the math has already been done. we pay more for less care in the united states than places with universal health care.
health insurance companies only profit by denying claims. profit only comes when humans suffer.
This is the root of it.
Piled on top of that are layers upon layers of middlemen rent-seekers. The amount of parasitic corporate bullshit that goes on behind the scenes whenever you go to the pharmacy to pick up a prescription would blow most people's minds.
The good news is, awareness is growing, and there are a few good actors in government trying to do something about it. It's very much an uphill battle, though.
And preventive medicine makes us live healthier for longer, making sure we can keep sustaining the system and reduce the amount of more complex and expensive care needed.
Entrepreneurs and small business would benefit tremendously. More people could follow their ideas and dreams as small business owners and entrepreneurs, and boost economic output and innovation. All are hindered by this surfdom.
I had my own business and my health insurance was crazy expensive and had a terribly high deductible. Ultimately I went back to being an employee. Then back to contracting with terrible excuse for health care. The compay I’m contracting for will lose me as soon as I land a job with good healthcare, so they’re effected too and they’re not small.
Anyone who is not for universal healthcare is anti-small business, the economy, the countries’ innovation and security in the global economy, and the people.
That would be logical and we don't do that here.
Stop that.
Whether I agree with you depends on whether "here" means "lemmy" or "this country."
Yesn't.
Well… that just sounds like socialism to me; so now we’re friends.
We have health care in Canada yet still lots of street homeless people. They aren’t getting adequate care at all, yet the cost of caring for them exceeds the average person by many times. Many of them are on a first name basis with all the paramedics and other first responders due to how often they’re taken to the emergency room.
Same in the UK :/ although I’d never want an American style healthcare system
You guys are getting close to it though. With your "Two Tier" system, You've slowly almost choked the public side of health care to death.
Unfortunately the Conservative groups in this country want us to have a fully privatised system. They’re already working to rid the country of mentally ill people, disabled people or anyone who could be a “drain”. There’s so much rhetoric at the moment about mentally ill people or those with ADHD and Autism receiving benefits I’m actually scared, they’ve made sure that the waitlist for therapy is a year long. I was forced to go private for my therapy or wait “up to 36 months”. I was suicidal and my mum couldn’t risk us waiting, so she sold half of our land to a builder to pay for it :/
How does that help the shareholders gain more wealth to hoard though?
Pay them with publics funds but give them no liability and no pricing oversight
Like we do in Canada (Ontario) for regular healthcare
Yes, that’s how it works in many countries.
Not having preventive health care if like having a car, hear it make too many strange noises and not fixing it until it breaks and you end up on the side of the road upside down. You "didn't spend money" in minor fixings but you end up paying a lot more.
Thanks for reminding me about all the stuff that needs fixing on my car.
As someone in the final stages of a masters degree in healthcare management and economics:
Almost. It doesn't entirely cover the costs (at least from the data we have available worldwide, which is somewhat insufficient) but a focus on mental health(which always includes workers rights, women's rights and a few more social issues that create long term health problems on a massive scale) and prophylaxis in general is FAR cheaper than what most industrial nations currently do.
We do have a few issues that are not addressed in these concepts (e.g. end of life care and costs associated with that, new types of personalised medication, accessibility in rural areas,etc.) that still make a healthcare system like that something society has to pay for...But it does improve things massively, especially the quality of life of people that are not the actual patients.
That's how you can see the true nature of the system. It isn't designed to maximize production, it is designed to subordinate production.
I bet the benefit of free school lunches would also pay for itself. And there's been studies that show that funding early childhood education has a huge ROI.
But that's not how things work here.
Yeah, but it wont pay back within the quarter.
Imagine how much we could save on policing if we didn't have outbreaks of mental health issues and shootings.
Just kidding, don't think about that, back the blue. /s
how are we going to know we're better than other people though, this is the most important thing.
I'm just here to agree. Also, people could stop self diagnosing, which is a whole other thing.
TBH the bigger problem is, even if we did have full funding, we just don't have the necessary amount of trained physicians. There would still be a backlog.
Same thing with crime and basic needs. It costs less to give people housing, food, etc, than to staff the police and infrastructure for jails. Once you realize that, you realize it's not about the cost. It's about the cruelty.
