← Back to context

Comment by Shog9

21 hours ago

One of, if not THE biggest challenge in getting treatment is getting past insurance rules designed to deny treatment. This is much, much easier when you're able to convince a doctor (and/or trained medical staff) to argue on your behalf. If you can't get those folks to listen to you, that's probably not gonna happen. You might have to go through several different practices before you find a sympathetic ear.

Now replace some / all of those humans with... A machine whose function also needs insurance approval.

It's gonna end badly.

Sounds like we need to dismantle and replace this broadly dysfunctional system at multiple points. It's not like the US insurance landscape is anywhere close to the best way of handling healthcare if you look at many places in the world.

  • I used to think this too. But the past couple of years have soured my taste for "dismantle and replace" of vital institutions.

    I still think healthcare needs to be reformed, and I hope that insurance will someday be a thing of a past, but I've hung up my chain saw for now.

    • This is because "dismantle and replace" (or perhaps in other words, "defunding") is not a serious, viable solution to many of the societal issues we face.

      Things were ruined slowly. They unfortunately will need to be fixed very slowly too.

      2 replies →

    • You've witnessed a dismantle and replace effort by the right wing that wishes to squeeze everything to make rich people more money. An effort by the left would destroy the private insurance scheme and build up medicare. Completely different and you'd get something functional.

      When the wrong targets get destroyed, everyone suffers. When parasitic forces are destroyed, the system functions better. It's the difference between defense and friendly fire.

      5 replies →

The whole system has basic flaws in how's financing set up.

There is an intermediary between customers and seller and it's allowed to take percentage of the sale. No such entity will ever work in the interest of the consumer. It has every incentive to inflate prices. Intermediary is needed but it should be financed by buyers with flat fee (possibly for additional incentives that reinforce the desired behavior). The tragedy here is that initially it was. But it was deemed too expensive for the buyers and got privatized which made it vastly more expensive in the long run.

Insurance is also wrong. Insurance is gambling and gambling needs restrictions. You are allowed to take people's money without providing any service most of the time, so you shouldn't be allowed to refuse legal service for that privilege.