Simon Johnson: The Problem With Health Care Is The Industry, Not Government Spending

Bloomberg:

How much should you worry about the level of federal government debt in 2075? The Congressional Budget Office forecasts deficits and debts out that far, and the numbers are eye-popping. According to the CBO, total debt is on a trajectory to reach 700 percent of gross domestic product.

Read the whole story at Bloomberg

Comments

[rtx47]

12:07 AM on 04/17/2012

A quick way to solve the problem of unnecessary tests and treatments (30% of all healthcare as per the Dartmouth Atlas of healthcare in USA) is to stop payimg for them.

And giving the patient the right to seek pay-back (claw-back for the incovenience and risks); which the patient may or may not split with their insurance carrier or Medicare or Medicaid.

At the same time the cost of unnecessary tests or treatments done at the insitence of the patient or family will be borne by the patient and/ or family.

Any remedy short of such financial action and penalty to the providers (doctors and hospitals) is spin, empty rhetoric, waste of time and destined to failure.

With the above, watch the cost of healthcare premiums drop by 30% to 40% with no change in the length or quality of life; and most likely an improvement of healthcare benchmark end-points.

[SueZbell]

09:01 PM on 04/16/2012

Obamacare is NOT the way to do it. Requiring that, just for the privilige of breathing, everyone buy a product from a private, for mega-profit industry will energize that industry to start stripping away price controls and "small gov't" GOPers will begin working at stripping away any subsidies for those that cannot afford to buy insurance.

More practical would be a single payer Medicare buy-in on a sliding fee scale--at least the money would be paid to the government and the "price controls" would be built into the system.

We need to be careful, though, that "universal healthcare" doesn't give us license to live even more unhealthy lives than we do. We need to put PE and a USEFUL health studies program back in public schools for every year beginning at year/grade one.

[rtx47]

12:12 AM on 04/17/2012

We can argue about the payment mechanisms from here to eternity and get no where.
Romney Care has insured most but not brought down the cost of healthcare in MA.
Boston is still fifth most expensive city in the USA for healthcare as per Medicare data.

[SueZbell]

01:39 AM on 04/19/2012

Neither Obamacare nor Romney Care is the answer--they are a "gift" in the making for the insurance industry, which I have sometimes have a sneaking suspicion is not unlike the "mob's protection rackets" gone "legit".

[loki]

04:39 AM on 04/17/2012

Universal is the way. Many countries have it, and it works. I lived in Australia for 5 years and it works, and works well. I have relatives in England ,France and Canada too, and ask them, it works there too. They wouldn't move here for anything. and Id move away except I cant at this time. I'm not going by what anti Universal health care types spout on radio and tv to scare people. Im basing it on facts.
Sure, its not perfect, but its many times better than what we have here. Lets take the country most hated by the Anti Universal Health care people. France. 5% total income from your salary goes to pay for your share. most copays from anything from a GP to a specialist will cost you between $5 and $20. You can buy extra fancy insurance if you want to skip the co pay. Medication is free to $20. Doctors and nurses get paid well, no they cant get 3 mansions , only 1 or 2, but they get paid very well.

[SueZbell]

01:37 AM on 04/19/2012

If the universal insurance premium was paid to the government on a sliding fee scale, then yes, it could very well be the answer. Obamacare is NOT.

When I was working in a law office, an insurance official told me that insurance collects three times what they pay out in benefits--one third is for "overhead' and one third is for "profit" and anytime they need to raise rates to meet the need for benefits, they raise it the other two thirds to increase "overhead" that same amount--with what the private CEO's and executives are making, that is a LOT of overhead--and then another third to increase the profits.

[Kenz300]

02:40 PM on 04/16/2012

Republicans want to end Medicare and replace it with a voucher.

Good luck getting health insurance at a price you can afford if you have a pre existing condition like high blood pressure or heart disease.

[MissouriModerate]

04:01 PM on 04/16/2012

or simply aging.

[demilieu]

01:19 PM on 04/16/2012

simple, people with less money will come to accept less from the system. right now everyone assumes the goal is equal access to the best care for everyone. but it's really a pipe dream. we're in a system where you get what you can pay for in every other part of life, so i don't see how health care-as a consumer good-can or will be any differenet. unless, perhaps, the larger trend of thinking changes.

[ThePeacemakers]

02:33 PM on 04/16/2012

"right now everyone assumes the goal is equal access to the best care for everyone."
Exactly.

Everyone hears what they want to hear. The health insurance bill is actually more about saving the the government money, not bringing down the price of insurance to make the best coverage affordable. That's the one of the top priorites of the bill along with ENSURING the profits of the private health insurance industry.

