sch340 wrote:
In reality, if you mandate coverage, the system will either get too expensive at the current standard of care, or health outcomes will decrease. Something must bend. You must reduce cost and regulation instead of squabbling over how many people are covered under the current system. Money doesn't grow on trees - if you are really "old" as your moniker suggests, I would think this would be clear by now.
Your argument is not true - there are a ton of wasted medical efforts in our country due to our patchwork for profit health and care sector.
I spent all day Monday getting unneeded medical care paid for my Medicare for my dad who is a DNR to assuage the lawyers at the corporate assisted living he lives at.
I missed a day at work. Doctors spent time with him. All so he could get a note to get filed away with the lawyers to prove it was not their fault if something happened. He was not allowed home til they had their get out of jail free note. There was zero benefit to my dad other than an exhausting dad of being poked and prodded.
This is how resources are used in our patchwork system of "healthcare".
There is zero outcome implication to eliminating this cost.
We need to create a second tier hospice paid at a lower rate for those not necessarily within 6 months of death but with a terminal illness and the correct legal protections for them in for profit assisted living to avoid ambulance rides and ER visits that don't add any value.
There are tons of things we can do to reduce costs.
What % of medical expenses are to make lawyers happy rather than patients?