I don't know because I'm in the US, but does universal healthcare in other countries cover autism-related therapies and care such as ABA, occupational and speech at the rates recommend by docs (our docs recommended 20+ hours/week - or roughly the cost of $100k/year)? And is that factored into the equation?
I haven't seen the official modeling, just assumptions around the internet. But back of the napkin math suggests that appropriate autism care alone could be quite high: 1/36 of the 341,500,000 American residents have autism. Assuming 15% need care in the range of $100k, would be somewhere around $138b/year for just autism care. Does that seem in line with what you are thinking? Either way, are you able to point me to some of the modeling you have found? I'd love to learn more about how it tactically works.
Where’s your math coming from? There’s a ton of folks on the spectrum that don’t need assistance at all.
I just estimated that 15% need care. So that would leave a huge number that don't - you are right.
EDIT: A quick Internet search says that 82% of autistic adults want or get support, and only 16% are fully employed. 🤷
"Want to get support" is not the same as "need 20h of a specialists time each week"
You are right, which is why I used 15%, instead of 82%.
But what do you base those 15% on? Might as well be 1%, or even lower. In the end its just your own intuition, based on nothing. Hell, if they were capable of answering that survey, I don't think they'd need that much support.
Nothing, back of the napkin math for discussion purposes based on the 2 diagnosisea and doc recommendations we've gotten. Totally can adjust if you have a more accurate number.
Fyi ABA is considered highly unethical in the autism community.
Fair, take that piece out of the equation. Our docs still advised us on 20+ hours of therapy, all of which is costly.
I’m autistic and I don’t think I need twenty hours of therapy per week.
That sounds excessive to me.
Probably would be - age plays into it as well. My kids are pretty impacted - minimal language, safety issues, etc. I suspect it can vary widely.
I didn’t speak until I was 4 years old. Safety issues were handled by teaching me to swim, light campfires and bonfires and fireplace
fires, use power tools, a little firearm safety, and how to interact with horses without getting kicked.
Mom knew I was a special kid, so she pushed me out the door a lot. Like she knew I was extremely different. I distinctly remember her and I sitting at the kitchen table, and her saying that if my face didn’t show emotion spontaneously I was just going to have to fake it to fit in because the world wasn’t going to work if I kept my wooden face.
I had a ridiculous temper. I fought (as in physically fought) my friends often. It always led to cathartic release and an improvement of our bond, which boy fights predictably do.
Sometimes I feel extremely fortunate to have grown up in the 1980s and not today. The way autistic kids are coddled today can be utterly inhumane. It instills in them a self image as a broken person who cannot fit in. That self image is far and away more damaging than autism.
Now, I know some people are unable to vocalize other than incoherent groaning at the age of twenty. I wasn’t that bad.
But among the kids who were enrolled in school, able to form sentences, I had it pretty bad and my little shithole town just treated me as “one of them weird kids”, and it worked out. Our cultures have had autistic people since the dawn of time; the expertise coming out of labs isn’t the only source of wisdom on how to help them lead good lives.
Your first mistake is to use US prices as if that's what the care actually costs.
20+ hours of anything is costly if you are paying the therapists appropriately. The issue is that their work is 1:1 and doesn't scale easily.
And?
Doesn't change the fact that US prices are orders of magnitude out of proportion. You simply can't use it as a yardstick.
Now, if you're looking at the plain amount of material, manufacturing, infrastructure, and labour required, then you're making sense.
But it seems you're making the argument that too many people cost more to care for than they are "worth" in terms of economics, and would be too great a burden on the productivity of the healthy for a universal healthcare system to function.
But that's not even close to true. Universal healthcare is essentially an attempt at triage on national scale. To apply resources where they do the most good.
In comparison, commercial market healthcare is just less efficient across the board. A universal system is able to provide more care for more people at less cost, even if it isn't able to do so for everyone in every situation.
No-one is claiming universal healthcare systems save everyone and care for every ailment, every time. The argument is that it's simply the smarter way to use the resources a country has.
So, you totally hit the nail on the head. I couldn't agree more: It is about maximizing resources for overall good. It is just that some groups may not see a qualitative difference in care.
the math has already been done. we pay more for less care in the united states than places with universal health care.
health insurance companies only profit by denying claims. profit only comes when humans suffer.
This is the root of it.
