The Chosen One’s demand to drop interest rates
- Thread starter IUclover
- Start date
Hell no, I think it would be great.
I just think it’s inconceivable. But the Fed is a creation of Congress. It’s unlikely it would even happen there. But at least it’s proposing taking power out of somebody else’s hands.
Fed funds is, or should be, totally driven by data…without any favor, without any external influence such as that being exerted by DT here, etc.
I agree that fiscal policy would be better done this way, too. But I’ll never live to see the day when Congress voluntarily gives up its own power.
I agree with much of this, but as others have argued, it could be a slippery slope. Someone with higher BMI isn't necessarily going to add higher costs than someone with genetic predisposition to expensive disease. The business person would say that perhaps we should set insurance costs based on genetic studies and healthcare assessments (think 23 and Me) that pre-identify risk.
The logical person would suggest that predisposition does not equate to certainty, and therefore, such a person is going to be detrimentally impacted because of a hypothetical.
An empathetic person, of which I have always struggled, would say this is just cruel and mean. And that's a valid argument in its own right, even for someone like me that doesn't necessarily think healthcare is a protected "right".
One more season of gemstones next month. Last one
The last 10 or so responses from crazed, jdb, digressions...............................................................................................snarl, have been the best i've read on here in a while. We should do this more often. I mean, keep the bantz going and all...
It's why single payor (pick a flavor) as a shared risk pool is the only way. And we should figure it out like the national priority it is. Moon shot.
Meh, that's only addressing the empathetic part of what I posted. My coverage will be worse and more expensive because of others and I'm not convinced that our government can run single payer insurance effectively, particularly given the fraud and inefficiency with Medicare.
It is possible to manage something this large if left alone by bureaucracy (probably impossible). In fact, I'd try and shame Jeff Bezos (though some patriotic sense of duty) to figure it out. We lament that the reason the nut and bolts, blocking and tacking, of governemnt is inefficient and dumb and that part of that is due to that they just don't pay like the private sector.
Give tax breaks, whatever. Figure something out. I don't know exactly how but I think there's enough public/private partnership available to learn from (think DoD and their supply chains - but you know, without the bad parts).
Moon shot. This country needs something to rally around/focus on that most Americans want (the majority in polling, though slightish, favor single payor though not government run). Those numbers will likely only increase. The party that figures this out wins (along with immigration and if one did both....oofta).
Majority in U.S. Still Say Gov't Should Ensure Healthcare
A majority of U.S. adults continue to think the federal government should ensure universal healthcare coverage, while they also prefer that the U.S. healthcare system be based on private insurance rather than government-run.
news.gallup.com
I’ve felt loved 3 times in life now. The one time my Dad said he loved me. When my new cat hopped on my lap and purred and now this post. Thanks buddy. Love you too. To be clear the cat just wanted food, but it still felt good.
You're absolutely f'n clueless.
...J.k., SC, thought it would be fun for this to be the next post.
But really, on this subject, that was the dumbest post that could have possibly been posted. Catch up and do better. I kid. Kinda.
Whether we think it’s a right or not isn’t of much consequence.
It can’t be -
It is possible to manage something this large if left alone by bureaucracy (probably impossible). In fact, I'd try and shame Jeff Bezos (though some patriotic sense of duty) to figure it out. We lament that the reason the nut and bolts, blocking and tacking, of governemnt is inefficient and dumb and that part of that is due to that they just don't pay like the private sector.
Give tax breaks, whatever. Figure something out. I don't know exactly how but I think there's enough public/private partnership available to learn from (think DoD and their supply chains - but you know, without the bad parts).
Moon shot. This country needs something to rally around/focus on that most Americans want (the majority in polling, though slightish, favor single payor though not government run). Those numbers will likely only increase. The party that figures this out wins (along with immigration and if one did both....oofta).
Majority in U.S. Still Say Gov't Should Ensure Healthcare
A majority of U.S. adults continue to think the federal government should ensure universal healthcare coverage, while they also prefer that the U.S. healthcare system be based on private insurance rather than government-run.
I’ve said this before. But I really think that Singapore offers something to look at.
