• gedaliyah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The arguments about “inefficiency” and “bureaucracy” have to be the most baffling ones to me. We already have a system that is an inefficient maze of red tape, lengthy forms, and arbitrary decisions about healthcare availability made by suits without medical training. We already pay high premiums. What “efficiencies” of capitalist healthcare are we so desperate to preserve?

    • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      76
      ·
      6 months ago

      Every single dollar earned in profit by a health insurance company is a dollar that was spent on healthcare, for which no healthcare was delivered. And there are billions of them.

      Health insurance company profits are literally inefficiency in the system.

      • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 months ago

        Health insurance company profits are literally inefficiency in the system.

        And an absolutely staggering inefficiency at that. The US spends roughly twice as much per capita as the rest of the developed world for healthcare, for health outcomes that are ranked nowhere near the top. A 100% inefficiency, attributable entirely to private health insurance.

          • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Someone starts a new company. It either grows or dies. The company can change over time to adapt to it’s environment, it can split, it can spawn new companies. The ones that fit best in their environment survive. The ones that don’t die. Some companies fill a specific niche and never grow beyond that. If they grow too big they can outpace their environment and destroy it and themselves.

            • Perfide@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              6 months ago

              Some companies fill a specific niche and never grow beyond that. If they grow too big they can outpace their environment and destroy it and themselves.

              Don’t mind me, just fantasizing about the alternate timeline where Amazon never expanded past selling books.

          • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            pls expand:

            C a p i t a l i s m i s a n a l o g o u s t o e v o l u t i o n . I w o u l d n ’ t c a l l i t e f f i c i e n t i n a n y w a y .

            pls expound:

            Someone starts a new company. It either grows or dies. The company can change over time to adapt to it’s environment, it can split, it can spawn new companies. The ones that fit best in their environment survive. The ones that don’t die. Some companies fill a specific niche and never grow beyond that. If they grow too big they can outpace their environment and destroy it and themselves.

      • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Efficiency only comes at scale. Only way to be truly efficient in capitalism is to ultimately have the entire system fold into one conglomerate monopoly.

        At that point, how is that better than communism or socialism?

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The efficiency of the system at making a few people very rich. Sure, it impoverishes people like us - but someday, WE might be rich! And then people like us better watch our step!