Health Care Reform - Universal/Public Option

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I'm just saying that while your suggestion is a good idea, and would help a ton in general, there are so many permutations of possibilities that there's only so much you can prepare for, as opposed to being able to get good and unbiased advice when a decision point comes up. The article does a good job of describing such a situation.

Ah got it. I just hope that when I go, it's not some long dragged out thing.

[SportsDino]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Interesting comments. I've read in a few places that health care costs in Europe have been increasing at a rate higher than here lately. Not sure if it is true or not.

Yes, I heard similar information and it made sense in general, but being a stat-addict I did a little digging into demographics and costs. Granted my data is all public and hard to establish its accuracy, but essentially the cost increases were statistically consistent with the demographic shifts....

Essentially, if you assume that old people just naturally cost more, based on statistics here and abroad on spend per age, then the rate of cost increase in these nations was more than well explained by demographics, and had no direct correlation to any form of waste due to the distribution method used (i.e. socialized universal health care).

If you were to apply the same model to the U.S., using its table of costs per age, and a similar demographic make up (basically more old people) the rate of increase in U.S. health care costs is even worst. This is even after understanding the stats are skewed by denied coverage, and the odd workings of the Medicare system.

To be fair, there are so many sources of error that it is hardly 'media-worthy' (granted they never even seem to make the attempt at all to find the truth behind the numbers).... but I think demographics are more than enough to describe the difference in cost growth rates.

I'm of course nervous about similar situation in the U.S. As that article described, we are terrible about promoting expensive life extension care, and then we put the cost of that ever more on the backs of eveyone else. It comes in the form of higher premiums or more recissions or paperwork for younger people.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by SportsDino

Yes, I heard similar information and it made sense in general, but being a stat-addict I did a little digging into demographics and costs. Granted my data is all public and hard to establish its accuracy, but essentially the cost increases were statistically consistent with the demographic shifts....

Essentially, if you assume that old people just naturally cost more, based on statistics here and abroad on spend per age, then the rate of cost increase in these nations was more than well explained by demographics, and had no direct correlation to any form of waste due to the distribution method used (i.e. socialized universal health care).

If you were to apply the same model to the U.S., using its table of costs per age, and a similar demographic make up (basically more old people) the rate of increase in U.S. health care costs is even worst. This is even after understanding the stats are skewed by denied coverage, and the odd workings of the Medicare system.

To be fair, there are so many sources of error that it is hardly 'media-worthy' (granted they never even seem to make the attempt at all to find the truth behind the numbers).... but I think demographics are more than enough to describe the difference in cost growth rates.

I'm of course nervous about similar situation in the U.S. As that article described, we are terrible about promoting expensive life extension care, and then we put the cost of that ever more on the backs of eveyone else. It comes in the form of higher premiums or more recissions or paperwork for younger people.

and we're about to really start hitting the point where the shit hits the fan with that as the Baby Boomers continue to age.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

and we're about to really start hitting the point where the shit hits the fan with that as the Baby Boomers continue to age.

It'll be interesting to see. Medicare and Medicaid will be unimaginable.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

and we're about to really start hitting the point where the shit hits the fan with that as the Baby Boomers continue to age.

Basically we all need to go kill one right now if we want to unfuck the mess that happens by our Age 50 Life Season

[sterlingice]

I've got my over 50 target in mind. Just no one take him because he's mine to kill

Wait, did I just say that out loud

SI

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by SportsDino

Yes, I heard similar information and it made sense in general, but being a stat-addict I did a little digging into demographics and costs. Granted my data is all public and hard to establish its accuracy, but essentially the cost increases were statistically consistent with the demographic shifts....

Essentially, if you assume that old people just naturally cost more, based on statistics here and abroad on spend per age, then the rate of cost increase in these nations was more than well explained by demographics, and had no direct correlation to any form of waste due to the distribution method used (i.e. socialized universal health care).

If you were to apply the same model to the U.S., using its table of costs per age, and a similar demographic make up (basically more old people) the rate of increase in U.S. health care costs is even worst. This is even after understanding the stats are skewed by denied coverage, and the odd workings of the Medicare system.

To be fair, there are so many sources of error that it is hardly 'media-worthy' (granted they never even seem to make the attempt at all to find the truth behind the numbers).... but I think demographics are more than enough to describe the difference in cost growth rates.

I'm of course nervous about similar situation in the U.S. As that article described, we are terrible about promoting expensive life extension care, and then we put the cost of that ever more on the backs of eveyone else. It comes in the form of higher premiums or more recissions or paperwork for younger people.

Interesting. I would love to dig deeper and see exactly what is costing the faster increase in costs in Europe. Baby boomers are one, but I got a feeling something else has to be doing it as well.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I've got my over 50 target in mind. Just no one take him because he's mine to kill

Wait, did I just say that out loud

SI

Dayton Moore is only 43.

