The article below is a quinnessential example of what I've repeated numerous times. It's not the health insurance industry that is causing health care costs to skyrocket, it's the blatant corruption by our government and government officials who are using the system for self serving interests to enrich themselves, taking bribes to look the other way when health care providers/hospitals and drug companies price gouge.
I've copied most of the article below. For you to understand what's really going on, you should read this and the discussion from the links in the 2 posts just below this from earlier this year. Politicians are fooling you into believing the health insurance industry is entirely to blame. As long as you keep believing that, they get away with this corruption.
https://wskg.org/news/cuomo-campaign-donations-from-hospital-org-are-questioned/
Last year, when New York Governor Andrew Cuomo was battling to win the Democratic primary, his campaign solicited a donation from the Greater New York Hospital Association, according to a recent report from The New York Times. The hospital lobbying group gave over $1 million to the New York State Democratic Party. And not long after, according to the Times, “the state quietly authorized an across-the-board increase in Medicaid reimbursement rates.” The increase is expected to cost taxpayers around $140 million a year.
The hospital lobby is a juggernaut in New York, as it is in other states. Over the last year, hospital lobbyists have fought reforms for billing transparency in Ohio, minimum nurse staffing levels in Illinois, and cheaper payment rates in North Carolina. Last month, a leaked email from the Kentucky Hospital Association showed that it was urging members to donate to gubernatorial candidates to “assure access.”
In Washington, D.C., the hospital lobby is battling Medicare for All as well as efforts to end surprise billing, which is when Americans go to in-network providers but then — surprise! — end up getting billed for more expensive, out-of-network services. Three-quarters of Americans say they oppose the practice, and leaders from both political parties have been working to end it. Yet, hospital lobbyists are making reform really difficult. Which is weird, because most hospitals are nonprofits.
More Than Just Quid Pro Cuomo?
A recent study by Yale School of Public Health economist Zack Cooper and colleagues takes a look at hospital politics and helps shed light on why American health care is so insanely expensive.
In 2003, President George W. Bush began fighting for a major expansion of the Medicare program. The Bush Administration knew it would be a hard sell, alienating small-government Republicans and putting Democrats in the awkward position of supporting Bush’s agenda before an election year.
Cooper says their study was inspired by one of his grad students, who served as a congressional aide when this legislation was being passed. “And the rumor was the U.S. Health Secretary, Tommy Thompson, was on the floor of the House with a notebook, writing down members of Congress who voted for the bill,” Cooper says. Thompson allegedly did this to sweeten the deal for lawmakers on the fence, offering to reward supporters by “bumping up payment rates to hospitals in their districts” through a special provision, Section 508.
Cooper and his colleagues have spent years investigating whether this was true, filing Freedom of Information Act requests and crunching data. They’ve uncovered evidence that suggests it was true. They find that legislators who were on the fence and voted “yea” for the legislation were 700% more likely to see a large bump in Medicare payment rates to hospitals in their district. Between 2005 and 2010, Congress shelled out over $2 billion to 88 hospitals through the horse-trading Section 508 provision. It was a clear win for these hospitals, which spent the money on more equipment, buildings, services, and staff.
Dropping opposition to the Medicare expansion also ended up being a political win for lawmakers on the fence. Not only did the special provision funnel extra federal funds to their districts and create jobs; the lawmakers ended up seeing a 65% increase in contributions from people who worked in their state’s health care industry and a 25% increase in overall campaign contributions. “It’s suggestive to me that this was in a sense a quid pro quo,” Cooper says, adding that their analysis shows how health care spending becomes a “piggy bank” for political influence.
Giving New Meaning To The Term “Nonprofit”
“Hospitals are the largest individual contributor to health care costs in the U.S,” Cooper says. Americans spend over a trillion dollars a year at hospitals. That’s about a third of national health spending, which now consumes almost 20%of U.S. GDP. Cooper’s research shows that, after a long period of consolidation, the cost of hospital services has been exploding. Between 2007 and 2014, hospital prices grew 42 percent.
The irony is most hospitals are “nonprofit,” a status that makes them tax exempt. Many (but not all) do enough charity work to justify tax benefits, yet it’s clear nonprofit hospitals are very profitable. They funnel much of the profits into cushy salaries, shiny equipment, new buildings, and, of course, lobbying. In 2018, hospitals and nursing homes spent over $100 million on lobbying activities. And they spent about $30 million on campaign contributions. Health industries have also been funneling hefty sums into dark money groups. But their political power isn’t just the result of lobbying or electioneering. Hospitals are often the biggest employers in states and cities across America.
