• rapchee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      17 hours ago

      as if that was a bad thing? do you understand that’s how insurance is supposed to work? spread the cost, so nobody had to pay much, but in the relatively rare cases when care is needed, they can get it. but in for profit insurance it’s so that investors make money

      • Zephyr@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        Never said anything about anything being bad. No matter how the pay comes I still like a government agency setting a maximum on the cost of treatments and medical items. Even in a no insurance pure open market or in a completely socialized medicine state there’s no need for a hospital to have profits greater than a grocery store aka above 1% to 3%. Although profits in a socialized medicine state aren’t quite the same since the buyer and seller are the same entity, but doesn’t stop products or services being purchased at X and sold at Y on the books.

      • Zephyr@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        Government collects taxes, government pays for socialized medicine with taxes along with other things. Maybe government sets up a sovereign wealth fund with taxes and that fund does well which also helps pay for social care programs.

          • Zephyr@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            I mean I guess at some time in the past. I watched a pretty in depth video on Norway’s sovereign wealth fund last year I kinda remember. Generally the concept of a government and taxes isn’t too complex and is taught in school.