• boydster@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    212
    ·
    2 days ago

    Weird how we have to pay more money every single year, and insurance somehow provides us less and less for our greater and greater spend

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      2 days ago

      Oh, but if you’re rich, we have the best healthcare system in the world! Rich people from all over the globe come to America for medical care!

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          As a non-rich American who got fucked over by The Mayo Clinic last year who were not only no help, but the patient advocate got me a full refund including for the AirBnB, I don’t blame them.

          • EldritchFeminity
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 days ago

            Me neither, to be honest. I just find it funny that they brag about the US having the best healthcare in the world and then go to Canada for anything that requires a stay in a hospital, Mexico for dental, and Thailand for cosmetic surgeries.

    • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      It is actually kinda incredible. I remember seeing a comic in Mad Magazine back in the 90s that satirized insurance companies by cutting ‘expensive’ healthcare and the cartoon showed an emaciated patient on IV and the insurance guy about to cut the tube with scissors.

  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    2 days ago

    This just feeds into my disillusionment with science and technology. What is the point of having developed these incredible things to then not go and use them. I just have to spell it out now. What. The. Fuck. You know I was born into a modern age but looks like im going to die in the dark ages.

    • Tiefling IRL
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      2 days ago

      In capitalism, EVERYTHING only exists for profit. If there isn’t money to be drained, it’s tossed to the landfill

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s not a Sci/Tech issue.

      It’s a dystopian capitalism issue. When products that don’t have adequate profit margin and volume to make notable contributions to the bottom line, or worse yet, negativley affect the bottom line in a high per-unit cost, they are a liability. Profits direct research, too, unfortunately.

      Humanity, quality of life, and all that medical shit is secondary or even further down the priority list for the corporations thinking about their profits first and the “service” last.

      • bstix@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Capitalism is not the issue in this case. I’m certain that prostetics have adequate profit margins. It’s a lucrative business.

        The issue here is that the insurance company just doesn’t want to pay for it.

        It’s the insurance company that doesn’t have an adequate profit margin without screwing their customers over.

        • EffortlessEffluvium@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Capitalism drives the health insurance company too. Greedy investors fund the health insurance decisions. All insurance companies, actually, with the possible exception of mutuals.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          The issue here is that the insurance company just doesn’t want to pay for it.

          That’s part of capitalism, too.

        • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Profit margin for who…? They already have your premium payments so actually covering your care gives them nothing, as far as they’re concerned you can do one. That’s why claim denial is the primary role of an insurance provider and all of its metrics, not coverage, the goal is to keep as much of your money as possible.

  • sheetzoos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    2 days ago

    I wonder if someone cut off the CEO’s limbs, would the medical necessity of prosthetic limbs would be questioned?

    • FundMECFSResearchOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      2 days ago

      You know, maybe we should force healthcare CEOs to be insured with the lowest tier of their own insurance.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        Kinda misses the point because they have their own money to pay for whatever treatments they want, even if their company regularly denies them to clients. Buying insurance is gambling against the house, just health insurance has that extra bit where the insurance companies somehow have a say in what treatments they’ll cover.

        That’s why the rich don’t gaf about ruining public services. They can still just hire someone to do it for them and if the government isn’t providing the service for everyone else, they’ll also need to hire someone to do those things, meaning some capitalist can set up a business to profit from the need the government no longer meets.

        • FundMECFSResearchOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          True. I almost forgot you can pay with your own money. When you dont have any disposable income, you don’t even consider that some people can afford to pay for things out of insurance.

    • prof_wafflez@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      It’s almost as if someone recently gave a heads up on how the public feels about health insurance companies… and they chose to implement this anyway 🤔

      • Bacano@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Line must go up. They probably see themselves as brave by continuing to follow Friedman’s shareholder logic in the face of these events.

    • Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s not how it works. The CEO is so wealthy that the insurance companies treat them for free because of all the business they bring in from enrolling their workers.

      We don’t hear stories about the soft privileges of being in a position of power very often but they tend to be immense. We’re just not in the club so we would never know.

    • TimboSlice@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 day ago

      Between the regulatory capture and corporate/political bribery, it’ll be tough to change anything from a grassroots perspective.

    • untorquer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      Lots but a couple of note:

      Health insurance already has deals with pharmaceuticals and hospitals to charge a specific rate. The buy in on these deals is cost prohibitive to some degree. Think legal and administrative cost, especially when working between municipalities and States, let alone from hospital to hospital.

      Health sharing ministries are a form of this. They have tied the concept to religious roots which is often limiting e.g. women’s and queer healthcare. They also have horror stories in the same abubdance as the big corps.

