- Jun 13, 2005
- Reaction score
That would work for regular office visits, but how would that help in an emergency visit? You don't get a choice when taken by ambulance generally, and especially if you are unresponsive. Then you are stuck paying whatever the hospital and ambulance company charges you.
No but competition and transparency would make that hospital better or the overall landscape better. How do you think the ER would look if it was government ran? or even directly funded by the government?
And the reason I argue about this so much is my family has been subjected to all of this. I had a sister with chronic health issues due hydrocephalus. By the time she was 12 she had gone through 4-5 cranial surgeries to install shunts. Over my and their childhood we had many trips to the hospital by ambulance. These medical bills were a huge stress on my parents and partially the reason they divorced. My brother has technically been dead twice in his lifetime with the last one from a horrific car accident on Christmas eve in 2019. He will never be able to pay off his medical bills. Right now Its well into the 800k range and still climbing.
This is why I advocated anything to do with health care be non-profit. Not just hospitals, but drug manufacturers, medical supplies, medical devices, etc. If there is a better idea to lower the costs of those items, I'll be for it. But allowing the medical industry to charge whatever it wants for their goods and service is the problem and trying to find cheaper ways to pays those costs is an illusionary effort. Someone will end up paying those costs at some point.
If you understood the current landscape of most hospitals you'd already see that going "non-profit" wouldn't be the savior to your problems. Why are you ignoring this? Do you not understand that many large hospital systems are "non-profit?"