[scndchnchtr]

12:48 PM on 04/16/2012

Well, I'm not in the Health care industry. SO, I can't say why it cost what it does. But, I can say $250 for a Doctors visit that takes less then 15 minutes. Is a little high. Never mind if you need blood work done. One visit with blood work will cost you close to what most make in a week. What real gets me is if you have Health Ins and even if it doesn't pay for the visit (due to deductible or whatever) you pay less then the guy that doesn't have Health Insurance.

[demilieu]

01:21 PM on 04/16/2012

you're paying for a lot of overhead. for example, a young doctor having 150k in student loan debt that needs to be paid and medical malpractice insurance that costs 10k a month. etc.

[loki]

04:48 AM on 04/17/2012

dont forget, any doctor needs a small army of specialist to compile , submit and argue over payments with the insurance companies. Every insurance company has different rules, and if the doctors office makes one mistake on forms, the insurance companies will not pay them. Then it takes months of more paper work and calls to get that mess fixed. The doctors staff has to know all the codes, rules and tricks that each insurance company, and every one of their policies have. Just think how much less it would cost under Universal with one set of rules, and one provider for them to deal with? Also, it more than likely would cut way down on Malpractice too. At least I would expect the gov to cut the cost of that as well. And the easiest way would be to have a data base were you can check on doctors who made mistakes and avoid them if you want. No doctor who screws up should be protected over the publics safety.

[demilieu]

01:29 PM on 04/16/2012

$7.35 buys an hour of unskilled labor, but that's about all. if you're down on that end of life, well, it's not affordable.

[scndchnchtr]

01:51 PM on 04/16/2012

It's not affordable at $18 an hour. But, at least you can afford Health Insurance at that pay scale. Health Ins. isn't even on the table at $7.35 an hour.

While the fact Health Insurance is the main reason we have the quality of health care in the US. It's all so the reason things cost what they do. If people had to pay for what is covered under Health Ins. The cost wouldn't be any where near where they are at. But, we wouldn't have the advancements we have. Therein lies the problem.

[blndgenie]

12:31 PM on 04/16/2012

Can't wait til the enormous herd that gets dumped into the exchanges find out their annual out of pocket exposure is $12,000/year for a family, $ 6000/year for a single. Is that prog-speak for 'affordable'?

[AC Guts]

03:14 PM on 04/16/2012

That is what it costs now. Is that conservative speak for "affordable" or the "best care in the world"?

[blndgenie]

09:17 PM on 04/16/2012

so then you must have about a $5-10,000 deductible per year if you have family coverage, or about $2-3000 if you're single? Remember, that's not PREMIUMS, that amount is OUT OF POCKET LIABILITY.

[loki]

04:51 AM on 04/17/2012

The US being the "best " in the world is something from about 75 years ago. Now we have very little, if anything we can claim to be best at. That includes health care, technology, business or education.

[dtallwalk]

08:46 PM on 04/16/2012

That is what is costs now

[WI Patriot]

11:26 AM on 04/16/2012

Just another university professor protecting his cash cow. *yawn* What is more hilarious is that Simon Johnson says his committe findings are better than anyone else's - yet provides not the slightest detail.

The title of this article should read: "Corrupt MIT Professor vies for appointed position!"

[WondererofAges]

11:23 AM on 04/16/2012

I also think eventually America will HAVE to implement a single-payer system. Perhaps it will be augmented by private policies purchased by wealthy people who can afford them. But i wonder how many people will NEEDLESSLY suffer and die, how many families will have to file for bankruptcy, before this change happens?

[blndgenie]

12:33 PM on 04/16/2012

The wealthy will always have private insurance and move to the front of the line while the rest find themselves waiting months if not years for surgery. Already happens in Canada and the UK/EU. Expect the herd will still be whining about 'fairness' then, too.

[mfitz11]

01:26 PM on 04/16/2012

I've lived in Europe and never had a problem in terms of waiting months for surgery.
I had a shoulder injury that had to be operated on and I was in within a couple of weeks.
My wife also needed and operation and we simply made an appointment for it and we were in.
Have you every lived in Europe or Canada?
I think a lot of Americans simply believe the rhetoric about these absurd wait times and "death panels" because they've never left America or lived in another country.
I have lived for years outside of America in countries with "universal healthcare" and never had an issue of waiting months for care. To tell you the truth, I often found the level of care to be better in these countries and the hospitals to be much nicer and cleaner than what I've seen in America.

[DUSAA-1775]

11:21 AM on 04/16/2012

Actually, the article did not dwell too long on the ' why ' the funding issues of healthcare, medicare and SS will be solved.

This article seems to reply heavily on the obama strategy. That is: ' We do not have a plan to address these issues, we do not have any plans to address them in the immediate future, and we do not like any other plan.

[scndchnchtr]

12:56 PM on 04/16/2012

Think most of us know deep down what will happen. The main question is how do they keep the income from employment taxes while scuttling the programs.