I guess what I'm saying is that the reality of healthcare in a world where technology is making the whole concept of health a relative and constantly shifting term is that there will always be limits. -ASThe current "system" isn't "solving" this problem, so how can "no solution" be a criticism of changing approaches? On the logic here, we simply swap one "failing" system for another - how is that a useful critique?
What's more, I remain unconvinced, so far, that "failed rationing" is at all what is driving U.S. cost growth, to the point that costs are now near double what other countries are paying.
On that same score, there are ways to push insurance companies to provide catastrophic and supplemental "experimental treatments" policies, for those who want that kind of coverage. Re-insurance markets, once they develop, can help underwriters to slice up and lay off the risks of this kind of coverage.
The idea that we have to choose an all-or-nothing embrace from government is an AS strawman, therefore.
THE CASE OF THE IV FLUID DRIP
Still don't believe me?
I know someone who just priced this out. $34-52 for 1000 ml of electrolyte IV fluid drip from local pharmacy, retail price. Same item wholesale, circa $3.32.
I'm not a healthcare expert, but I bet I could go through medical devices and find the same.
I'd be willing to bet that lab tests that cost circa $5.00 to run are sold at 10 times that, retail.