      There’s nothing technically stopping a coop from forming short of startup capital and legal status. But those are insanely large hurdles.

  • POTOOOOOOOO@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    111
    ·
    2 days ago

    I have a friend who has a prosthetic. Sure they could live their life in a wheelchair. But this guy goes hiking, and acts like a fully capable walking person. The quality of life is huge. It really gives back their life.

    • FundMECFSResearchOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      77
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yep. It’s absolutely insane they wouldn’t cover it.

      It’s honestly unethical as shit.

      • toast@retrolemmy.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        75
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Unethical and counterproductive. Having a prosthetic limb would almost invariably lead to a less sedentary lifestyle, which is strongly correlated with better health. Paying for a prosthetic today has to be cheaper than paying for a heart attack or diabeties later.

        • ggppjj@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          2 days ago

          You’re making the assumption that they’ll pay out for a heart attack or diabetes later. You just said that they were caused by the pre-existing condition of not having a prosthetic limb.

        • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          Depends on how you measure productivity. The hope is that by the time long term care is required for things like diabetes or heart disease, the patient would be eligible for Medicare.

          That or the sedimentary lifestyle will so negatively affect the more than likely diabetic patient, that they go into renal failure and qualify for disability through social security. Effectively removing their cost onto a socialized network.

          Paying for a prosthetic is much cheaper in the long run, but not for private insurance. The vast majority of the cost of not providing a prosthetic will be absorbed by Medicare.

      • Heikki@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        Won’t somebody thinking about the profiteers?

        Those guys can go to hell

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s absolutely insane that people should be expected to either buy insurance or pay for medical care out of their own pocket. And the insurance is never enough.

      • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean it’s not really. They don’t cover hearing aids or even implant surgery. “Not necessary” is what my sister gets told. Yeah, trying living deaf you asshats!

    • credo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      They are saying it’s not “medically necessary” to have any quality of life. As long as you’re breathing, you’re A-okay in their book.

      This is what insurance in the US has come to mean.

      • Capt. Wolf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 days ago

        Like how they still consider dental care to be “cosmetic.” They’ll rip them out of your head free of charge, but putting new ones in? No sir… You can eat mush!

        But God forbid anyone mentions a solution that includes socialized healthcare…

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      From a purely “medical necessity” viewpoint even, having a properly-functioning prosthetic helps him keep the rest of his body healthy! (Although I suppose they’d figure on denying claims for hospital treatment when his unhealthy heart caved in!)

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        (Although I suppose they’d figure on denying claims for hospital treatment when his unhealthy heart caved in!)

        The long term goal of this type of policy is to not only reduce immediate cost, but to offload the cost of long term care onto a socialized network like social security.

        The majority of amputees are already diabetics, if you remove their ability to remain active and mobile, you substantially increase the chance of renal failure. Patients who require dialysis because of renal failure get enrolled for disability through social security.

  • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    ·
    2 days ago

    Noooo heckin’ killing CEOs is violent and bad

    Then this fucking headline pops up.

    They’re basically crippling people, who could have at least some kind of limb use, by denying them limbs that THEY ALREADY PAID FOR AS PART OF INSURANCE PAYMENTS.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’ve been in corporations being driven unto the ground to extract as much money as humanly possible in the shortest amount of time. They are sociopaths, they are physically incapable of stopping. They want ALL the money and they want it NOW. They can not help themselves, and they won’t stop unless they are forced to stop by regulations, you know, in a well regulated capitalist society that puts limits on greed that costs people’s lives or happiness on an undue scale. If you don’t have those regulations… we’ll that’s how you get a forced reset of the country by people who can’t manage to swallow that much bullshit

      • Snowclone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        Violence is NEVER the answer! Can you imagine how horrible it would be if some degenerate insurance needer walked into a board meeting and pewpew’d all the poor shareholders? Who would make the hard decisions and demands that costs be dramatically cut and value dramatically increased? What if some horrible psychopath threw a maltov into an executive office? Or some villainous cloak and dagger type of scum rigged car bombs in some poor wealthy persons gated drive way? What would we do then! We’d live in terror of extracting value out of a system that is ment to provide service instead of just freely taking that value without consequences! Can’t you even image how bad that would be! Think of the CEOs people!

        • JonsJava@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          2 days ago

          This comment was reported.

          I get the anger, and there’s no direct threat of violence, so I’m leaving it up.

  • enbyecho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    2 days ago

    “I mean technically any medical service is not truly medically necessary, right? You could just die*”

    *Funeral services are not covered under your current plan.