[sjwright]

That quote is misleading because it implies that the cost of care is static, that it's not also heavily influenced by spending choices made by the hospital that don't affect patient outcomes. Or heavily influenced by the consequences of the broken healthcare system, like the overuse of emergency rooms by people who can't afford to see a doctor.

Hospitals could easily afford to provide care at Medicare/Medicaid rates — if they're willing to have less impressive lobbies, marketing materials, corporate facilities and shareholder profits. Citation: all other first world countries.

[klipt]

> shareholder profits

Do intelligent people ever go to for-profit hospitals? I'd group those with for-profit universities and for-profit prisons as "nope, not touching that, stay as far away as possible and hope they all disappear".

[fusiongyro]

No matter your intelligence, if you're having a heart attack, you go to the nearest hospital, whatever its tax status may be.

[klipt]

Okay, but apart from emergencies, why would anyone go to a hospital whose goal is profit when all the best research hospitals are non-profit?

[fusiongyro]

Your tax status doesn't necessarily indicate what your goals are. SpaceX and Tesla are for-profit and the Susan G Komen foundation is non-profit.

[klipt]

But do you have any actual counter-examples to "all the best research hospitals are non-profit"?

[hockley]

Do you have any price comparisons between for-profit and non-profit hospitals?

[ll123]

non-profit hospitals and non-profit universities have had exorbitant price increases in the last few decades so they aren't doing any better

[klipt]

Maybe, but for the same expense I'd rather go to (non-profit) Harvard than (for-profit) Trump University.

All the best universities are non-profit, for the obvious reason that it allows them to keep massive endowments, which are spent on better education instead of being paid out to investors.