AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND

580 readers

817 users here now

This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

♦ ♦ ♦

RULES

① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.

② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.

④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.

⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.

Please also abide by the instance rules.

♦ ♦ ♦

Can't get enough? Visit my blog.

♦ ♦ ♦

Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.

$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.

founded 11 months ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Team USA rugby medalist becomes free healthcare advocate after discovering it in Olympic Village (edition.cnn.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[+] [email protected] -22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"Free".

Using the least efficient mechanism, government.

The problem with US Healthcare is insurance companies. They're the reason that stories of a tylenol pill costing $10 at the hospital, because they control rates, only reimbursing at 10% sometimes, so billing specialists jack up the costs they submit to get reimbursed appropriately.

Interview any billing coder, they'll tell you how it works.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's not free. We pay using taxes. Instead of paying a middle man whose sole purpose is to make money, you have a government run service that isn't profit driven. Is it efficient? No. Is there a better alternative? Also probably no but I haven't heard of one. If there is one that is being used somewhere in the world and isn't something theoretical, I would love to learn about it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I will also say that these services aren't the best. What I mean is that the medical doctors are indeed competent and won't release you until you're cured or healthy enough depending on your condition, but expect to be at the hospital all day for an appointment that you got at least a month in advance.

Having said that, it sure beats going bankrupt or paying out of pocket. I don't mean to dunk on these state-driven services, but people need to be sober about these things.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Most importantly it provides a “minimum bar” that everyone has access to. Nothing prevents people from getting additional private insurance, say as a benefit from a job, but there’s a humane minimum level of coverage and benefits people can get without going bankrupt.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Exactly, it's not free.

And uses the efficient, most corrupt mechanism To achieve it.

Simply removing the corruption of insurance companies in Healthcare would solve the problem much more effectively.

If you read up on the history, you'll see the costs skyrocket with insurance involvement.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

How do you "simply" remove the corruption of insurance? The sole purpose of insurance is to take in as much money as possible and pay out as little as possible. I would argue that it's not corruption, it's greed but that is by design. Government already provides plenty of other services that aren't profit driven. The roads that the government builds using tax payer money isn't generating profit. The public school that the government runs using tax payer money isn't generating profit. Social security, medicare, medicaid, fire department, VA, public libraries, all run using our tax dollars. Even the army that the government runs isn't profit driven but there are other companies that have propped up to take advantage of it and have bought lawmakers to be able to easily take advantage (toilet seat that costs 10k anyone?) My argument is that the government inherently isn't bad or inefficient, it's the lawmakers that we vote for and don't vote out that are the problem. Because it's the government for the people by the people we can vote them out but we can't vote out a CEO of an insurance company or board of directors of military contractor company.