

Sometimes I read stories about American healthcare and feel utterly sick - creamyhorror
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002252691

======
creamyhorror
And here's the follow-up, posted by his widow a week ago:
<http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002632763>

It looks like this guy was a long-time member of that site, so I'm somewhat
inclined to believe the story. But even if it were not real, I've read enough
about what goes on in the US to know it's a very possible scenario that plays
out all the time.

Plainly barbaric, to many of us in other countries.

~~~
creamyhorror
When I read such stories I'm inclined to wonder if such a mess could ever be
fixed by (idealistic) entrepreneurs, even in part. It doesn't seem like a
problem startups can directly address; it seems almost purely a political
problem. I can only hope people with brighter imaginations and keener minds
than me will turn their attention to this problem.

Good luck America, I hope you beat this one.

~~~
Mz
I am a pretty bitter idealist who is currently homeless and trying to declare
bankruptcy. I have an incurable genetic disorder, as does my 24 year old son.
We figured out how to get well. I would love to offer alternatives but damn
few people care or are interested.

I also worked for an insurance company for five years. So I have an insider's
view of that aspect of it as well. I don't think our current system works. But
it has inertia on its side.

------
sp332
_People dying of preventable disease in the USA every day because insurance
companies decide they deserve to die._

Dying sucks. But everyone dies, regardless of how much they deserve it. So
he's claiming that someone "owes" him >$300k. Why? What claim does he have to
$300k of other people's money?

~~~
creamyhorror
The same claim you have to public funds raised via taxes?

The conversation in my country is not about "claims on others' money" or other
such matters of pure principle, but rather what produces humane outcomes.
Having a medical safety net for everyone is kind of taken for granted here - a
poor-to-middling option, but far preferable to a you're-(mostly)-on-your-own
system like in the US.

One principle from an ethics class in school comes back to me: before we were
born, while we were behind the "veil of ignorance", if we didn't know what
sort of family we'd be born in, what rules would we prefer in life? If you
didn't know what sort of family background or medical conditions you'd have in
your life, would you prefer social insurance or take your chances? I'd
definitely prefer insurance for everyone, because then I'd have a fighting
chance if I were born to poor parents.

> But everyone dies, regardless of how much they deserve it. So why shouldn't
> we try to reduce it happening?

Your comment seems to be saying this state of affairs is somehow more
desirable than the alternative...that it's better that the guy died than other
people be forced to pay taxes to insure him. That kind of boggles my mind, to
be honest.

~~~
sp332
Reduce what happening? Dying? I'm pretty sure the death rate will remain 100%
even if you were willing to spend $1B to "prevent" it. Everyone dies.

I'm not saying that the guy should die _instead_ of using other people's money
to postpone death. I'm saying that he has _no more right_ to that money than
those other people do. You're talking as if there is an infinite amount of
money to be spent on this one person. But spending money on this guy takes it
away from other people. The world doesn't revolve around this one guy, you
know?

Someone has to make the decision: how much money is it worth to postpone my
death for a while? And if I arbitrarily decide that one more breath is worth
all the money in the world, that doesn't automatically mean that I now get to
spend all the money in the world on it. Even with "universal health care"
there are limits.

Also, all the money that gets paid out by the state has to be paid in first by
taxpayers. Moving responsibility to the state doesn't magically make health
care cheaper, or free. On average, the taxpayers are still paying for all
their health care.

~~~
DanBC
> _Also, all the money that gets paid out by the state has to be paid in first
> by taxpayers. Moving responsibility to the state doesn't magically make
> health care cheaper, or free. On average, the taxpayers are still paying for
> all their health care._

US pays more state money to health care than other nations, yet has much worse
health outcomes.

~~~
sp332
What makes you think that will change if the government mandates that everyone
pay in to the broken system?

~~~
DanBC
Insurance companies have a powerful incentive to maximise profits. They are
oversighted by shareholders and maybe some law enforcement.

Governments have dual interests - have better benefit:cost ratio and spend
less tax. They are oversighted by quangos and tax-payers.

But a more interesting question is why people don't help themselves - we know
about the importance of good food and exercise and sensible drinking and not
smoking and not driving like an idiot etc, yet a lot of illness is caused by
entirely preventable stuff.

We know that even if people can get medication they don't take it properly.
(There's no difference between the UK (where most people getting meds don't
have to pay for them) or the US (where most people have to pay) or the
severity of the illness (most transplanted organ failures are because people
don't comply with the medication regime.)

This is a significant cost. Just the cost of the meds - in the UK we spend
about £9billion per year on meds, of which about half (£4.5billion) is wasted
because people don't comply with the instructions. And then there's the
additional cost of treating those people.

~~~
sp332
"Some law enforcement" actually it's one of the most heavily-regulated
industries, after stock trading and telecommunications probably. Also we don't
have quangos.

How would an insurance company get customers, if their services aren't good
for customers?

~~~
DanBC
How many people chose an insurance company, over have one provided for them
via work?

And the only time you know your insurance is lousy is when you're trying to
make a claim - at that point you may have years of time with and payments to
that company.

