Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

nly Way to Fix Healthcare Insurance in the U.S.
http://blog.dilbert.com/2017/06/27/the-only-way-to-fix-healthcare-insurance-in-the/ | June 27, 2017 | SCOTT ADAMS' BLOG PODCAST

Posted on 08/03/2018 8:13:23 PM PDT by ckilmer

The Only Way to Fix Healthcare Insurance in the U.S.

Our system of government has been amazingly robust for hundreds of years, but it fails when you have these two conditions:

1. An issue is too complicated for the public to understand.

2. Big companies are willing to distort the system for profits.

That situation describes the healthcare debate going on in the United States right now. Our undersized brains can’t grasp all the nuances and implications of any particular healthcare plan. And when our brains are confused, we default to our biases (usually party loyalty) or to whatever metric is simple enough to understand. With healthcare, the one metric that matters is how many people will be covered compared to Obamacare. If the Republican plan covers more people, it will pass. If not, it will fail. 

 

Sure, Republicans will argue that the CBO projections are inaccurate. They will argue that comparing a mandatory plan with an optional one is comparing apples to oranges. They will be right about all of that, but it is irrelevant to the outcome. People will look at the number of people covered and stop there. So any Republican bill that covers fewer people than Obamacare is dead on arrival. That’s where we are now. And we don’t have a system of government that can fix this situation. 

But what we do have is an active citizenry and social media. That’s a better system for designing a healthcare system. I’ll describe one way to go about it.

Some of you are aware of Github, a company that lets software developers contribute bits of code that are made available to all other Github users. Github is a big deal, and software developers almost can’t live without it. Perhaps it is time to build a similar system for fixing health insurance in the U.S.

Imagine a website where any interested party can contribute suggestions for improving any individual element of healthcare in the United States, with a focus on lowering costs while improving outcomes. Perhaps you have an idea about lowering drug prices, and I have an idea about online doctors. We submit our ideas, and the Github-for-healthcare users gets to improve on them or ignore them. The system would allow users to rank the ideas. In time, citizens could develop multiple ideas for every element of healthcare. Citizen volunteers could eventually create up to three plans and present them to Congress for a vote.

I’ll get the ball rolling here by framing the problem as an innovation challenge, not a cost issue.

I think Congress can pass a bill that overspends in the short run so long as it comes with a plan (or path) to greater coverage than Obamacare. In my picture above, you see the growing gap between future health care costs and tax revenue. That growing gap can only be closed by some combination of innovation, cutting regulations, improving competition, and improving prevention. Let’s call that a “moon shot” challenge. We don’t know how to get there right now, but Americans are good at figuring out this sort of thing.

My suggestion for getting a healthcare bill passed is for Republicans to create a credible story for how they will cover more people than Obamacare, at a reasonable cost. And the best way to make that case is with visual persuasion, starting with this sort of simple graph and extending to images of startups that promise to lower medical costs.

At the moment, Paul Ryan and the Republicans are trying to sell their plan with facts, concepts, details, and logical arguments. That won’t work. You need an aspirational story about how to get to better coverage than Obamacare via American ingenuity. Everything else is just noise.

I don’t mind letting Congress take its best shot at improving healthcare. But realistically, they can’t. They are not the right form of government for this sort of complexity. 

Perhaps citizens can do what congress could not.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: healthcare; scottadams

1 posted on 08/03/2018 8:13:23 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

I started reading the Dilbert blog during the election cycle and it was great. I don’t really do podcasts, so I have been missing it :(

Anyway, two great ideas!!!!! I love the Github one, which would allow experts in a small area of health coverage to share ideas, as well as regular people who would have a very different point of view.

I also like what he said about using graphs and charts to explain appropriate aspects of issues. This is one (of several) things that drives me completely nuts about the Republicans—they are really bad at communicating. Perot showed us about the national debt with his charts, and I had never even heard about the national debt (being much younger then). I really think his ability to communicate was what got him 19% despite that bit of weirdness at the end of the campaign.

Thanks for sharing this with us :)


2 posted on 08/03/2018 8:24:47 PM PDT by Chicory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

The only way to fix health insurance in the United States is to get the government totally out of Insurance and out of Medicine, including pharmaceuticals. The market will settle out at far lower costs and prices than are necessary now to pay for all the paperwork and regulation and pay for the salaries of the hordes of government and insurance bureaucracies. The only government entanglement with medicine that is legitimate is military medicine.


3 posted on 08/03/2018 8:31:55 PM PDT by arthurus (<?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Problem with “healthcare” in the US is that everybody wants someone else to pay for it.
And everyone can come up with the heartaching story about a person who can’t afford needed care, so “we” should all contribute to universal coverage.
Horse Hockey!
Pay your own way or die.
Don’t knock on my door because I don’t give a Shiite.

That said, there are many ways folks can receive care of if the Goobermint
Would just get out of the way,

Cadillac care for all? No.
Basic care for idigents, sure. Charity Hospitals, or Teaching Hospitals.

Smoke? Obese? Drug addict? Too effin bad. Not my problem.

Sorry to all the do-gooders out there but my compassion circuits are blown.


4 posted on 08/03/2018 8:55:07 PM PDT by Macoozie (Handcuffs and Orange Jumpsuits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Funny, it seemed to be fine until that AH Obama started farting around with it.


