Unknown's avatar

About Sci Fi Engineer

Husband Father Writer Engineer

Health Care Costs (3)

So to continue:  The way I see Health Care has seen a bubble in the US that has grown huge over a very extended period.  Most have called this ‘bubble’ Health Care Cost inflation.  But a bubble over any period between inception and bursting can be seen as (mistaken for) inflation. Is the HCC “Bubble” going to burst or do we have to just accept this as inflation.  I think that too many people want this to be Inflation, not a bubble. And I do not want a ‘bust’ but I do think we need to get on the off ramp, to a price plateau at the very least.

I’ve discussed:

  1. The pernicious effect of opaque pricing
  2. A spike in Cost/Value in capital investment (buildings and equipment.) 
  3. The Gov’t affected floor to pricing
  4. The profit motive effect of increasing costs in the system

Now I’ll add some more:

  • Direct sales…more and more selling of this that or the other service, drug, wonder cure, to the general populace who have no real way of parsing the useful from the useless or even harmful.  And then the sales guys got to congress and punditry and started demonizing those who tried to point out that the common man was not really in a position to make medical decisions. (Not that the god-doctors should be put in charge, much as many of them believe that they should be because they are smarter than anyone else.)
  • Litigation, because medical outcomes are impossible to ensure, and there has been a Lawyer bubble going on for many decades, doctors got sued more and more frequently, malpractice insurance costs went up and so another cost was added into the equation (and for a long time absorbed because the system hid the costs)
  • Specialization, again 9% of 10,000 is a lot more money than 10% of 5,000, but 15% of 10,000 is even more.  Specialist charge at a higher rate because they are specialists and have special skills, that are needed by special cases…..they don’t have to see as many patients, get to go to conferences and consult with other wizards and look down their noses at the rest of the world, even at other doctors.  What’s not to like? Just one more cost adsorbed in the system.
  • Administrative fief building, its a fact of nature, or rather an emergent property of human society:  administrations grows more complex and adsorbs more resources as time moves on, as the top level administrators increase the number of ‘direct reports’ then create hierarchies so they don’t have to talk to as many people so they can be ‘more efficient.’  Administrators (Bureaucrats) are extremely good at capturing the system and turning it to serve them versus the customer the system is supposed to serve.

So what is the solution.  Well I think you can see the one I would focus on first but that will be a discussion for another day.

Alpha Dog…next we have Wardogs…then Wargs

Alpha Dog shown in this video is really, really neat technology but even in this early stage there is something very creepy about it.    If you connect this with what we have done with the Predator drone and its cousins….one has to wonder if we have opened Pandora’s box.  

I have written about Wardogs in Under Seige, a novel I wrote years ago and I will be publishing soon, and in passing about guard robots in Moon Dreams.  Saberhagen had the Berserkers et.al. for decades. But one does not have to get to AI’s gone berserk for things to get out of control. 

We may have paved the way to H E double toothpicks with Predators.  The Chinese and Russians, as well as others, will sell just about any technology to anyone.  We have the example of what tech did in the Arab Spring….is possibly doing in Syria.  What happens when the bad guys don’t have to risk their lives, or lose a night sleep, when they go after protestors and arrest or erase them?

Health Care Cost (2)

When I was a kid and even as a younger adult I went to the dentist’s office and other ‘providers’ and the amenities were clean and neat but often I was treated in a ‘ward’ environment.  And this was way after I’d left Jolly Olde England and the NHS (National Health Service.)  Today most providers I go to the office/clinic space is custom designed often with soothing art, music, video etc.  Now don’t get me wrong, Video/Music does help when you’re under the drill (having something probed etc,} and the video screens used for modern digital x-rays or other data reproduction are a boon as well. But why is every ‘provider’ the same.  Why did hospitals move away from wards to private or semi private rooms with the concomitant increase in capital and operating costs.  Why does my local hospital s soaring almost churchlike multi story lobby floored in granite with overlooking balconies and a Yamaha robo grand piano, and this is not the top end hospital in the region. 

It seems to me that what we have seen is a health care bubble, much like the higher eduction bubble (or the overall education system foam,) we’ve seen in the last thirty years….but I digress.

