Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

But at least so far the political configuration of that discontent, not the magnitude of it, has prevented progress on lowering the cost of health care.

Health insurance in this country suffers from kind of a legacy situation. It is sort of like how the qwerty keyboard is terribly inefficient, but most people continue to use it.

From what I have read, at some point health insurance was offered as a means to beef up compensation in a way that was tax friendly for employees, thus helping to entice better employees to come work for your company. This became kind of the standard default and typically covered the family, not just the employee.

This was considered a perk in a situation where most people whipped out their check book to pay for medical care because it was relatively reasonably priced. Then health insurance became kind of the default and it adds overhead and complexity. Obomacare was passed as the only politically viable solution and it's a terrible solution.

Health insurance coverage for basic services doesn't really make sense. Insurance only makes sense as a bet to defray unexpected expenses. When you use it cover annual exams and other basics that you know are guaranteed to happen, it essentially creates an unnecessary middleman, pushing prices higher without providing any real benefit for the cost involved.

This is where we are now and most people don't know how to get out of this mess. It doesn't help that Obamacare puts a gun to your head and insists that most people participate in this charade or be fined at tax time, in essence. Ugh.




One can argue over the implementation method, but fundamentally a society must decide whether they believe health care - both routine/simple and unexpected/severe - is a right of all or a privilege for just some. If you say it's a right, everyone has to participate and those of means have to help pay for those who have none. The individual mandate was an admittedly roundabout way to achieve that.

The old system of paying a doctor outright with a check or cash was not a universal healthcare solution - a lot of people couldn't afford it even back then.

Most developed countries deal with the cost problems of health care through strong price regulation, even the relatively laissez-faire systems like Singapore [1] or Switzerland.

Obamacare did a lot to improve access [2] (subsidies, pre-existing conditions, adult children on parents plans) - it's a lot like the Swiss system, - but unlike that system, it did very little to address costs.

1. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/upshot/what-makes-sing...

2. https://www.kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the...


I agree with you. So I'm not sure what the argument is here. I was only describing how we got to the current morass and why it is so hard to extricate ourselves and do something not crazy.


Sorry, I'm not arguing with you. What I'm addressing is that the particular mechanisms only matter once the objective - affordable health care as right or a privilege - is broadly established and agreed upon. Until then, debating the mechanisms, whether taxes or mandates, or nothing at all if one believes health care is a privilege, doesn't address the root problem.


Ah. I generally find it helps to understand the problem space. With a sufficient understanding, sometimes one can come up with elegant solutions that can cut past the BS.

That approach of mine is frequently misunderstood and perceived to be things like making excuses or justifying the current status quo, etc.


Absolutely correct.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: