| mookiemookie |
12-18-10 03:46 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo
(Post 1555362)
August - but you have to look at WHY that cost was so high. Malpractice insurance - the cost of the machine (which is astronimical) - not counting the money the techs made. Sure, they make a decent living - but if you think the majority of that went into their pockets your wrong.
The biggest costs in medical care are overhead - facilities and equipment. Followed closely by the costs of medication. Now - if everyone who accessed medical care PAID for it - even if it was a reasonable sum - then the costs of doing BUSINESS in health care would decrease. But between the insurance, R&D, non-payments, etc - the costs are huge. Then you have the employees - be they docs, nurses or whatnot.
When a "miracle pill" is developed - that first pill off the line may cost 10's of millions of dollars. All the ones after? A few pennies. But the business has to average that out. The cost of the MRI machine? Average over 1 Million. The business then has to figure maintenance etc - so every usage has to help cover those costs...
Fix the overhead problems, get people to actually PAY for services, not sue at the drop of a hat, etc - and medical costs would drop drastically.
|
I don't see in your post any mention of repealing the antitrust exemption for the insurance industry. If insurance companies were forbidden from collusion, price fixing, market allocation, bid rigging, etc, don't you think that would naturally have a greater effect on lowering prices than limiting the rights of the people to seek redress in court?
If any politician had any stones at all, they'd repeal the McCarran Ferguson Act, and you'd see real insurance reform. Unfortunately, it will never happen. Corrupt political hacks in the pocket of big insurance like Ben Nelson, as well as rules that allow special interest to pour their money into political campaigns (Citizens United decision) will make any kind of real repeal and reform a pipe dream. |