[sterlingice]

Not who I was thinking, but

It's so frustrating. So, I'm watching the draft last night and the Rockets have one of the best in the business in Daryl Morey. And then to see Dayton Moore who scoffs at advanced stats in a sport where there's a broad enough sample size to make them really useful... well, it's just frustrating.

SI

[Galaxy]

For Forgetful, Cash Helps the Medicine Go Down - NYTimes.com

Do we really have to pay people to take medicine?

[sterlingice]

We shouldn't but one of the big reasons we have drug resistant TB making a huge comeback is that people will only take enough medicine to feel better but not enough to fully kill the disease. So, because of their stupidity, it makes things a lot more dangerous for the rest of us.

However, paying them is just... well, stupid. You set up the wrong sort of incentive system. Instead, I think sending a large, threatening man with a name like Guido to make sure they take their pills is the way to go. Don't reward people for something they should do, take punitive measures for them being stupid enough to not do what they should do.

SI

[fpres]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

For Forgetful, Cash Helps the Medicine Go Down - NYTimes.com

This type of program is simply ridiculous. At the risk of over-generalizing...how much of this money is going to find its way to practices which contribute to unhealthy living? Sure, at least some it will go to the essentials (food, shelter, clothing, etc.), but who's naive enough to think that none of it will go to not-so-productive pursuits? At some point, people have to show at least a minimum amount of personal accountability (read: that they give a damn about themselves).

This takes the cake (regarding warfarin use) for me...

Originally Posted by Article

But in the six-month lottery program, she pocketed about $300. “You got something for taking it,” Ms. Parker said. Suddenly, she said, “I was taking it regularly, I was doing so good.”

You mean you get something for taking it? Besides preventing blood clots that will in all likelihood kill or debilitate you? It's great to see that you think the medication is a good idea now.

Originally Posted by sterlingice

We shouldn't but one of the big reasons we have drug resistant TB making a huge comeback is that people will only take enough medicine to feel better but not enough to fully kill the disease. So, because of their stupidity, it makes things a lot more dangerous for the rest of us.

This was one of the driving factors behind the development of Directly Observed Therapy for TB which is now considered standard of care.

[SportsDino]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Interesting. I would love to dig deeper and see exactly what is costing the faster increase in costs in Europe. Baby boomers are one, but I got a feeling something else has to be doing it as well.

There are a number of factors muddying up the waters.

Costs of medical inflation are higher for instance, but they are growing from a smaller base than the US counterpart (i.e. if the U.S. is already paying $20 and Europe paying $10, than a $5 increase by percentage looks worst in Europe, and actually the increase is shallower here because it probably has less give (so 20 to 23 where euro may go 10 to 15).

Coverages approved by countries are expanding as well, not to mention more expensive drugs.

Essentially costs across the board, US and abroad, are inflating. The question is whether they are increasing faster in Europe, and the simple answer is yes, they are... but only if you constrain yourself to a subset of the statistics. Looking at the whole picture, we are already so much more expensive and have a better demographic picture, that the increase growth rate of euro costs to me can be easily explained as 'catching up'. The demographic boost, by itself, is enough to cover the change in growth rates... this ignores the entire issue of them having a lot lower costs to grow from to begin with.

As it is relevant to me, all I care about where to spend on health care businesses in Europe versus here (I'm looking for the fastest stock price growth, an entirely different question, but as I've found increasingly over that past couple of years to ignore government interference is to shoot yourself in the head). In a lot of ways, I like european investments better than US, just because the margins look healthier if not so excessive (good margins here, but higher risk of some disaster or another). I'm in love with the short of a failing industry strategy, I'm of the opinion that it is merely a matter of timing with American health care at this point, the certainty that it will decline in my mind is inevitable.

[SportsDino]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

We shouldn't but one of the big reasons we have drug resistant TB making a huge comeback is that people will only take enough medicine to feel better but not enough to fully kill the disease. So, because of their stupidity, it makes things a lot more dangerous for the rest of us.

However, paying them is just... well, stupid. You set up the wrong sort of incentive system. Instead, I think sending a large, threatening man with a name like Guido to make sure they take their pills is the way to go. Don't reward people for something they should do, take punitive measures for them being stupid enough to not do what they should do.

SI

The natural solution is to let them die of TB. I'm more in favor of it everyday, let the dumb die.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by SportsDino

The natural solution is to let them die of TB. I'm more in favor of it everyday, let the dumb die.

Unfortunately, TB is communicable and all or else, well, the utilitarian in me says "yeah"

SI

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by SportsDino

The natural solution is to let them die of TB. I'm more in favor of it everyday, let the dumb die.

Yes...natural selection has been the cornerstone of human evolution. Why cheat it now?