The title suggests that there are a small group of people that are 'over-using' healthcare and driving up costs for the rest of us. But the content suggests that actually our insurance program is working exactly like you would expect insurance to work: it covers you when you have a catastrophic health event. Luckily only 5% of people fall into that category each year! If you want to focus on the (much smaller) group of people who continue to use healthcare at a much higher rate year after year, I think you will find that these folks often have chronic conditions. These chronic conditions are not something the US healthcare system is setup to deal with well. And often, research on these conditions is not well funded, leaving patient and doctors without many choices.
price gouging is the real issue. "Several European countries have health insurance just like America does. The difference is that their governments regulate what insurance must cover and what hospitals and doctors are allowed to charge much more aggressively than the United States does."
Can someone explain that last line to me? "When healthcare is on the line, there's almost nothing health insurance companies won't charge, and Americans won't pay". I.e., it's adding up to a lot?
Healthcare isn't a supply and demand thing, people will spend anything to keep their loved ones alive, putting their families under a mountain of debt. About 30% of every dollar spent on healthcare via private insurers is lost and doesn't go towards their care (via redundant admin costs and profiteering).
TheColorfulPube, Healthcare IS a supply and demand thing. It so happens that when your health is on the line, your demand for healthcare becomes inelastic, and that makes you pay whatever it takes. Also, that argument that a public service would be better because it would save costs on adm, profits and marketing can be said to any industry. Why not have public services for everything than ?
to the 5% there is nothing they wont do/buy/ or sell to stay alive, to the insurance and medical communities out there the 5% is their cash cows because to live you have to have it, and to have it you will do whatever it takes.
I think this video was supposed to point out a peculiar way in which the health system works (ie, at any given time, a random few are spending a majority of the costs), in an effort to invite theories as to why this is how it shapes up, and possibly push the viewer to ask whether this is a problem that can/needs to be fixed. By understanding that this is how the system is being used, we might look at if it is following the same pattern in single-payer healthcare, or if pushing preventative care would reduce or exacerbate this trend. I don't think the video itself was trying to say it new what this information meant or what the next step should be. The first step is always pointing out trends that we might not be aware of. All that being said.... HOLY SHIT this was a gorgeous animation with incredible colors. Yukai Du is absolutely incredible!!
Although it is difficult to identify exactly the top 5% of individuals who are contributing to 50% of healthcare costs, the video makes an interesting and very important point. Specifically, I am referring to the quote, “When health is on the line, the numbers suggest there’s almost nothing insurance companies won’t charge and Americans won’t pay”. Once hearing this quote, I was reminded of a categorical imperative by Kant that states humans should not treat one another as a means to an end but rather an end-in themselves. The latter meaning that humans have value outside of personal uses for them. I believe this is often lost in our healthcare system today. Maintaining health is absolutely necessary for survival, and individuals do not have a choice whether or not they will have to pay for the healthcare that they are receiving. However, that is not to say that insurance companies merely view patients as a means to a paycheck. The initial intention of insurance companies was based on a way to protect and provide assurance when it comes to healthcare costs. Therefore, they are not only using individuals as for pay but rather providing other added benefits as well. This means that patients are also using insurance companies as a means to access affordable healthcare. The key aspect is intention of use. It is important to remember that the patient and insurance company are both using one another as a means to an end which is not inherently morally wrong, but acknowledging the importance of the value of individuals outside of their use is key. When the balance of intention gets shifted in different scenarios, it can lead to difficulty and distrust between patients and insurance companies. The quote highlights one of these scenarios that shifts the balance as it can feel that the patient is being exploited financially by the fact that they are fighting a chronic condition or even to stay alive. The individual becomes a means to an end as they accrue costs for healthcare and it becomes difficult to see where the acknowledgment of human value is in this scenario.
The title suggests that there are a small group of people that are 'over-using' healthcare and driving up costs for the rest of us. But the content suggests that actually our insurance program is working exactly like you would expect insurance to work: it covers you when you have a catastrophic health event. Luckily only 5% of people fall into that category each year! If you want to focus on the (much smaller) group of people who continue to use healthcare at a much higher rate year after year, I think you will find that these folks often have chronic conditions. These chronic conditions are not something the US healthcare system is setup to deal with well. And often, research on these conditions is not well funded, leaving patient and doctors without many choices.