Health care reformers direct much of their ire at the nation’s health insurance companies. Perhaps they’re the easiest targets because they’re faceless paper-pushers, located outside their districts or states, who are often the only entity in the system controlling costs. Studies suggest insurance administration and profits do contribute to wasteful health care spending, but they’re just one contributor to a bloated system. Hospitals, which often escape criticism, are a significant part of the problem.
We reached out to the Greater New York Hospital Association to get a response to criticism of the appearance of a quid pro quo between them and the Governor of New York. They stressed that state hospitals “hadn’t received a Medicaid rate increase in 10 years” and that while they “aggressively lobbied” to change this, they deny the interpretation that suggests their large donations were motivated by increasing Medicaid rates. They say, instead, the donations were aimed at defending the Affordable Care Act from “relentless attacks” from lawmakers in the nation’s capital.
More compelling evidence to support this:
Fixing the health care system
Started by metmike - Aug. 23, 2019, 10:44 p.m.
How the U.S. Pays 3 Times More for Drugs
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-u-s-pays-3-times-more-for-drugs/
"LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. prices for the world's 20 top-selling medicines are, on average, three times higher than in Britain, according to an analysis carried out for Reuters.
The 20 medicines, which together accounted for 15% of global pharmaceuticals spending in 2014, are a major source of profits for companies including AbbVie, AstraZeneca , Merck, Pfizer and Roche.
Researchers from Britain's University of Liverpool also found U.S. prices were consistently higher than in other European markets. Elsewhere, U.S. prices were six times higher than in Brazil and 16 times higher than the average in the lowest-price country, which was usually India.
The United States, which leaves pricing to market competition, has higher drug prices than other countries where governments directly or indirectly control medicine costs.
That makes it by far the most profitable market for pharmaceutical companies, leading to complaints that Americans are effectively subsidizing health systems elsewhere."
metmike: Facts are facts. This is not about private or government healthcare. Both will fail are failing catastrophically because health care insurance companies must pay these price gouging costs and pass them on, even if their profit margins were a bare minimum.
Politicians and the FDA don't want you to know this real reason because they get bribes(usually legal/lobby money) from drug companies and they personally, benefit from this arrangement.............screw the American people and make them think its the health insurance industry's fault.
the ACA has made the drug cost problem much worse.
for example, the law as written says i have to buy health insurance. and it says the insurance company has to cover birth control. so the company that makes the birth control pill can keep jacking up the price. (even if me and my wife are past child bearing years).
in 2008, those pills (without a prescription) costs 30 bucks per month. today the same thing is 140 per month . this is a direct result of the ACA.
in 2007 my sisters thyroid medicine was 10 bucks a month (w/o insurance). today the same perscription is 170/m... up 17 fold in just over 10 years.
the effect in the end... the ACA is corporate welfare for drug companies. and the dems all voted for this system of corporate welfare.
I have posted many times the advantages our health care. Honestly why I do not know. If you continue to think as you do, then it is like voting one party all your life. You won't even give a new thought, or the other political party, the time of day
When I post about your health care
Every time somebody will come back with the "wait time" people think is in our system for hospital surgery or some thing similar in kind.
Or the other argument is that no way do you want gov't running your health care
Well: Let me ask you. How well is your present system working???
In Canada, nobody dies waiting for life saving hospital attention no matter how expensive it may be
I had a cracked bone in my wrist, I was x-rayed the day it happened, put on a list for further examination with a surgeon, which happened the very next morning. I was given a splint to wear as surgery was deemed not necessary. I was then given a date for follow up examination
Total cost -- 30.00 -- for the splint which was bought off the shelf at the hospital. We bought another splint so we could wash one while I wore the second splint. The second splint [which was actually a brace to protect my wrist so "splint" may not be totally correct wording] was just a convenience for us and not required
I also suffered a mild stroke, some time ago.
Same thing. Immediate attention that day and follow up by more experience hospital staff including all kinds of tests to see if it was serious. Turned out it was a very mild stroke and I re-gained all flexibility in my fingers, hand and arm. I was monitored and all records were sent to my family doctor
The only wait time is for "elective surgery"
If you want bigger or smaller boobs then you wait, but you will have the surgery done and not wait a yr or more as some of you may think. Hip replacement, knee replacement is the biggest need for hospitals to perform and yes you will wait for a hip replacement. You will see a surgeon and they will decide how urgent your need is. I have a knee that does not work 100% but I can manage, I don't want to do the painful exercises after ward, so I told my doctor somebody else should take my spot as I can manage and don't really want the surgery. My doctor told me any time, just tell her, and I will get a new knee
That is my experience
As we age we have a need for hospital care. When I was young I did not even think of a hospital except for my elders in hospital waiting to die. or a tetnus shot if I poked myself with a rusty nail
Now you tell me if your system is doing a better job than our system and I have a bridge to sell you some place. Or we agree to disagree
Why you folks dance around possible BK or put assets in places like a trust so you have minimum assets for the hospital to grab is beyond me. Obviously many off you don't even protect your assets from a hospital surprise bill, which completely baffles me
Wait until you are my age and then tell me you love your system more than our Canadian system. At least I won't go BK and I don't pay premiums, my personal tax rate is very close to yours, our farm Co's pay 15% tax on the 1st 500,000.00 of profit
Health care is a large part of our natn'l budget, but if you want to see a fly over at every NASCAR event, then spend your money where you think it will do the most good
I am happy how we spend our money in Canada
Well mostly happy, that carbon tax really gets me, but maybe after the election that will be gone
thanks much Wayne!!!
