OT: Health Care in Mexico vs. U.S. (related to “Father is visiting and hospitalized…”)

[Raybyrnes]

My wife is a dentist and if you are looking for high quality care at an affordable price check out the community clinics. Family Health Centers of San Diego and San Ysidro are very affordable. They charge on a sliding scale and no one is checking what you are listing your income as. If you have children you can go to The Children’s Dental Health Center in Golden Hills. Cost for a check up is about $30. Don’t see why you would ever have to go over the border for quality care.

[Rich Toscano]

This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich

[air_ogi]

The right solution would be to start over, scrap the current system completely. Do what Taiwan did, research existing systems and implement pieces that work the best.

With all of this talk of socialism, the numbers are simple. Would you switch to socialist Canadian system if it meant Canada level healthcare and saving $4000 per member of you family every year?

[air_ogi]

The right solution would be to start over, scrap the current system completely. Do what Taiwan did, research existing systems and implement pieces that work the best.

With all of this talk of socialism, the numbers are simple. Would you switch to socialist Canadian system if it meant Canada level healthcare and saving $4000 per member of you family every year?

[air_ogi]

The right solution would be to start over, scrap the current system completely. Do what Taiwan did, research existing systems and implement pieces that work the best.

With all of this talk of socialism, the numbers are simple. Would you switch to socialist Canadian system if it meant Canada level healthcare and saving $4000 per member of you family every year?

[air_ogi]

The right solution would be to start over, scrap the current system completely. Do what Taiwan did, research existing systems and implement pieces that work the best.

With all of this talk of socialism, the numbers are simple. Would you switch to socialist Canadian system if it meant Canada level healthcare and saving $4000 per member of you family every year?

[air_ogi]

The right solution would be to start over, scrap the current system completely. Do what Taiwan did, research existing systems and implement pieces that work the best.

With all of this talk of socialism, the numbers are simple. Would you switch to socialist Canadian system if it meant Canada level healthcare and saving $4000 per member of you family every year?

[equalizer]

[quote=Rich Toscano]This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich[/quote]
Rich,
I quoted the great article back here in Oct 09.
http://piggington.com/healthcare_yes_this_subject_again

Businessweek has an article about end of life care and breakdown of costs. “The bills for his seven years of medical care totaled $618,616, almost two-thirds of which was for his final 24 months.”

Here’s the general conversation with most people with good insurance: “I’ve got great coverage, let the SOBs eat cake or go to TJ, etc”

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_11/b4170032321836.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

[equalizer]

[quote=Rich Toscano]This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich[/quote]
Rich,
I quoted the great article back here in Oct 09.
http://piggington.com/healthcare_yes_this_subject_again

Businessweek has an article about end of life care and breakdown of costs. “The bills for his seven years of medical care totaled $618,616, almost two-thirds of which was for his final 24 months.”

Here’s the general conversation with most people with good insurance: “I’ve got great coverage, let the SOBs eat cake or go to TJ, etc”

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_11/b4170032321836.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

[equalizer]

[quote=Rich Toscano]This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich[/quote]
Rich,
I quoted the great article back here in Oct 09.
http://piggington.com/healthcare_yes_this_subject_again

Businessweek has an article about end of life care and breakdown of costs. “The bills for his seven years of medical care totaled $618,616, almost two-thirds of which was for his final 24 months.”

Here’s the general conversation with most people with good insurance: “I’ve got great coverage, let the SOBs eat cake or go to TJ, etc”

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_11/b4170032321836.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

[equalizer]

[quote=Rich Toscano]This conversation reminds me of a great article I read a while back about the problem with US healthcare.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/7617/

(Ignore the lame title, for which some magazine editor should be fired).

As I recall, the author makes a compelling case that it is the “comprehensive insurance” model that is the root of the problem, because the “customer” is not the actual patient but the insurance company, medicare, etc. This puts all kinds of distorted incentives into the system and reduces efficiency.

What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell (and I admit I’m not too punched in), most of the debate right now centers around who should pay. And this is an important question, but I think the better question to address first would be that of what we are paying for. Clearly, as davelj’s stats show, we are paying more and getting less. There is a reason behind that that needs to be fixed, and simply shifting the payment from one party to another won’t do it.

I’m probably not doing the article justice. I highly recommend it.

Rich[/quote]
Rich,
I quoted the great article back here in Oct 09.
http://piggington.com/healthcare_yes_this_subject_again

Businessweek has an article about end of life care and breakdown of costs. “The bills for his seven years of medical care totaled $618,616, almost two-thirds of which was for his final 24 months.”

Here’s the general conversation with most people with good insurance: “I’ve got great coverage, let the SOBs eat cake or go to TJ, etc”

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_11/b4170032321836.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

[Author]

Posts