Affordable Care Act

Healthcare, like other services, is influenced by supply and demand, which ultimately affects its cost. Patients, insurers, providers, and the government all play a role in determining the price and accessibility of healthcare. Introducing universal healthcare as “free” would likely impact the availability of services. When healthcare is perceived as free, there is a risk of overuse or misuse of resources, leading to inefficiencies.

For example, in Canada, which operates under a universal healthcare system, there are fewer MRI machines in the entire country than in the state of Massachusetts, illustrating potential limitations in resource availability.

In the United States, healthcare is regulated more by market forces. Patients and insurers bear a significant responsibility in controlling usage. If a patient has the flu and their insurance requires a $100 co-pay, they must decide whether the situation warrants the cost of a doctor visit.

If the goal is to prioritize different outcomes, such as universally accessible healthcare at the cost of longer waiting times or fewer sophisticated services, then maybe Canada’s way of things is better. I personally think it would be terrible idea.
 
Rich country's problems. Luigi is the perfect poster child for it.

GeetgCKaEAMgBY8
 
chop2chip said:
If we wanted less sophisticated services (less MRI’s, less specialists, etc) and more generic medication with worse outcomes, then we could optimize for that.
Click to expand...

What's interesting is that pretty much every country as it gets richer plows a very big chunk of increases in income into healthcare services. It seems to be a universal choice by a wide range of countries and societies. A wide range of countries also seem to have decided they want to socialize the risks associated with health. I'm still looking to my libertarian friends for an example of a country that has opted for the rugged individualism option. It would be an interesting data point to assess.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
nsacpi said:
What's interesting is that pretty much every country as it gets richer plows a very big chunk of increases in income into healthcare services. It seems to be a universal choice by a wide range of countries and societies. A wide range of countries also seem to have decided they want to socialize the risks associated with health. I'm still looking to my libertarian friends for an example of a country that has opted for the rugged individualism option. It would be an interesting data point to assess.
Click to expand...

US prior to the Affordable Care Act seems like a decent proxy for comparison. We had better outcomes and lower costs.
 
chop2chip said:
US prior to the Affordable Care Act seems like a decent proxy for comparison. We had better outcomes and lower costs.
Click to expand...

dirty little secret: healthcare inflation has slowed down since the Affordable Care Act. Medical care services in the CPI rose 4.5% per year from 2000 to 2010 and 3.2% in the subsequent decade

plus the not irrelevant fact that the number of people without health insurance has dropped bigly...that was the whole point of the ACA and it accomplished its goal...the cherry on top is that it has a number of features that worked to curb healthcare inflation
 
Last edited by a moderator:
nsacpi said:
What's interesting is that pretty much every country as it gets richer plows a very big chunk of increases in income into healthcare services. It seems to be a universal choice by a wide range of countries and societies. A wide range of countries also seem to have decided they want to socialize the risks associated with health. I'm still looking to my libertarian friends for an example of a country that has opted for the rugged individualism option. It would be an interesting data point to assess.
Click to expand...

Is that not the case here? Pretty sure our healthcare spending by government has only gone up.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Is that not the case here? Pretty sure our healthcare spending by government has only gone up.
Click to expand...

Yes. Medicare and Medicaid take up an increasing share of GDP. Partly because of an aging population. And partly because like other countries we have prioritized consumption on healthcare services as we have gotten richer.
 
sturg33 said:
It's a bad thing to force every American to pay for the freaks to have risk free sex
Click to expand...

It's sad you have such a depressing outlook on life. I think it's a bad thing to force every American to pay for subsidies for oil companies. But here were are doing it. I'd rather lower the risk of spreading HIV than give the richest of the rich more incentives and benefits.
 
zitothebrave said:
It's sad you have such a depressing outlook on life. I think it's a bad thing to force every American to pay for subsidies for oil companies. But here were are doing it. I'd rather lower the risk of spreading HIV than give the richest of the rich more incentives and benefits.
Click to expand...

How about we stop doing both
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top