Being able to relate actual, first hand experiences gets a lot of weight in my book.
Wayne, you may not go bankrupt for healthcare in your country, but do you have have something like the UK's "NICE". the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence"? They have a bunch of unelected nameless bureaucrats deciding who deserves what care based on "cost effectiveness". "End of Life" type decisions get very short shrift. In the unlikely event you don't have something like"NICE", you will. Then you can choose to die or, like many of your citizens, choose to come to the US for treatment and face bankruptcy. Priorities shift for some when the decision involves life or death.
As far as wait times, Canada came in 11th out of 11 countries. If you don't like this source, there are dozens of others.
https://www.medrepublic.com/blog/travel/long-wait-times-canada/
The Commonwealth Fund and the Canadian Institute of Health Information published a study of wait times in 11 countries, including Australia, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK and the United States. Canada scored the lowest for ability to get same-day and next-day appointments, emergency visit wait time, specialist wait time, and elective surgery wait time. A survey by the Fraser Institute determined the median wait time for medically necessary treatments and procedures in 2016 was 20 weeks, the longest recorded wait time since the organization started tracking in 1993."
Hi Tim
I read your reference material and all I can tell you is personal experience. I found the material hard to access for real life experience as just a bunch of stats is very misleading. I know that is all you know, but trust me it is not as bad as that material would suggest.
My wife's parents both died of cancer
Both ended up in hospital as terminal patients. They both received excellent care and because they were terminal about all any one could do was keep the pain as low as possible. If I was in terrible pain I really think doctor assisted suicide would be my preference. I don't like pain and if there is no hope why prolong the agony.
My father died of alhzeimerers [sp]disease He had excellent care even if he did not know me for the last three yrs of his life. Now if you have watched your loved one suffer any kind of terminal disease then get it over with. But our system keeps on plugging along until you die. I don't know where you get your info about elderly because my experience has been all good, except keeping a person alive while in great pain, But I suppose that is just me
If you just go in off the street for emergency then yes you will wait. Those people choose not to have a regular doctor. I can call my doctor any time and if it is an emergency at 10.00 P.M then I go to emerg and will wait my turn. On the other hand I am assessed immediately as to need. If I have a broken bone then that is a priority. If I complain about a sore nose which has been runny all day then I will wait. It is priority and nobody suffers in emerg for long wait times
If I want elective surgery, such as bigger boobs then yes I will wait, but I will get my boobs, which seems a waste of time and space to me.
I tried to read your reference material and it is biased to all situations, many of which don't need immediate care and your personal doctor is the place to go. Some choose not to have a personal doctor. My doctor wants me in her office more than I want, but she insists
As for going to other countries I have been to Florida and listen to your citizens talk about going to other countries for surgery of which I would not want to risk the competence of those countries. So you folks also do what we do, so don't give me that song and dance, as if we are the only people that travel to another country.
We all make choices and if you had our system I would bet you would be of a different opinion. All you know is what your read
You and I know what you read is not the entire story
I can remember when we did not have our social health care in place. My father owed more money to doctors alone than his entire yrly salary. and that did not include hospital bills
I will take our system any day of the week
You folks pay so much in drug cost alone it baffles me compared to our cost. A typical visit to the drug store will cost me maybe 4 - $5.00
One yr I had a drug bill of over 50,000.00 plus doctors and hospital time, of which I paid zip. I had terrible cluster headaches and nothing seemed to work. This lasted for over 4 months.Thankfully my doctors have found a remedy that works but I take approx. 30 pills a day. I have not counted exactly but I take pills 4 times every day. Can you imagine the cost in your country???
That is where I pay the 4-$5.00 per visit to the drug store as some are off the shelf drugs, but my doctor wants me to use them.
