logoalt Hacker News

longerthoughts • today at 4:11 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

>There's a paradigm shift needed in how health insurance works: optimize for total cost of care.

You're criticizing health insurance but payers are far more incentive-aligned with patients on lowering total cost of care than the providers. They carry the risk and have to pay out claims. Providers, on the other hand, have an incentive to provide lots of expensive reactive care that's bound to expensive labor.

I agree with the sentiment of your "only for emergencies" point and wish direct care was more affordable. The problem is providers charge insanely high rates for services because a) they can get payers to cover it, and b) they're covering the cost of labor that's getting increasingly expensive with no commensurate increase in productivity [0].

For prices to come down substantially in the US, we'd need a much greater supply of doctors or more automated care. The former is against the financial interests of current doctors and the latter is an uphill battle against FDA regs, state medical boards, and billing codes from CMS to make it reimbursable.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect#Healthcare


Replies

an_account • today at 6:03 PM

Payers are bound by law to spend at least 80% of premiums on healthcare. So if they can drive up healthcare costs across the board, they can profit more (by taking the same 20% of a bigger pie).

➕ show 1 reply