Message from @Sophie
Discord ID: 679416958650941452
CON laws
Yes, it's an example of how deregulation lowers prices.
CON laws prevent Medicaid abuse
Removing these barriers reduce prices universally.
If you repeal them, faculties abuse Medicaid
No, it’s an example on how regulation lowers prices
Technically my plan requires gutting medicaid.
You frontload the cost
There are no regulations that you speak off.
Yeah, I know
Literally the ACA
Lowered prices
As I proved to you last time
It ended up with higher prices of insurance.
No, it did not.
The year before it was inacted it was slowing.
Prices ended up rising faster.
That is a lie.
I'll be back later.
I would love to see you in a room with some hedge fund guys saying what you’re saying right now
The diploma mills were encouraged by a public that abhorred government regulation or any interference with the rights of the common man to do as he wished. There were no licensing requirements for medical personnel or professional oversight. In the face of declining respectability, physicians, anxious to reestablish their credentials, began to use more extreme depletion methods. Their model was Benjamin Rush, who as a leading physician at the turn of the century proposed using more extreme bleeding and purging. The poorly trained could point to the dramatic effects of their therapies as a form of success.
But not all people accepted this “heroic” medicine. The result was a proliferation of competing health initiatives, a growth of medical sectarians such as homeopaths, hydropaths, new botanical theorists such as Thomsonianism as well as fitness gurus such as Sylvester Graham and John Harvey Kellogg. The sugar-coated pill advertised by a variety of entrepreneurs also competed freely. They had only to patent the shape of the bottles. There was no control over their ingredients. The medical scene in the nineteenth century was a chaotic free-for-all.
I'm back.
@Puerto Rican Nelson Comparing 1800s to now is idiotic, especially in the light of evidence that shows occupational licensing doesn't improve quality.
> The provision of health care to low-income Americans remains an ongoing policy challenge. In this paper, I examine how important changes to occupational licensing laws for nurse practitioners and physician assistants have affected cost and access to health care for Medicaid patients. The results suggest that allowing physician assistants to prescribe drugs (including controlled substances) is associated with a substantial (more than 11 percent) reduction in the dollar amount of outpatient claims per Medicaid recipient. I find little evidence that expanded scope of practice has affected proxies for access to care such as total claims and total care days. Relaxing occupational licensing requirements by broadening the scope of practice for healthcare providers may represent a low-cost alternative to providing quality care to America’s poor."
https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/Timmons-Scope-of-Practice-v2.pdf
@Sophie Going back to what I was saying, a WC exam is reduced by a fair amount with occupational licensing barriers removed moderately.
That's universal for the entire healthcare system.
do pharma companies want single payer?
basically do the opposite of whatever they want
right?
Well Pharma companies would be right single payer sucks, they would be wrong when they oppose importing drugs from other countries (Trump is doing this).
we actually rely heavily on china to produce our drugs
needs to end
You had your free market paradise. Fake doctors built empires on fake medicine, and nobody was able to practically afford anything. That's why the insurance industry began.
The insurance industry began because FDR froze wages in 1930s.
free market doesnt mean free of consumer protections
Also, because it was the 1800s. Technology and science was far worse, it's an in-apt comparison.
My system of private healthcare would generally have insurance for tragic events, like any other insurance (car, house).
without the US the entire global healthcare would be third world
It would be out of pocket, but prices cheap due to regulatory reform.
"After independence the character of the physician changed. They lost their special social status. Few went to Europe to study and thus they were cut off from advances on the other side of the Atlantic. Fewer still came from the educated population. Standards of medical education in this country declined dramatically. Minimally-trained doctors opened their own medical schools as moneymaking ventures encouraged by a growing commercial and acquisitive social climate. To entice students they eliminated most of the academic requirements that had been traditional. They seldom offered any laboratory experience or taught anatomy or even required literacy for admission. To compete, even the colleges with medical schools reduced their requirements."
The free market made american medicine stupider.