My cluster head aches are gone, I hope. Have not had an attack for over two yrs and counting. Found out pure oxygen is the number one thing to do if I have an attack which does require a prescription although it costs me zip. I generally arrives the next day
All I can tell you is my experience and family members. Nobody that I talk to has any complaints. It is simply a non issue and I wish you would read a bit closer to what is really printed and not believe all the horror stories that people like to print when there is another side to the story that is not explained
This wait time is way out of proportion. When I go to the hospital I am given a time slot and within 1/2 hr depending on if they are running behind I am off to x-ray or what ever. I actually prefer afternoons as it is not as busy and they wisk you right on thru the rooms, as fast as you can walk from here to there.
Our hospital serves an entire county and no complaints.
If more experienced doctors are required or a second opinion then we have three hospitals 35 miles away Living in the country 35 miles is nothing. Gives my wife a chance to try a new resturant.
I know you will never agree with me Tim but I notice you are the only poster who disagrees.
If we're going with personal/anecdotal experience.....
I pay less for my health insurance than you have taken in taxes for your healthcare. We'll ignore the fact that my employer pays a significant portion. I have a relatively low deductible (3000 per year for my wife and myself) and it is more than offset by my employer subsidized HSA for which my contributions are pre-tax. I rarely, if ever, have out of pocket expenses that are not covered.
I can't imagine why anyone would want anything else than what we have available here in the states based on my experience.
But of course, we know my experience is not the same as everyone else's.
I would take Canada's health care over ours in a heartbeat.
We spend 40% more per capita on our health care than the next most expensive country (France).
And for that spending we are uninsured or underinsured.
For what it is worth, my personal experience with health insurance companies over the decades can be summed up as follows: They are criminal. They take your money and then make every effort to deny claims. It would cost me more in legal fees than just paying the cost that should have been covered in the first place. I have chosen to "self insure". Saves me 8-9 thousand a year.
" We'll ignore the fact that my employer pays a significant portion."
Why would you do that if you're objective Tim?
We don't have an employer to pay that for us in this family and many others.. I really don't know what to say that hasn't been clearly stated above. You have made your decision on this and will justify it by doing things like ignoring the obvious facts.........they are facts that I stated not anecdotal reports and seeing things from your comfortable position of having an employer that pays much of the costs for you.
This is actually part of the overall problem.
People like you who can't see facts from people not in your cozy situation.
I might continue to respond more but am unable to give tell you anything that is not just repeating the same points.
I'm not here to win arguments or debates..................just make points using authentic data as evidence. When one side has decided they already know the answers, that data doesn't register in their brains if it contradicts the answer..............but I made my points.
We can't always agree on everything.
" We'll ignore the fact that my employer pays a significant portion."
Why would you do that if you're objective Tim?"
I thought I made it clear that I was not being objective when I started with..as long as we are using personal/anecdotal evidence, and closed with..but we know not everyone’s experience is the same. It was in response to Wayne doing essentially the same while attempting to disregard the study I cited.
And JOJ, I agree.What Canada has is much better than what we have.Politicians have worked hard for decades to screw up our system as badly as they have. It did not happen overnight and I’ll just about guarantee giving them more power over healthcare will not lead to improvement. Quite the contrary.
Hi Tim
I don't want to prolong this debate or win points. You know my position and I know your position
However you did bring up our income tax bill, which needs an explanation
We have been paying a low combined income tax for two people as we built assets on the farm
Without going into personal stuff, just know we paid mostly a corp income tax rate of 15% . My wife put large sums into a retirement portfolio at zero tax.
Now we are into estate planning and we are advised to pay more income tax or our estate will be hit with a huge tax bill, on all liquid assets
Thus we will be paying taxes on accumulated liquid assets plus our personal tax rate which means an inflated tax bill, for us, as related to other people who pay less taxes, on that yrs income..
Nothing can be done. I did not want to pay taxes when building our farm operation. But the gov't will get their share now or later, thus we pay an inflated tax bill to avoid a huge tax bill that our estate would have to pay in one yr. which we can pay in 10 yrs or what ever.
So that taxable amount is very mis leading. I think we should actually pay more, just in case one or both of us kicks the bucket sooner than expected. Hope not but what if the plane crashes while on vacation. We always review our will before going on vacation, just to make sur everything is okay or something may have changed
Remember, I did that estimate way back in a post. As you pointed out, not everybody spends money like we do. Nor do other people have a tax problem like we do. So I put in a high tax bill because that is what we will pay due to estate planning. Normal taxes would be much less and also pay for our health care.
What really gets me is the carbon tax we pay for pump fuel and other energy bills, such as fuel for our semi trucks, fuel to dry corn, electricity to run the fans on grain bins etc.. The dang people in town get a tax credit while our bill is so large the tax credit means almost nothing. The farmers are paying for the town people's tax credit which really burns me up. The town people think the tax credit is like mana from heaven and they are saving the planet while doing this
Grrr.
Thanks very much Tim!
All your positive contributions are greatly appreciated even if we disagree on some things regarding this issue.