  • As providers realized that they could attract more lucrative patients by setting up nice offices in nice parts of town the general price of HC (excuse the acronym) went up, in general the expectation in all for pay HC went up while the free clinics crashed.
  • It’s mathematically obvious that 10% of 5,000 is a lot less than 9% of 10,000 and the cost of consumables etc are usually fully reimbursed by the payee because their price is a published known. So providers made more and more use of high cost consumables of one sort or another, and were not incentivized to keep the costs down even if their ‘profit’ was squeezed a bit.
  • Medicaid and Medicare have managed to subsidize the lower end of the patient rainbow and pushed up the overall cost by pushing the higher end patients and providers into a different ‘market space.’
  • Because the actual cost of HC is essentially invisible to the patient the steady spiralling cost was not noted by the high-end clients because they perceived (I think rightly) that they were receiving value for money.  BUT as the high-end pulled away the middle dependent ons insurance etc was stretched and the low-end fell away, the old-fashioned cheap equipment / methods / services they had used were rendered obsolete and replaced by the new much higher cost versions.

Add this and other mechanisms together and you have a bubble.  One that grew and grew, while people griped, tried to do something about it but failed.  For some reason we seem unwilling to change the basic underlying dynamics.  Is that because they are so complex and interlaced that people can’t be bothered to go beyond the simplistic.  Or do a lot of the bad things have attractive sides that would be lost if we made major changes? 

In the current system its impossible to figure out the trade-off between a private room and a ward.  Once that wasn’t true or as true.  We have the technology to make this problem go away.  I believe that with transparent pricing and costs wouldn’t we make different decisions.  Maybe not all the time, but maybe enough to break the back of the ridiculous inflation rate we see in health care.

Health Care Costs (1)

I was listening to the Diane Rehm show this morning.  She had a panel discussion on Health Care, Obama Care and Health Care Costs.  They touched on a couple of issues that I find rather under discussed and it struck me as odd after a while that no one really dug in on the topics.

Here is Topic 1…

Why is it that the cost of a procedure or a piece of gear etc, varies according to who is paying?  If you’re lucky enough to be covered by a relatively old fashioned policy like I am you will see on your explanation of benefits that the Doctor, Hospital, Clinic, Dentist…(the provider) charged one price but the insurance agreed to pay another, the provider agreed to that and wrote off some or all of the rest and you paid your deductible plus some additional cost sometimes for one arcane reason or another. 

The Provider and the Insurer have some pre agreed price sheet that you never get to see.  (You never get to see any price sheet that I know of.)  Blue Cross Blue Shield apparently has one price sheet, UHC another, Medicare and Medicaid another, and the uninsured are hammered with the top line rate.  An uninsured person who cannot prove he/she can pay up front is charged a higher rate again, (at least that appears to be the game) and then the hospital hounds the near-victim for some ‘pittance fraction’ that in the end is still probably more than an insurer would have paid.

If there were an industry agreed to list of procedures etc (which has to be effectively in place.) You, a consultant, a doctor w/should be able to tell what services you require and you should be able to look up what those services cost on the web comparing various providers.  There should be various providers offering various prices and various deals, that you can work through and figure out what is the best value solution for you and your family quite quickly.

This way the insurance companies could reduce costs because they no longer have to individually negotiate prices, rebates, write-offs with each set of providers, the providers likewise can reduce costs for the reciprocal reason.

Administration costs are a huge part of the Health Care Expenses these days and to me this seems to be one of the myriad reasons why.

Health Care Costs are rising almost uncontrollably and the lack of a price comparison mechanism seems to me to be a significant issue.

 

The Senatorial Launch System Revealed

Artist concept of SLS on launchpad

Image from NASA of SLS on launch pad

For only $18Billion….and I’m not kidding about the ‘only.’  This is a big budget program on a pitiful credit line.  All the technology development is to happen in the first couple of years of development, before inflation robs the fixed and thus effectively decreasing NASA budget, of its buying power.  The choice of technologies was based on reusing the shuttle solid booster technology, shuttle main engine derivatives and the canceled Constellation’s upper stage engine because they are hydrogen fueled and thus use shuttle Infrastructure.  It will launch either cargo or cargo and the Orion exploration capsule/system into low orbit. 

It’s an impressive beast, it will start with the ability to loft 70 tons into orbit and end with something like 130 tons, significantly more than the Saturn V of Apollo fame.  But the plan is to launch maybe 1 a year, and that will make it terrifically uneconomical.  The intent is to have a booster capable of lifting exploratory craft for Luna and Lagrange Point exploration, with multiple launches it could do a Mars mission. 