"Who are the super users? It's hard to say"
Saved you 2 minutes
*George Texstel*
Time to cull the 7½ billion herd?
Hard choices are coming down the pike.
I'm relieved that I won't be here to experience it.
price gouging is the real issue. "Several European countries have health insurance just like America does. The difference is that their governments regulate what insurance must cover and what hospitals and doctors are allowed to charge much more aggressively than the United States does."
Can someone explain that last line to me? "When healthcare is on the line, there's almost nothing health insurance companies won't charge, and Americans won't pay". I.e., it's adding up to a lot?
Healthcare isn't a supply and demand thing, people will spend anything to keep their loved ones alive, putting their families under a mountain of debt. About 30% of every dollar spent on healthcare via private insurers is lost and doesn't go towards their care (via redundant admin costs and profiteering).
TheColorfulPube, Healthcare IS a supply and demand thing. It so happens that when your health is on the line, your demand for healthcare becomes inelastic, and that makes you pay whatever it takes. Also, that argument that a public service would be better because it would save costs on adm, profits and marketing can be said to any industry. Why not have public services for everything than ?
to the 5% there is nothing they wont do/buy/ or sell to stay alive, to the insurance and medical communities out there the 5% is their cash cows because to live you have to have it, and to have it you will do whatever it takes.
Though the message or conclusion wasn't clear, the sheer artistry and tasteful aesthetics of the visuals made it worth it
I think this video was supposed to point out a peculiar way in which the health system works (ie, at any given time, a random few are spending a majority of the costs), in an effort to invite theories as to why this is how it shapes up, and possibly push the viewer to ask whether this is a problem that can/needs to be fixed. By understanding that this is how the system is being used, we might look at if it is following the same pattern in single-payer healthcare, or if pushing preventative care would reduce or exacerbate this trend. I don't think the video itself was trying to say it new what this information meant or what the next step should be. The first step is always pointing out trends that we might not be aware of.
All that being said.... HOLY SHIT this was a gorgeous animation with incredible colors. Yukai Du is absolutely incredible!!
Although it is difficult to identify exactly the top 5% of individuals who are contributing to 50% of healthcare costs, the video makes an interesting and very important point. Specifically, I am referring to the quote, “When health is on the line, the numbers suggest there’s almost nothing insurance companies won’t charge and Americans won’t pay”. Once hearing this quote, I was reminded of a categorical imperative by Kant that states humans should not treat one another as a means to an end but rather an end-in themselves. The latter meaning that humans have value outside of personal uses for them. I believe this is often lost in our healthcare system today. Maintaining health is absolutely necessary for survival, and individuals do not have a choice whether or not they will have to pay for the healthcare that they are receiving. However, that is not to say that insurance companies merely view patients as a means to a paycheck. The initial intention of insurance companies was based on a way to protect and provide assurance when it comes to healthcare costs. Therefore, they are not only using individuals as for pay but rather providing other added benefits as well. This means that patients are also using insurance companies as a means to access affordable healthcare. The key aspect is intention of use. It is important to remember that the patient and insurance company are both using one another as a means to an end which is not inherently morally wrong, but acknowledging the importance of the value of individuals outside of their use is key. When the balance of intention gets shifted in different scenarios, it can lead to difficulty and distrust between patients and insurance companies. The quote highlights one of these scenarios that shifts the balance as it can feel that the patient is being exploited financially by the fact that they are fighting a chronic condition or even to stay alive. The individual becomes a means to an end as they accrue costs for healthcare and it becomes difficult to see where the acknowledgment of human value is in this scenario.
Cancer patients? How unjustified damn hypercondriacts.
Lets identify who the 5% superusers are so we can save money by denying them insurance.
The insurance companies are on it.
Total nothingburger of a video. They literally can't answer their own question stated in the title.
First!