Piled on top of that are layers upon layers of middlemen rent-seekers. The amount of parasitic corporate bullshit that goes on behind the scenes whenever you go to the pharmacy to pick up a prescription would blow most people's minds.
The good news is, awareness is growing, and there are a few good actors in government trying to do something about it. It's very much an uphill battle, though.
The suffering keeps the working class busy.
And hospitals. No one ever takes into account the fact that hospitals charge outrageous and arbitrary fees for services.
Congratulations, you just figured out how healthcare works in the rest of developed countries
Yup. Everything is better when everyone is doing better. It’s weirdly simple.
And also in some of the non developed countries (Cuba, Brazil)
"Cuba is such a shit hole."
Consistently has some of the best doctors. Also, healthcare workers from Kenya? Some of the best in the world.
And preventive medicine makes us live healthier for longer, making sure we can keep sustaining the system and reduce the amount of more complex and expensive care needed.
Entrepreneurs and small business would benefit tremendously. More people could follow their ideas and dreams as small business owners and entrepreneurs, and boost economic output and innovation. All are hindered by this surfdom.
I had my own business and my health insurance was crazy expensive and had a terribly high deductible. Ultimately I went back to being an employee. Then back to contracting with terrible excuse for health care. The compay I’m contracting for will lose me as soon as I land a job with good healthcare, so they’re effected too and they’re not small.
Anyone who is not for universal healthcare is anti-small business, the economy, the countries’ innovation and security in the global economy, and the people.
That would be logical and we don't do that here.
Stop that.
Whether I agree with you depends on whether "here" means "lemmy" or "this country."
Yesn't.
Well… that just sounds like socialism to me; so now we’re friends.
We have health care in Canada yet still lots of street homeless people. They aren’t getting adequate care at all, yet the cost of caring for them exceeds the average person by many times. Many of them are on a first name basis with all the paramedics and other first responders due to how often they’re taken to the emergency room.
Same in the UK :/ although I’d never want an American style healthcare system
You guys are getting close to it though. With your "Two Tier" system, You've slowly almost choked the public side of health care to death.
Unfortunately the Conservative groups in this country want us to have a fully privatised system. They’re already working to rid the country of mentally ill people, disabled people or anyone who could be a “drain”. There’s so much rhetoric at the moment about mentally ill people or those with ADHD and Autism receiving benefits I’m actually scared, they’ve made sure that the waitlist for therapy is a year long. I was forced to go private for my therapy or wait “up to 36 months”. I was suicidal and my mum couldn’t risk us waiting, so she sold half of our land to a builder to pay for it :/
How does that help the shareholders gain more wealth to hoard though?
Pay them with publics funds but give them no liability and no pricing oversight
Like we do in Canada (Ontario) for regular healthcare
Yes, that’s how it works in many countries.
Not having preventive health care if like having a car, hear it make too many strange noises and not fixing it until it breaks and you end up on the side of the road upside down. You "didn't spend money" in minor fixings but you end up paying a lot more.
Thanks for reminding me about all the stuff that needs fixing on my car.
As someone in the final stages of a masters degree in healthcare management and economics:
Almost. It doesn't entirely cover the costs (at least from the data we have available worldwide, which is somewhat insufficient) but a focus on mental health(which always includes workers rights, women's rights and a few more social issues that create long term health problems on a massive scale) and prophylaxis in general is FAR cheaper than what most industrial nations currently do.
We do have a few issues that are not addressed in these concepts (e.g. end of life care and costs associated with that, new types of personalised medication, accessibility in rural areas,etc.) that still make a healthcare system like that something society has to pay for...But it does improve things massively, especially the quality of life of people that are not the actual patients.
That's how you can see the true nature of the system. It isn't designed to maximize production, it is designed to subordinate production.
I bet the benefit of free school lunches would also pay for itself. And there's been studies that show that funding early childhood education has a huge ROI.
But that's not how things work here.
Yeah, but it wont pay back within the quarter.
Imagine how much we could save on policing if we didn't have outbreaks of mental health issues and shootings.
Just kidding, don't think about that, back the blue. /s
how are we going to know we're better than other people though, this is the most important thing.
I'm just here to agree. Also, people could stop self diagnosing, which is a whole other thing.
TBH the bigger problem is, even if we did have full funding, we just don't have the necessary amount of trained physicians. There would still be a backlog.