In the meantime we are supposedly going to fund the Entrepreneurial Space companies to compete for ISS supply including crew launch and recovery…..

But if we have the ESpace why do we need SLS.  If SLS is going to need to do multi craft build to go further than Luna or the Lpoints why not focus on building up our space infrastructure and refueling capability to support a common set of commercially viable launchers lofting the parts for assembly of the earlier and simpler systems in orbit.  It may seem more expensive at first but in the long run it will become cheaper because the launchers are cheap on a per use basis. 

OK I’m sure they’re promising that SLS will be real cheap per lb to launch because it uses proven technology and it has the advantage of being bigger (bigger is generally more efficient in this game.) But its a Gov’t program w/infrequent launches, using technology that has been chosen to save money up front.  Not a promising Start. 

And it’s quite possible that one of the driving factors in choosing solid booster over pure liquids was to keep the manufacturer in business (I believe there is only one US supplier at this point) Solid fuel rockets are brute simple, on the surface, but brutally complex in detail, and the only other significant market for the stuff is weapons.  With the wind down of the cold war and the use of solids for various boosters the solid rocket industry has hovered on the brink of bankruptcy.  That means the supplier will have the ability to hold NASA over the barrel for providing the boosters. 

So the SLS remains the Senatorial Launch System and a yoke around the neck of our future in space…..Its a pity we didn’t build this system twenty years ago, when it would have had a positive impact….

Laptops and the PC model

The earlier link leads to an interesting article on the PC industry.  The WinTel mass market suppliers have carried the Desktop market model into the Laptop arena and are now reaping the downside.    [This is what the US Car manufacturers did as well, developing too many me-to platforms and then forcing folks to option up singularly unattractive base models of which there were too many as well. ]

The solution is similar to the car industry as well: in the long run there needs to be  an emphasis on base quality and fewer options. (Is it not strange that this is what Apple is doing?)

BUT why not take a step back as well.  Components have gotten smaller and a Laptops frame can only get so small without losing functionality.  All these companies have developed custom interfaces so they can plug in modules for this and that but also standardized the chassis frames so that they can ‘plug in the modules for this and that.’ In other words they should have a platform to move to the Home Build market and let people build their own.  Companies could compete with plastic, aluminum, titanium or bamboo chassis with various levels of cooling sophistication in 17″, 15.6″, 15″, 14″ and tubby 13″.  Keyboard manufacturers could offer various keyboard modules.  You could buy motherboards with a variety of chip solutions .  Graphics solutions.  Phone net solutions.  LCD Panel solutions. Battery solutions.

Now all of this would require the establishment of an interface standard.  IBM did this for the Desktop market almost by accident, but there is no reason that companies like Dell, Asus, Acer, etc could not come together, they build only marginally differentiated systems now, the differentiation mostly based on a ‘keep those rascals out of my hardware’ business model and design history. 

What would this do?  1) Make it cheaper to build ma, pa and baby laptops to be sold in the big box stores. 2) Create a market for high-end technology in moderately tight form factors for a range of suppliers 3) Allow those with the tennies to move into building mainline power user, mainline business and high-end units which I believe will owe more to the MacAir than the ThinkPad or Inspiron of yore.

Link

This is a really neat article on Intel’s Ultrabook initiative.  In other words get other companies to compete against Apples MacAir 11″ and 13″ models.    And he likes the ‘IBM’ keyboard and pointing stick to!

Lethal Fantasy

I happened on this article through a hyperlink chain from Glenn Reynolds, it blew my mind that an article from that timeframe could clearly explain why 9/11 never made any sense to me, at least not after it became clear that it was not part of some greater campaign.

But read it for more that the explanation of why 9/11 was never about war in the normal sense and that treating it as such may have been a mistake. 

Almost more stunning is the explanatory concept it lays out, a concept that provides a powerful too for examine the social dynamics in the world of today. 

Perhaps I am taking it too far but if I start holding it up against a lot of major movements today as an explanatory meme…I get worried.

 Read the article, take the basic concept it explains to view various ‘movements’ , and do it for ones you are for as well as against with intellectual honesty and clear-eyed understanding of your own biases .  

It makes one wonder if we aren’t all living in a matrix of interlocking Fantasies?   Is our civilization driven by something close to magical thinking?  Is this unavoidable?