Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,749 posts)
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 06:01 PM Mar 2013

"Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France"

Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France

Posted by Ezra Klein at the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/15/why-an-mri-costs-1080-in-america-and-280-in-france/

"SNIP................................................


Health care is an unusual product in that it is difficult, and sometimes impossible, for the customer to say “no.” In certain cases, the customer is passed out, or otherwise incapable of making decisions about her care, and the decisions are made by providers whose mandate is, correctly, to save lives rather than money.

In other cases, there is more time for loved ones to consider costs, but little emotional space to do so — no one wants to think there was something more they could have done to save their parent or child. It is not like buying a television, where you can easily comparison shop and walk out of the store, and even forgo the purchase if it’s too expensive. And imagine what you would pay for a television if the salesmen at Best Buy knew that you couldn’t leave without making a purchase.

“In my view, health is a business in the United States in quite a different way than it is elsewhere,” says Tom Sackville, who served in Margaret Thatcher’s government and now directs the IFHP. “It’s very much something people make money out of. There isn’t too much embarrassment about that compared to Europe and elsewhere.”

The result is that, unlike in other countries, sellers of health-care services in America have considerable power to set prices, and so they set them quite high. Two of the five most profitable industries in the United States — the pharmaceuticals industry and the medical device industry — sell health care. With margins of almost 20 percent, they beat out even the financial sector for sheer profitability.

...............................................SNIP"
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Faryn Balyncd

(5,125 posts)
1. gangster "capitalism" that would make Adam Smith hide his head in shame.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 10:35 PM
Mar 2013


The system that we call "capitalism" in 21st century America is not what he had in mind, and is not what he advocated.

What we have today is much more akin to the monopolistic mercantile system he opposed.

But it is even more similar to the gangster economies of the 1920's American Mafia, or the 1990's Russian Mafia.

And corporate medicine is a prime example.




spanone

(135,857 posts)
2. just had kidney stones blasted...2 proceedures-outpatient-4 hrs ea. max - $35,000.00
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 10:38 PM
Mar 2013

it's obscene, it's immoral and it's america 100%

your illness is HUGE business

Faryn Balyncd

(5,125 posts)
5. "Kidney Stones & the $78,000 Loophole" by Rick Casey, Houston Chronicle
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 11:57 PM
Mar 2013
http://www.chron.com/news/casey/article/Kidney-stones-and-the-78K-loophole-2128414.php

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4qBjRxxijWQJ:www.chron.com/news/casey/article/Kidney-stones-and-the-78K-loophole-2128414.php&hl=en&client=firefox-a&gl=us&strip=1

The above links are to an account of how Northwest Hospital in Houston, after agreeing to accept $8,200 from custodian Allan Barnett's insurance company for his 2003 outpatient lithotripsy, then demanded $67,000 from Mr. Barnett himself after the insurance company denied payment because of a loophole in the insurance portability act (even though the Barnett's had been given "pre-estimate" of $1000 for their portion of the bill prior to scheduling).

Interestingly, Northwest Hospital refused to budge from their demand that the Barnetts pay 817% more than the highly profitable $8200 rate they would happily accept from the insurance company. The issue was finally settled with a happy ending only because Mrs. Barnett was able to successfully appeal the insurance company's denial based on the fact that Mr. Barnett had not been notified. So the insurance company eventually paid, and Northwest Hospital received their $8200.

The travesty of Northwest Hospital, and other for profit hospitals nationwide, maintaining a fantasy "regular rate" of $67,000 (817% more than charged to insurance companies) which they demand from uninsured patients, including those denied insurance, and to those who find their coverage denied after the fact, remained intact.

Northwest Hospital claimed it was business as usual, and claimed that it was all the fault of the government.

The rest of the story "HOSPITAL 'GOUGE'? FEDS MADE 'EM" is curiously not available at the Chronicle's website: http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl/2003_3680447/hospital-gouge-feds-made-em.html

A portion of that follow-up article, dealing with Northwest Hospital's attempt to lay the blame for their "business practices" upon the government, is available at http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-106612682.html . While the complete article is hidden behind a subscription firewall at the link, the intro to the article states:


Aug. 15--HOSPITAL 'GOUGE'? FEDS MADE 'EM: When Houston Northwest Medical Center agreed to provide its facilities, hi-tech machines and staff for a routine operation using shock waves to smash Allan Barnett's kidney stones into dust, it anticipated being paid $8,200 by Barnett's insurance company.

But when Barnett's insurer stunned everybody involved after the operation by denying coverage, the for-profit hospital recalculated its charges. It billed Barnett, a custodian at Klein Oak High School, $67,003.

And when Barnett asked for a discount, Northwest refused to budge....

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-106612682.html




Somehow, I don't believe William Osler, or Adam Smith, would be proud.




reformist2

(9,841 posts)
3. This is how you argue for price controls. When buyers are desperate, sellers engage in price gouging
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 10:40 PM
Mar 2013

It's practically the opposite of the "free" market.

BlueCheese

(2,522 posts)
4. A 20% profit margin doesn't come close to accounting for the difference between $1080 and $280.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 10:54 PM
Mar 2013

There has to be a bigger explanation than that.

limpyhobbler

(8,244 posts)
8. It's not just the profit margin. It's because we have a so-called "market based" system.
Sat Mar 16, 2013, 12:20 AM
Mar 2013

Prices are determined by whatever people are willing to pay. Of course people are willing to pay everything for medical care because their lives depend on it. So this system is pure exploitation.

Prices of health care should be set to the lowest possible figure that will allow the health care staff to get a reasonable salary, and no more. I think that's roughly how they do it in England.


 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
9. 20% margins are obscene. The nation's biggest industries were built on a fraction of that.
Sat Mar 16, 2013, 03:28 AM
Mar 2013

The ACA, as we are going to be learning over the next couple of years, is an obscenity. Worse still, everybody that matters knew it all along.

Union Scribe

(7,099 posts)
7. There's a free Coursera.com course on the ACA
Sat Mar 16, 2013, 12:04 AM
Mar 2013

and health care in America starting on March 25 if anyone is interested. I enrolled because my knowledge base on this is a little shaky and I'm hoping it will give me a foundation to understand more fully the kinds of issues Klein brings up.

Edit to add link and correct subject line: https://www.coursera.org/course/healthpolicy

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Why an MRI costs $1,080 ...