I have some misgivings about it. But they seem to have hit a sweet spot between access, cost, and quality. They utilize incentives better than most and most transactions are made directly between consumer and provider, without any third party payer.
Everybody has an HSA, the accounts are subsidized for those with low income, insurance only kicks in for major expenses (it is single-payer).
I’m agnostic on the solution but bullish that today’s scheme is too imperfect.
No. You continually stop short.
@Spartans9312 asked in the thread, how is fertilizer priced to farmers? How?
Well, this is why many of us were saying that Obamacare was, at best, not a solution.
But I assure you: it can get worse than what we have now. And it wouldn’t surprise me if it does.
I hate to sound like a broken record. But search the board for my link to the story about Vermont. They thought they were going to help matters with their reforms. They tried to do single payer at first. But that was a bridge too far, money-wise. So they settled on what they have.
The results have been horrible and are headed towards something even worse. Their biggest insurer is nearly bankrupt and 9 of the 14 hospitals in the state are losing money. You can only lose money for so long.
We need to stop hunting that unicorn. All we’ll find is an ornery alligator.
No worries. It doesn’t hurt my feelings. I’m right. There are three ways to bring down healthcare costs. 1. Get on a Bitcoin Standard. 2. Get government out healthcare 3. Major gains in innovation (semaglutide will help drastically in cutting costs).
I like incentives but they can be hard to communicate. There’s no way something like a single payer or HSA/thrift acct scheme would be cheap initially. So we’d need to have the discipline as a public body to see out the pain. If this is to be incentive based, those incentives should only serve to better health outcome and thus drive down cost. But that’s 20 years out. I don’t see how anybody could argue otherwise without draconian measures. However, introducing a change like single payer or an HSA Plan, I think markets would adjust over that period of time. Some new economy would emerge. Never discount somebody’s ability to make a buck off a thing in America.
The above would require tremendous political capital. And it really ****ing sucks that we’re so polarized now that we can’t agree on a single goddamn thing as a nation. It’s not sustainable and every election cycle we keep this up just diminishes our future.
There are many ways to bring down healthcare costs. You should go read the last thread and get up to speed. Especially the early links.
Your reply about harsher price controls is non-responsive. The healthcare industry has enjoyed 60 years of compounded interest. The percent of GDP has increased at an increasing rate. It's been baked in.
If someone is interested in solving the healthcare dilemma that threatens our solvency, they should first answer a simple question: How are prices for healthcare services obtained?
Please don't reply until you have the answer.
Also, the reason you're full of shit and non-responsive is that we’ve been doing healthcare for 60 years without the help of any of those things. It must be something else. Go find it.
I know you aren't a Trump fan, but were you a supporter of his transparency proposal that was enacted, but never enforced?
Apparently, it's a lot more complicated and tedious than I anticipated.
Edit: How are healthcare costs priced?
Yes, that was fantastic and would help.
Unfortunately, the larger problem is baked-in.
Set cost of a service based on complexity etc, negotiated amount or discount between health insurer and provider, and out of pocket of patient generally
Somewhat, but not really. Look it up and get back to me.
Edit: This has probably been the best non-Google answer.
Pragmatically, the issue is that you cannot apply a model that works well in Singapore to the United States.
Priced by providers. Paid by insurance and/or consumers (more the former, though that is shifting).
I'm a farmer. You know that.
But your answer was incomplete and vague (at least the way I read it).
What parties are negotiating, initially?
Key word: initially.
I don’t know that. I’ve sued zimmer, Stryker, and 25 other medical device manufacturers. Sued doctors, physician groups, hospitals, and health insurance companies. Reviewed tens of thousands of medical records. Negotiated countless liens with cms and providers. Dug in. You want a simple answer to how services are priced when it isn’t simple bc there are so many factors that influence same. The answer i gave you is THE answer
They play a role. They buy and lease med equipment. Have malpractice coverage. Overhead. Etc. That plays part of their costs and attendant pricing
Then who prices the laparoscopic surgery at $18,000 in one hospital and $52,000 at another?
They do play a role. I agree.
I believe all of this. No doubt about it.
How is the '26 price going to be different than the '25 price, for the same service?
