851
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2024
851 points (98.7% liked)
politics
19283 readers
1831 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Insurance companies should be forced to be nonprofits.
Edit: I mean we should have MfA but at the least hospitals and insurance companies should be nonprofit.
That wouldn’t work because there is no regulation. It’s very easy to spend all profits on stock buybacks and say you’re now non profit
Nonprofits are non stock issuing; since there are no shares, they can’t have any buybacks.
Yes, and I agree, but I don’t see how Multi factor Authentication enters into this argument…
Haha well we should have 2Factor but I just meant Medicare for All
Nonprofits also act like for-profits, for example giving absurd salaries to the C suite, planning luxury retreats as business trips, hiring friends as consultants and paying expensive compensation for nothing, and so on
I saw many "cancer research" non profits that waste most of donations in bullshit and then give what's left to actual research grants
Yes this can happen, though it should be noted that a nonprofit health insurer would be regulated differently than a nonprofit research institute that isn’t responsible for providing or reimbursing care.
There can be corruption in governments and government programs too — but still the data says they do a better job at optimizing public health than for profit environments. Not letting perfect be the enemy of good, or better, it’s pretty clear from what I can gather that non profit is better than for profit, and optimized single payer is better than both of those.
Most hospitals are nonprofits.
So are several large health insurance companies, such as Blue Cross Blue Shield and Kaiser Permanente.
Guess what: nonprofits deny care too. So do single-payer health care systems.
I’m not suggesting it’s perfect — I’m suggesting it’s better. I’m suggesting optimizing a healthcare system around profit instead of population level health measures shouldn’t be done. I’m not suggesting that making things be non profit or single payer will magically resolve all issues, only that it will be better.
OK, but you can already find health care that is not optimized around profit. Just sign up for BCBS (which is available in most places) and choose a nonprofit medical center as your PCP (which are easy to find since they greatly outnumber for-profit medical centers).
I suspect you may find that this leads to slightly higher premiums. After all, one of the reasons UHC denies so many claims is to keep their premiums low. But in health care, you generally get what you pay for.
Not all BCBS plans are nonprofit actually. And most comparisons I can find for nonprofit medical facilities show lower costs. I haven’t found many studies on pure on profit health insurance vs for profit insurance, but I did find a Harvard paper which compared specifically BCBS plans that converted from non profit to for profit, and here’s an excerpt from that:
Here NP is nonprofit, FP is for profit, and NFP is not for profit. Bold emphasis is mine. You can read the study here:
https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/20130370_manuscript_c83842eb-f97b-4c84-b356-c72d163dff9b.pdf
So I would find actually the opposite of what you said, in aggregate, according to this study. Secondly, I still argue for expanded Medicaid and a public option / single payer. I’ve worked with large population datasets from US and internationally — invariably the health outcomes and monitoring, quality of data and followup, are all better for single payer systems.
Interesting paper!
Thank you for the link.