Same thing with crime and basic needs. It costs less to give people housing, food, etc, than to staff the police and infrastructure for jails. Once you realize that, you realize it's not about the cost. It's about the cruelty.
I don't know because I'm in the US, but does universal healthcare in other countries cover autism-related therapies and care such as ABA, occupational and speech at the rates recommend by docs (our docs recommended 20+ hours/week - or roughly the cost of $100k/year)? And is that factored into the equation?
I haven't seen the official modeling, just assumptions around the internet. But back of the napkin math suggests that appropriate autism care alone could be quite high: 1/36 of the 341,500,000 American residents have autism. Assuming 15% need care in the range of $100k, would be somewhere around $138b/year for just autism care. Does that seem in line with what you are thinking? Either way, are you able to point me to some of the modeling you have found? I'd love to learn more about how it tactically works.
Where’s your math coming from? There’s a ton of folks on the spectrum that don’t need assistance at all.
I just estimated that 15% need care. So that would leave a huge number that don't - you are right.
EDIT: A quick Internet search says that 82% of autistic adults want or get support, and only 16% are fully employed. 🤷
"Want to get support" is not the same as "need 20h of a specialists time each week"
You are right, which is why I used 15%, instead of 82%.
But what do you base those 15% on? Might as well be 1%, or even lower. In the end its just your own intuition, based on nothing. Hell, if they were capable of answering that survey, I don't think they'd need that much support.
Nothing, back of the napkin math for discussion purposes based on the 2 diagnosisea and doc recommendations we've gotten. Totally can adjust if you have a more accurate number.
Fyi ABA is considered highly unethical in the autism community.
Fair, take that piece out of the equation. Our docs still advised us on 20+ hours of therapy, all of which is costly.
I’m autistic and I don’t think I need twenty hours of therapy per week.
That sounds excessive to me.
Probably would be - age plays into it as well. My kids are pretty impacted - minimal language, safety issues, etc. I suspect it can vary widely.
I didn’t speak until I was 4 years old. Safety issues were handled by teaching me to swim, light campfires and bonfires and fireplace fires, use power tools, a little firearm safety, and how to interact with horses without getting kicked.
Mom knew I was a special kid, so she pushed me out the door a lot. Like she knew I was extremely different. I distinctly remember her and I sitting at the kitchen table, and her saying that if my face didn’t show emotion spontaneously I was just going to have to fake it to fit in because the world wasn’t going to work if I kept my wooden face.
I had a ridiculous temper. I fought (as in physically fought) my friends often. It always led to cathartic release and an improvement of our bond, which boy fights predictably do.
Sometimes I feel extremely fortunate to have grown up in the 1980s and not today. The way autistic kids are coddled today can be utterly inhumane. It instills in them a self image as a broken person who cannot fit in. That self image is far and away more damaging than autism.
Now, I know some people are unable to vocalize other than incoherent groaning at the age of twenty. I wasn’t that bad.
But among the kids who were enrolled in school, able to form sentences, I had it pretty bad and my little shithole town just treated me as “one of them weird kids”, and it worked out. Our cultures have had autistic people since the dawn of time; the expertise coming out of labs isn’t the only source of wisdom on how to help them lead good lives.
Your first mistake is to use US prices as if that's what the care actually costs.
20+ hours of anything is costly if you are paying the therapists appropriately. The issue is that their work is 1:1 and doesn't scale easily.
And?
Doesn't change the fact that US prices are orders of magnitude out of proportion. You simply can't use it as a yardstick.
Now, if you're looking at the plain amount of material, manufacturing, infrastructure, and labour required, then you're making sense.
But it seems you're making the argument that too many people cost more to care for than they are "worth" in terms of economics, and would be too great a burden on the productivity of the healthy for a universal healthcare system to function.
But that's not even close to true. Universal healthcare is essentially an attempt at triage on national scale. To apply resources where they do the most good.
In comparison, commercial market healthcare is just less efficient across the board. A universal system is able to provide more care for more people at less cost, even if it isn't able to do so for everyone in every situation.
No-one is claiming universal healthcare systems save everyone and care for every ailment, every time. The argument is that it's simply the smarter way to use the resources a country has.
So, you totally hit the nail on the head. I couldn't agree more: It is about maximizing resources for overall good. It is just that some groups may not see a qualitative difference in care.