Don’t all of those costs have a profit counted into them? I’ve always thought that a socialized system is incentivized to be as cheap as possible, to have as few “customers” as possible, which means that the whole system, from education to taxation, should make policies that improve people’s health, to make sure they need to use the hospital as rarely as possible.
That depends a lot on the medical system. Some systems target profit, but some are non-profits, affiliated with universities or other arrangements that make sense for a medical system.
The city I live in has two main hospitals. One is run by a for profit corporation. The other was a non-profit that got government funding to cover the difference because they were the main “ER as only healthcare” hospital in the area, since the other was built on the rural side of the suburbs and this one was in the middle of the population center. Then they got bought by, of all things, another non-profit operated by a public university. The first non-profit also owned a for-profit insurance company and a fitness center. I think the disposition of those is an ongoing legal question, since the university also owns an insurance company and there’s some weird conflict of interest interplay.
It’s a clusterfuck but the redeeming side is that the hospitals are actually extremely good.
Having at some point or another used all three systems I can say that the prices were basically the same. The staff all like that they can transfer patients to the university easier, but dislike the new parking system.
Yeah it’s actually a serious problem how many hospitals in the US are non profits run by religious organizations. Like, your local ER has a decent chance of being owned by the catholic church and you won’t know until you need medical care they don’t approve of.
Don’t all of those costs have a profit counted into them? I’ve always thought that a socialized system is incentivized to be as cheap as possible, to have as few “customers” as possible, which means that the whole system, from education to taxation, should make policies that improve people’s health, to make sure they need to use the hospital as rarely as possible.
That depends a lot on the medical system. Some systems target profit, but some are non-profits, affiliated with universities or other arrangements that make sense for a medical system.
The city I live in has two main hospitals. One is run by a for profit corporation. The other was a non-profit that got government funding to cover the difference because they were the main “ER as only healthcare” hospital in the area, since the other was built on the rural side of the suburbs and this one was in the middle of the population center. Then they got bought by, of all things, another non-profit operated by a public university. The first non-profit also owned a for-profit insurance company and a fitness center. I think the disposition of those is an ongoing legal question, since the university also owns an insurance company and there’s some weird conflict of interest interplay.
It’s a clusterfuck but the redeeming side is that the hospitals are actually extremely good.
Having at some point or another used all three systems I can say that the prices were basically the same. The staff all like that they can transfer patients to the university easier, but dislike the new parking system.
Yeah it’s actually a serious problem how many hospitals in the US are non profits run by religious organizations. Like, your local ER has a decent chance of being owned by the catholic church and you won’t know until you need medical care they don’t approve of.
Yes, but that’s socialism and therefore bad.
/S just in case
Edit: actually, it’s lost potential revenue which is even worse.