5 posted on 08/04/2018 3:59:44 AM PDT by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Macoozie

The stated GOP goal for reform: “Reduce costs, reduce taxes, take away the “individual mandate,” but still ensure people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it”

The whole problem, succinctly stated, in one clever, incoherent sentence.

The reason the Republicans can’t crack this nut, in fact, the reason their party won’t exist as a single party by 2024, is that they are divided and unable to be reconciled over the contradiction so ably stated above.

“Ensure people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it”

Let’s break it down.

Nobody “wants” “healthcare” (whatever that is). I suppose the author of the sentence means “health insurance”.

People either need health care (meaning, hospitalization, surgery, medications, and nursing services), or they don’t. WHEN they need it, they want it (or are too sick to know they do), but when they don’t need it, they most certainly don’t WANT it.

When people NEED hospitalization, surgery, medications, and nursing services (and notice how much people don’t want to think about that - they invented the euphemism “healthcare” to describe it) - when they need it, “having the ability to purchase it” is absolutely, totally, 100% completely the last thing on their minds. So is organizing society so that it will be available. What is on patient’s minds at the point of need is death, or life - disability and disfigurement, or recovery. They do not know, or care, who pays, or how.

So, the Democrats have resolved the philosophical question that comes before the practical problem. They want to ensure that “healthcare” (by which they mean services) is given to all by the government without regard for ability to purchase (pay for) it. Whether this is right or wrong, smart or stupid, practical or akin to skittles from unicorns is not my point. My point is that they have resolved the contradiction embedded in “lower costs, lower taxes, no mandate, ensure ability to purchase (pay for it) for 100% of the population”. The Democrats know what they want, and they are united and determined to have it.

The poor, stupid Republicans, OTOH, are divided about the underlying premise. They really do want health insurance to be cheaper without the lost revenue being made up by taxes, and they want no requirement to have it, BUT they also want “people that want healthcare” (again, whatever that means) to “have the ability to purchase it”.

This is incoherent. If hospitals, surgeons, drug manufacturers and nurses do not get paid for their services, they will no longer be available. Many, many people who NEED (and therefore “want”) those services cannot pay 1% of what they cost.

“Ensuring that people that want healthcare have the ability to purchase it” either means cheap insurance that doesn’t cover anything OR nationalization of the resources to deliver care to those who cannot, or will not, pay.

There is no middle ground. The Democrats know what they want. The Republicans don’t.

As Sun Tzu said, “It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.”

The Republicans do not have a plan because they do not have a philosophy that can support their opposed goals of more freedom for the well and perfect security for the sick.


6 posted on 08/04/2018 4:13:31 AM PDT by Jim Noble (p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Macoozie

No. The problem with health care in the US is it’s ridiculously expensive. There is no way for 80% of the people in this country to afford out of pocket even a short stay in the hospital. Costs are 5 or 6 times what they should be.


7 posted on 08/04/2018 5:46:49 AM PDT by KyCats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble; All
The Republicans do not have a plan because they do not have a philosophy that can support their opposed goals of more freedom for the well and perfect security for the sick.

Well-stated BUMP!

Stay healthy FRiends.

8 posted on 08/04/2018 6:29:27 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: KyCats
Costs are 5 or 6 times what they should be

And what should they be?

Or, more exactly, what services should hospitals provide that are not directly attributable to the cost (properly accounted for) of what you receive as an inpatient?

Right now, the "indirect" portion of reimbursement for a day in a hospital bed is well in excess of 100%. The funds, in addition to waste and administrative bloat, cover an enormous reserve army of highly skilled people waiting for something to happen to you.

Take them away, the whole thing goes down the drain.

9 posted on 08/04/2018 6:40:01 AM PDT by Jim Noble (p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Our “Health Care” problem could be fixed overnight.

1. NO Taxpayer funds shall be spent on Insurance of any kind for any Public Employee.

2. ENFORCE OUR 100 Yr Old ANTI TRUST LAWS!!!

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws

The Sherman Act outlaws “every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade,” and any “monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize.” Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are “per se” violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed.

The penalties for violating the Sherman Act can be severe. Although most enforcement actions are civil, the Sherman Act is also a criminal law, and individuals and businesses that violate it may be prosecuted by the Department of Justice. Criminal prosecutions are typically limited to intentional and clear violations such as when competitors fix prices or rig bids. The Sherman Act imposes criminal penalties of up to $100 million for a corporation and $1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison. Under federal law, the maximum fine may be increased to twice the amount the conspirators gained from the illegal acts or twice the money lost by the victims of the crime, if either of those amounts is over $100 million.


10 posted on 08/04/2018 6:42:46 AM PDT by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

SEPARATION OF STATE AND DOCTOR

The Federal Government shall make no law related to medicine or healthcare.

DONE! 12 words!

This would create the most successful, advanced medical care in the world.


11 posted on 08/04/2018 7:03:14 AM PDT by TheNext
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Well said. Back in the ‘90’s when the Clintons were initiating the universal healthcare, there were groups of health professionals who brainstormed healthcare fixes. The culmination and conclusions were very good. Hillary butchered these ideas and came up with Hillarycare.

So, the fixes/solutions are out there, have been. As to the Republicans, I hope DJT comes up with a plan and finally neutralize this item of the Democrat party.


12 posted on 08/04/2018 8:41:20 AM PDT by VRW Conspirator (Enforce the Law. Build the Wall. Deport them All.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson