• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Soaring cost of healthcare sets a record

Dittohead not!

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
52,009
Reaction score
33,943
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Healthcare spending grew to a record 17.3% of the U.S. economy last year

Reporting from Washington - In a stark reminder of growing costs, the government has released a new estimate that healthcare spending grew to a record 17.3% of the U.S. economy last year, marking the largest one-year jump in its share of the economy since the government started keeping such records half a century ago.
Click to expand...

Regardless of how we feel about the current health care reform debate, of whether said reform would bring down costs or not, there is one thing on which we all should agree: The current system is not sustainable over the long haul.
 
and thanks to the "Party of NO" and a bunch of spineless Democrats, our healthcare system will remain broken and insurance companies that contribute millions to their campaigns, will continue to rape the American public.
 
disneydude said:
and thanks to the "Party of NO" and a bunch of spineless Democrats, our healthcare system will remain broken and insurance companies that contribute millions to their campaigns, will continue to rape the American public.
Click to expand...
Baseless allegation.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Healthcare spending grew to a record 17.3% of the U.S. economy last year



Regardless of how we feel about the current health care reform debate, of whether said reform would bring down costs or not, there is one thing on which we all should agree: The current system is not sustainable over the long haul.
Click to expand...

Uhm, how disingenuous. A massive recession hits, building, investment, production is GOING TO be down... but regardless of economic conditions, people still have health issues...

Did it really "grow" or did the other economic numbers just get smaller?


See folks, this is a case of media bias, plain, in your face and it succeeded in producing the desired response in the target audience. Blind unthinking acceptance that that healthcare costs are out of control, and something has to be done!

Disneydude and Dittoheadnot! did not stop to consider the possible causes of this rise, they just accepted it blindly. The media powers that push this crap want that. Don't let the media fool you.
 
disneydude said:
and thanks to the "Party of NO" and a bunch of spineless Democrats, our healthcare system will remain broken and insurance companies that contribute millions to their campaigns, will continue to rape the American public.
Click to expand...

Yeah, so let's add $13 trillion to it. That'll fix it. Good gawd almighty, it's like herding cats.
 
MrVicchio said:
Uhm, how disingenuous. A massive recession hits, building, investment, production is GOING TO be down... but regardless of economic conditions, people still have health issues...

Did it really "grow" or did the other economic numbers just get smaller?


See folks, this is a case of media bias, plain, in your face and it succeeded in producing the desired response in the target audience. Blind unthinking acceptance that that healthcare costs are out of control, and something has to be done!

Disneydude and Dittoheadnot! did not stop to consider the possible causes of this rise, they just accepted it blindly. The media powers that push this crap want that. Don't let the media fool you.
Click to expand...

Health care inflation has been approaching double digits for some time. Hell in 2006 i believe it was 7.7%. Such a scenario is unsustainable especially for those calling for tax cuts.
 
MrVicchio said:
Uhm, how disingenuous. A massive recession hits, building, investment, production is GOING TO be down... but regardless of economic conditions, people still have health issues...

Did it really "grow" or did the other economic numbers just get smaller?
Click to expand...

Other economic numbers didn't get smaller, they just didn't grow very much.

GDP growth anemic again
Since When Is 0.6% Growth Good News?
Click to expand...


A 0.6% growth is abominable, but it is not a decrease.

No, health care costs are rising astronomically, and have been for quite some time now.

If you add the cost of the federal government plus the cost of health care, the two add up to six trillion out of a GDP of $14.25 trillion, or over 41% of the GDP. Add to that state and local government spending, and you have somewhere over half of the GDP tied up in government and health care, with both of those rising faster than inflation.
Houston, we have a problem.
 
The main issue is HMOs. Due to tax incentives for businesses, most people get insurance from their employer. With this third payer plan, the consummer has no incentive to cut costs. And as demand goes up, so does price. In a more individualized system people have a much greater incentive to look out for the best price. Things like allowing people to buy insurance across state lines and tort reform. Bring back the free market in health care

Also Disneydude, while I disagree with most of their ideas on it, the GOP has put forward several bills and suggestions that the Democrats didn't even consider. Most, including even the GOP, want reform, just not what the Democrats are pedaling
 
Dittohead not! said:
Healthcare spending grew to a record 17.3% of the U.S. economy last year





Regardless of how we feel about the current health care reform debate, of whether said reform would bring down costs or not, there is one thing on which we all should agree: The current system is not sustainable over the long haul.
Click to expand...

I do not think that anyone feels the current system is sustainable. If you believe that then you would oppose the healthcare legislation on the table. This bill will not do enough to slow down the rate of spending, if it slows it down at all.

The danger in passing this bill is that people will then think we have done something to fix the system and forget about the problem for the next 10 years or so. Who wants to go through this again if they don't have to.

Congress needs to get past the lobbyists and pass meaningful health care reform!
 
washunut said:
I do not think that anyone feels the current system is sustainable. If you believe that then you would oppose the healthcare legislation on the table. This bill will not do enough to slow down the rate of spending, if it slows it down at all.

The danger in passing this bill is that people will then think we have done something to fix the system and forget about the problem for the next 10 years or so. Who wants to go through this again if they don't have to.

Congress needs to get past the lobbyists and pass meaningful health care reform!
Click to expand...

Having people without insurance raises the cost on everyone. Health care possesses what is known as "perfect inelasticity" meaning rising prices will not reduce the amount of people who will seek it.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Having people without insurance raises the cost on everyone. Health care possesses what is known as "perfect inelasticity" meaning rising prices will not reduce the amount of people who will seek it.
Click to expand...

Not sure I understand the point you are raising. Although I think everyine should have insurance, I am pretty sure if you have more people using something without reducing the cost per unit served then costs overall will rise.

I also do not agree with your perfect inelasticity theory. Most people do not have to consider cost when choosing health care options as insurance pays the fees and most people with insurance get it through their employers. Thus very little of the cost of a procedure is actuallu paid by the user. This was not addressed at all in the health care bill in congress.
 
washunut said:
Not sure I understand the point you are raising. Although I think everyine should have insurance, I am pretty sure if you have more people using something without reducing the cost per unit served then costs overall will rise.

I also do not agree with your perfect inelasticity theory. Most people do not have to consider cost when choosing health care options as insurance pays the fees and most people with insurance get it through their employers. Thus very little of the cost of a procedure is actuallu paid by the user. This was not addressed at all in the health care bill in congress.
Click to expand...

Health care is perfectly inelastic. The cost rises every year in line with steady demand (now increasing). That is the very definition of price inelasticity in regards to demand.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Healthcare spending grew to a record 17.3% of the U.S. economy last year

Regardless of how we feel about the current health care reform debate, of whether said reform would bring down costs or not, there is one thing on which we all should agree: The current system is not sustainable over the long haul.
Click to expand...

Soaring Health Care cost are not an indication of a problem as much as it is the result of an aging population that has led the "GOOD LIFE" and are now paying the cost for a life of poor choices, in fast food consumption, smoking, and living the good life.

Baby Boomers like me are now getting the bill for our life of Reilly and it will continue.

Don't fall into the trap of believing it's all the result of a failed system. My parents and grand parents all had fewer options to fall back on when it comes to medical care and they died.

Today we get treatments that were not available a few years ago and that adds to the bottom line costs because there are so many of us who are now living longer, and that costs more.

Are you willing to argue that I am wrong? Or are you so stupid that you can't see the facts that when more people there are receiving treatment the overall costs are going to go up?
 
Last edited:
Goldenboy219 said:
Health care is perfectly inelastic. The cost rises every year in line with steady demand (now increasing). That is the very definition of price inelasticity in regards to demand.
Click to expand...

then what do you say to the growth of generic drugs. When given the choice, people use the lower cost product. This would seem to show pretty good price elasticity.
 
washunut said:
then what do you say to the growth of generic drugs. When given the choice, people use the lower cost product. This would seem to show pretty good price elasticity.
Click to expand...

:slapme:

If the cost of health care goes up, the quantity demanded does not go down in equal proportion. This is referred to as inelastic demand. If the cost of health care goes up, and the demand does not decrease at all, it is referred to as perfectly inelastic.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
:slapme:

If the cost of health care goes up, the quantity demanded does not go down in equal proportion. This is referred to as inelastic demand. If the cost of health care goes up, and the demand does not decrease at all, it is referred to as perfectly inelastic.
Click to expand...

Perhaps what makes this confusing for some is that the person using this service is not the one paying for it. Most health care is provided by either the government or insurance companies. When you charge the user, i.e. if they have to pay a higher deductable then you see the usage go down.

An example of this is that the co-pay for generics is lower than if you buy the
original. Thus people switch to the lower cost drug. So there is price elasticity.
 
Councilman said:
Soaring Health Care cost are not an indication of a problem as much as it is the result of an aging population that has led the "GOOD LIFE" and are now paying the cost for a life of poor choices, in fast food consumption, smoking, and living the good life.

Baby Boomers like me are now getting the bill for our life of Reilly and it will continue.

Don't fall into the trap of believing it's all the result of a failed system. My parents and grand parents all had fewer options to fall back on when it comes to medical care and they died.

Today we get treatments that were not available a few years ago and that adds to the bottom line costs because there are so many of us who are now living longer, and that costs more.

Are you willing to argue that I am wrong? Or are you so stupid that you can't see the facts that when more people there are receiving treatment the overall costs are going to go up?
Click to expand...

I can see that the current system was adequate back when there was little that medical science could do anyway, and when we had a younger population. Now that people are aging, living longer, and when it is possible to treat diseases that were once untreatable, of course, costs are going to rise.

But, that isn't the whole story. The same services cost a lot more than they used to, even when inflation is added into the equation.

When my son was born in 1969, for example, we paid $250 up front for a normal childbirth and an overnight stay in the hospital. Insurance didn't cover normal childbirth, nor did it have to as the cost was affordable. When my grandson was born in 2000, the cost for the same thing had risen to over $10,000. Nothing else has gotten that much more expensive. Today, I have no idea how much a childbirth costs, but I'm willing to bet that it is a lot more than $10,000.

When my daughter was born in 1971, it was far from a normal childbirth. My wife was in the hospital for three weeks, the baby was in the hospital for quite some time, there was a cesearean section involved, and the cost was about $2,000 for everything, including hospital, doctors, and meds. That's 1/5 the cost of a normal childbirth ten years ago.

Anyone have an idea what such a stay in the hospital would cost today?

What worked thirty, forty, or fifty years ago isn't good enough today. Anyone want to buy a 1950's car? How about a TV?
 
washunut said:
Perhaps what makes this confusing for some is that the person using this service is not the one paying for it. Most health care is provided by either the government or insurance companies. When you charge the user, i.e. if they have to pay a higher deductible then you see the usage go down.

An example of this is that the co-pay for generics is lower than if you buy the
original. Thus people switch to the lower cost drug. So there is price elasticity.
Click to expand...

You are making a weak reference to cost price elasticity because comparison between normal, generics, used, etc... skews the relativity as other factors influence their price. The health care industry as a whole faces severe inflationary concerns for the foreseeable future without proper policies implemented to minimize externalities.

It is essentially saying that price elasticity in the auto market exists because of used cars, when this is not at all the case. On the extreme end, you have "Giffen goods" which have a positive sloping demand curve.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom