. ha ha
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 04:26 PM
Mar 2016

no you are only including discretionary spending. Please look up the mandatory spending as well.

Like I said, Maths.

Avalux

(35,015 posts)
24. What don't you understand about single payer?
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 04:29 PM
Mar 2016

That average healthcare cost you quote would be irrelevant. Not sure what you're trying to say with your post (well actually I do), but your logic is faulty.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
25. So why is it higher as % of GDP here than elsewhere?
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 04:42 PM
Mar 2016

You don't have to pay for the for-profit insurance system, its 28% in "administrative" costs, or the awesome drug-price gouging.

People die, life sucks, life is unfair, etc. etc., so your argument is that profiteering and price-gouging should be tolerated, nay, allowed to be central principles of the society?

No.

 

revbones

(3,660 posts)
26. So take out the 30% for administrative costs
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 04:49 PM
Mar 2016

then get rid of ridiculous drug pricing by allowing price-negotiations, etc...

Were you pretending to be right-wing or something? Those were similar arguments to those about the ACA.

kgnu_fan

(3,021 posts)
32. $3.7 Trillion For U.S. Wars, $12,000 Per Person
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:45 PM
Mar 2016

Iraq War Cost U.S. More Than $2 Trillion, Could Grow to $6 Trillion, Says Watson Institute Study
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/14/iraq-war-cost-more-than-2-trillion_n_2875493.html

Report: $3.7 Trillion For U.S. Wars, $12,000 Per Person
http://www.globalresearch.ca/report-3-7-trillion-for-u-s-wars-12-000-per-person/26039

Fighting for a U.S. federal budget that works for all Americans
https://www.nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/
 

lumberjack_jeff

(33,224 posts)
33. Maybe it ought not to be $10k?
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:52 PM
Mar 2016

The reasons it costs $10k are the differences between our system and the rest of the developed world ($5k)

KingFlorez

(12,689 posts)
41. Transfer of costs
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:49 PM
Mar 2016

People would just go from paying an insurance company to paying a tax, which is really just a transfer of costs. That might or might not result in a savings for some, but it's still not really free.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Average health care spend...