It appears that in every thread about this event there is someone calling everyone else in the thread sick and twisted for not proclaiming that all lives are sacred and being for the death of one individual.

It really is a real life trolley problem because those individuals are not seeing the deaths caused by the insurance industry and not realizing that sitting back and doing nothing (i.e. not pulling the lever on the train track switch) doesn’t save lives…people are going to continue to die if nothing is done.

Taking a moral high ground and stating that all lives matter is still going to costs lives and instead of it being a few CEOs it will be thousands.

  • Xeroxchasechase@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    Number 3 is the best argument for national insurance. (Saying public might imply it’s tradable, this isn’t what I’ve meant)

    • Bilb!@lem.monster
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      10 days ago

      The health insurance industry is an abomination. It’s completely across the purpose of keeping a population healthy to try to extract and concentrate wealth out of the process, and they’re dug in like a tick.

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      Health care is not compatible with the free market as health care is logically something people would pay anything for.

    • bluGill@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 days ago

      National insurance denies claims all the time as well in some form.

        • bluGill@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          10 days ago

          Do you have detailed numbers or just a feeling?

          UHC covers far more people than most national systems despite not being national (I’m sure china is bigger, but most countries have much smaller populations). National systems often have ways of saying “that isn’t covered” that mean the claim isn’t even attempted. there are many different national systems with different rules. There are lots of other complications here that need to be studied in depth.

          • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 days ago

            I think you’re getting this kind of backwards. Individual claims aren’t denied under universal healthcare. It’s not opaque like a private insurer. Specific procedures are the thing not covered, and that becomes part of a national legislative/policy discussion.

              • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 days ago

                The fact that the system is transparent, that every one is denied in a way that is public knowledge, makes the system much easier to change. It’s not directly comparable to the opaque way that US insurance companies deny claims, and the way you said “often have ways” implies the same level of subterfuge.

                I feel like you also missed the other commenter’s point entirely. No one makes comparisons on raw numbers, that would be silly. But the rate at which UHC denies claims is likely greater.

                • bluGill@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  Rate is just one data point. I’m back again to asking for in depth analysis. Do people who use UHC submit more bogus claims than those who use other insurance for example? There are many more important questions that need to be asked.

                  • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    10 days ago

                    Holy moly, are you really this much of a bootlicker that you buy “bogus claims” as an excuse for insurance denying people life-saving treatment?

                    You’re right, rate is just one data point. One I think you purposefully ignored now.

          • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            10 days ago

            Somebody posted a graph of the stats in another thread, and there was a great follow-up by somebody who had worked in claims at another company about just how bad those stats really were.

            The national average for denied claims is 16%. UHC denies 39% of claims. The real kicker here, as they pointed out, is that this is after appeals. They worked at some branch of Blue Cross, which sits at 17% of claims, and said how most claims that are appealed are approved and that the vast majority of those that are denied are things like chiropractors putting in claims for procedures that end up being malpractice or stuff where the paperwork was wrong. Basically, if you get something denied by insurance, you’re almost guaranteed to get it approved after an appeal. They said that for UHC to hit the numbers that they do, they would effectively have to deny almost every claim that they get that isn’t a routine medical visit like an annual physical.

    • timestatic@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 days ago

      Wish more people talked about reform than violence tbh. Thinking about leaving lemmy since associating myself with some people here makes me sick