
GoFundMe CEO: One-Third of Site's Donations Are to Cover Medical Costs - pera
https://time.com/5516037/gofundme-medical-bills-one-third-ceo/
======
johnpowell
I have incurred over a million dollars in medical bills since Sept, 24, 2018.
I get a pembro drip that is 28K every three weeks. And a CT scan every few
months, 45 treatments of radiation.. 10K a pop on average.

Feeding tube insertion. 40K.

They had to try a few times since my stomach rides high. They had to basically
use a live "CT" scan while sending a thing down my throat to push my stomach
below my ribs so they could poke a hole in my belly and insert a feeding tube.
And then they used staples to hold everything in-place. My god it hurt and
they have amazing drugs that make you feel so good and pass out for three
hours. Then you wake up screaming frantically pushing the button for more
drugs. My sister had twins vaginally.. It is a toss-up who has done more pain.

I am lucky.. I am cheap. I have no kids, and my possessions fit in the back of
a 1987 Volvo wagon. I tested that when I moved after I found out about the
cancer. But I have gone through all this without worrying about money, kids,
or bills. I was lucky I just had enough savings I could quit everything and do
my health.

But my god. If you get cancer and you have a mortgage you are fucked. It has
consumed every minute of my last year. Every second you think about it growing
in you.

~~~
joshmn
I really have no words. I'm sorry John.

------
Akinato
Does this not show that there is something inherently wrong with society?

~~~
ddingus
Yup.

The US system is expensive and increasingly cruel.

I do not expect that state of affairs to endure too much longer.

~~~
toomuchtodo
A majority of Americans support Medicare For All, it’s just a matter of
getting politicians who will vote for it into office.

~~~
rsj_hn
A majority of Americans do not support medicare for all, they support a public
option and believe (mistakenly) that this is what medicare for all means.
Moreover 40% of adults have no opinion (sources:
[https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/americans-need-more-
conv...](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/americans-need-more-convincing-
on-medicare-for-all-poll-says) ). This polling is very soft.
([https://www.marketwatch.com/story/poll-finds-medicare-for-
al...](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/poll-finds-medicare-for-all-support-
drops-when-details-are-included-2019-01-23))

When you explain to them that they will lose their existing insurance and be
forced to take medicare then support plummets.

It's a complete mystery to me why people keep pushing medicare for all when a
public option is much more popular, and this is even before the ad blitz that
would happen should this ever become a serious possibility (which wont happen
without a massive political realignment).

The main problem here is that the Republican establishment is led by the
plutocrats (the top 0.1%) with a strong economically populist insurgency,
while the Democratic establishment is led by professionals (the top 10%) with
a a strong leftist insurgency.

But while you can have affordable healthcare with overpaid CEOs, you cannot
have affordable healthcare with medical professionals earning the salaries
they currently earn, and these groups have enormous power over the Democratic
party establishment. We are now spending 19% of GDP on healthcare and that
number keeps going up, meanwhile the only thing the Democrats can do is
advocate for more government subsidies to allow the professional classes to
keep extracting even more from working class americans. You simply can't have
universal healthcare while median nurse practitioner wages are $50/hr
([https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291171.htm](https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes291171.htm))
and no one is willing to take a hammer to medical professional wages in order
to make universal healthcare affordable. This is why we got
Obamacare/Romneycare when the Democrats controlled all branches of government
-- there was no support for anything other than more subsidies being funneled
into the pockets of the health care system.

It is the exact same situation as with higher education -- completely out of
control costs that are bankrupting people as we spend triple what the rest of
the world spends, and what is the Democrat policy? More taxpayers subsidies
are needed, because they are not going to take a hammer to the professionals
working in higher education anymore than they are willing will take a hammer
to the professionals working in healthcare. Both of these are key Democratic
constituencies.

Really some kind of political realignment has to happen because the current
economic status of this country is that we are being stripped bare by the
professional classes who have failed to provide us with either affordable
higher education or affordable healthcare and who can only demand more
taxpayer subsidies or else they will refuse to provide these crucial services.
But people are fooling themselves if they don't see the enormous wells of
anger and resentment against the nations universities and hospitals. There
simply isn't the support to shovel more subsidies into these groups, and it
doesn't matter how you package it, whether a medicare for all program or
something else. You are not going to get European style social benefits until
these industries are shrunk to requiring European style spending levels. We
are talking 50% cuts in total spending just to start things off and even more
in higher education.

