Politics
Out of context: Reply #11345
- Started
- Last post
- 33,771 Responses
- ukit0
Hey mathinc, you seem to be saying that 100% of the problem can be solved by reducing the cost.
Let's say there is some way out there to drastically reduce costs that for some reason wasn't considered. What does a drastic cost reduction look like, realistically - 10%? 15%?
The people that insurance companies refuse to cover, people with serious illnesses, aren't a 10 or 15% difference in terms of the bottom line. They are more like a 10000% difference. We're talking hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars to treat these people, versus trivial cost for your average customer.
If I reduce the cost of treating someone from $1.3 million to $1.2 million, does that suddenly change the equation so much? It seems to me that absent a change in the law forcing their hand, companies would still have every incentive to not cover these people.