[dmckinno]

Healthcare is a slippery slope. Don’t tax hospitals, but tax pharmaceutical companies? Don’t tax pharmaceutical companies, but tax the income of doctors?

I think the point of the article is that it’s really hard to make these judgments and doing way with the whole system entirely makes the most sense, which seems reasonable to me.

[willcipriano]

"Best I can do is tax you like you have socialized medicine[0], then force you to pay 2 - 4 fold what those other counties private systems cost to actually get care for most of your life." - Every politician in my entire life time

[0]https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

[ceejayoz]

Quite a few politicians suggest we take one of the various approaches the rest of the OECD countries do, as they're clearly more cost-efficient... but that gets derided as socialism.

[willcipriano]

Then they vote for another war instead.

They also never make the point that we are already paying for it. They want to tax me more, when if they were as efficient as the NHS I'd have two healthcare systems with money left over.

Medicare for all will never see the floor until everyone currently over 60 is gone, at a minimum. They are all in on it.

[ceejayoz]

The US can clearly afford both, as your chart demonstrates. It shows we pay more in tax than the other OECD countries pay in total, including taxes for healthcare.

We've picked the least efficient worst-of-both-worlds scenario out of a fear of anything that sounds like socialism ("public option", "Medicare for All", etc.).

[willcipriano]

Its corruption. Explain it in the terms I have on the national debate stage, everyone is on board. NHS style healthcare AND lower taxes. You'd win every election, but you'll never see that stage.

[whoitwas]

No one would win anything. Money wins elections. If you had this platform and money, you find an early grave.

[antisthenes]

> The US can clearly afford both, as your chart demonstrates.

The chart doesn't demonstrate anything of the sort. By definition, sovereign governments can afford literally anything, since they can print the currency within the country. It will just cause inflation.

That statement is complete and utter reductionist nonsense.

[pessimizer]

The US government is currently paying as much per capita for healthcare as socialized systems, then individuals pay again. If we can afford what we're doing now, it's obvious that we could afford a socialized system. It costs less.

The reason we don't have one is because Democratic politicians, funded by healthcare and drugs, are so willing to lie about the math for money, and the media, funded by ads for healthcare and drugs, are so willing to help them.

[ceejayoz]

We are currently paying for both.

The fact that our current setup costs 2-3x any other OECD nation indicates reform to be more like their systems is likely to reduce costs, not increase them.

[csdreamer7]

> Don’t tax hospitals, but tax pharmaceutical companies?

Hospitals, to maintain their nonprofit status, have to provide charitable contributions. One way is when patients apply for payment reduction or discharge because they can not afford to pay. Patients need to apply for this so they have documentation to give the IRS.

> Don’t tax pharmaceutical companies, but tax the income of doctors?

How often do you ask a doctor to work for free? They still get paid by the hospital.

Yes, pharmaceutical companies, which as far as I know are private, also have something like this. This is preventing media coverage and Congress imposing max cap on prices on public assistance programs (prices private insurance will use for leverage) so they can keep charging what they want.

> I think the point of the article is that it’s really hard to make these judgments and doing way with the whole system entirely makes the most sense, which seems reasonable to me.

The point of this article is to attack the nonprofit competitors to their due paying members. They gloss over many details and as I posted elsewhere; they even defensive of the tax loopholes of their due paying members.

[FireBeyond]

> How often do you ask a doctor to work for free? They still get paid by the hospital.

Oftentimes, physicians are not paid by the hospital at all. They will form consulting groups and work for the consulting group which will have a contract with the hospital, or they'll do something C2C.

[csdreamer7]

> Oftentimes, physicians are not paid by the hospital at all. They will form consulting groups and work for the consulting group which will have a contract with the hospital, or they'll do something C2C.

This is a red herring. The hospital still pays for a service (doctors or a group representing them) while being required to make charitable contributions to keep it's nonprofit status. These charitable contributions are very important for people in poorer and rural areas of the United States that for profit entities do not want to operate in (or would demand subsidies from the government to operate in).