At least one political party has to be willing to both _massively cut costs_
and _provide insurance guarantees_ to ensure coverage. Those who are convinced
that there is popular support for medicare for all as the primary reform are
in for a big surprise.

~~~
toomuchtodo
The polling data I’ve seen disagrees, but of course it’s going to be up to
elections and not polling.

Cost controls and increased revenue will be necessary, but neither will be
excessive to accomplish the goal. I carry around Sander’s Medicare For All
bill as well as the accounting breakdown when canvassing (practicing for my
own federal office run), so I am familiar with the details.

~~~
rsj_hn
None of these things will happen until the power of the professional classes
is broken. They will fight it, and you will find that you don't have the votes
in congress to do any of this stuff. Seriously people are walking into an
oncoming freight train thinking they will reorganize 20% of the economy
through the power of sheer idealism and it would be funny if the stakes
weren't real. But we will meet again in 20 years when the situation is much
worse, and you will be confused as all hell why none of these plans were
realized. As long as the professionals are in the drivers seat of the
Democratic party, you can push the truck as hard as you want but they will
steer it towards an Obamacare style solution, at which point you will say "We
must push harder! It will happen!"

But it will never happen, not as long as the Neera Tandens of this world are
calling the shots in the Democratic Party.

~~~
ddingus
This is all accurate.

And the Medicare For All movement knows it.

Organizing to take seats, build something like a 10 million volunteer group,
and plans for all that to be very highly active, are in the works.

The current system is completely unacceptable. As it has come into it's own
now, the number of impacted Americans will grow rapidly.

I expect there will be significant unrest over this issue.

~~~
rsj_hn
Yes, there has to be unrest. Promising all sorts of benefits isn't the battle.
Those who think they can combine the exorbitant spending of a US system with
the social financing of a European system are not serious players in these
discussions.

Same for universities. If you want European style public financing of
Universities, get ready for a system where universities accept only 1/2 of the
students that American universities accept, where a degree lasts only 3 years,
and where total spending per student is 50% of the US level even on a GDP
basis.

This is the kind of the system that you can get the public to agree to fully
fund, and it again requires massive cuts to university staffing, shutting down
a lot of schools, as well as lower salaries (on average) of those who remain.

When that starts polling well together with the free tuition part, then you
know you have real backing for a European style system.

I'm from Europe and I think European systems are more rational and ultimately
much more humane, but they are so far different from what is happening in the
U.S. that when I see the college kids argue "why can't we have what they have
in Germany/France", I want to yell back "If we had a French system you would
have never been accepted to University." People have no idea of whether or not
these moves will be popular.

Keep in mind that when European nations adopted universal health systems, the
health care sector was a small part of the economy and the nations were
politically united with high levels of social trust and solidarity.

When England adopted the National Health Service act in 1946, healthcare was
less than 3% of GDP ([https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/chart/nhs-spending-as-
a-per...](https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/chart/nhs-spending-as-a-percentage-
of-gdp-1950-2020)) and the nation had high levels of social trust especially
trust in government (they just won WW2, large portions of the economy were
nationalized, they were used to rationing, etc). Even then it took a big
battle, with lots of organizing to get it done.

So when people say "why can't we do what the Europeans did", the Europeans
never took over 20% of their economy, they took over ~3% of their economy and
that grew to 10%

There is a big difference in the political battle to take 3% versus 20%.
Today, in almost every city the hospital is the biggest employer. Healthcare
workers are huge political players, and while they certainly favor more
government spending, they do not favor more cuts. But taxpayers favor the free
stuff, not the "we will tax you more" part. These are huge requirements for
social trust and especially trust in government. But now, the U.S. is as
divided as never before and social trust, particularly trust in government, is
rapidly falling. (source: [https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2019/07/22/key-finding...](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2019/07/22/key-findings-about-americans-declining-trust-in-government-
and-each-other/)). The younger generation is in the curious position of
demanding more free stuff while also trusting government the least of any
generation.

So when all these people say "Hey, free stuff polls really well, we can do
this people", I just roll my eyes. This would be 10x the achievement of what
the Europeans accomplished and in a nation completely divided and growing
farther apart each day.

~~~
coreypreston
"free stuff" is a pretty flippant way to describe a social service covered by
taxes.

~~~
rsj_hn
It's not at all flippant when one side describes the benefits but not the
costs. If it was marketed accurately, I wouldn't call it the free stuff
platform. But then if it was marketed accurately you wouldn't have the
majority of people thinking that medicare for all was really a public option
proposal, or Kamala Harris throwing smoke in people's eyes by simultaneously
distancing herself from medicare for all while also advocating for it. Let's
be honest about the level of honesty here.

------
exabrial
I think this is incredible and everyone should seriously evaluate their
commitment to both their money and time when it comes to charity work. So many
people "want the government to do something", very few will get their hands
dirty.

------
pinkpegasus
Anyone have any idea how this self reported statistic is verified?

