Access to health care, mental health services, and substance abuse treatment reduce crime.
Another example of how preventative costs are much lower than punitive costs.
We need to get better at accepting evidence based fixes to our societal problems. In this case providing more treatment up front will reduce crime and the need for jails.
One way to increase access to care is to open more treatment facilities throughout the country. Existing facilities often operate at capacity because of limited funding, so that those who want treatment cannot always find help.
The authors found that an increase in the number of treatment facilities causes a reduction in both violent and financially-motivated crime. This is likely due to a combination of forces: reducing drug abuse can reduce violent behavior that is caused by particular drugs, as well as property crimes like theft committed to fund an addiction. Reducing demand for illegal drugs might also reduce violence associated with the illegal drug trade. The authors estimate that each additional treatment facility in a county reduces the social costs of crime in that county by $4.2 million per year. Annual costs of treatment in a facility are approximately $1.1 million, so the benefits far exceed the costs.
Drafting bills like the new healthcare bill in secret mean two things. Republicans know it’s wrong and they wish to obscure the involvement of special interests.
As they draft legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act, Senate Republican leaders are aiming to transform large sections of the American health care system without a single hearing on their bill and without a formal, open drafting session.
That has created an air of distrust and concern — on and off Capitol Hill, with Democrats but also with Republicans.
Secrecy Surrounding Senate Health Bill Raises Alarms in Both Parties https://nyti.ms/2trgrbM
Conservatives get it too. We are going about this healthcare thing in entirely the wrong manner.
Getting employers out of healthcare and building a single payer system based on outcomes not quantity of service provided is our best hope.
The bad old days of health insurance:
let’s go back to the world of individual insurance before the major provisions of the Affordable Care Act went into effect on Jan. 1, 2014. In that world, the primary source of profit for insurers was not providing better care so that patients stayed healthy, or negotiating better prices with hospitals and drug companies; it was their ability to avoid the sick and insure only the healthy. And insurers had three tools for doing so: denying coverage to the insured for any costs associated with pre-existing conditions; denying insurance entirely to sick people; and charging the sick much higher prices than the healthy, a practice called health underwriting.
What Could Be Worse Than Repealing All of Obamacare? http://nyti.ms/2eUCfVt
Employer provided healthcare doesn’t work. The purchase process is too opaque, too complicated, and the insurance is too expensive.
More people are choosing high deductible insurance because they want to hold onto as much of their earnings as they can. Without this factor pressuring the market downward we are where we are with spiralling costs.
Is High-Deductible Health Insurance Worth the Risk? http://nyti.ms/2e6mCtA
Monopolies aren’t the only threats to competition. When a large industry like cable, wireless, media, banking, or health care merges down to a few dominant players we all suffer the consequences of constrained competition.
A wave of mergers in many sectors of the economy over the last several decades has significantly reduced competition and hurt consumers. That’s why the lawsuits filed last week by the Department of Justice and state attorneys general in federal court challenging two big heath insurance mergers were so important.
Antitrust officials say Aetna’s $37 billion acquisition of Humana and Anthem’s $54 billion purchase of Cigna will reduce the number of large national health insurers to three, from five today. That would lead to fewer choices and higher premiums for individuals and employers in places like New York, Los Angeles and Kansas City, Mo. The mergers could also hurt doctors and hospitals, because they would have less bargaining power against the larger insurers when negotiating reimbursement rates.
One 2012 study published in the American Economic Review found that consolidation in the health insurance industry between 1998 and 2006 was responsible for a seven percentage point increase in premiums, or about $34 billion a year. And a study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found that hospital mergers also increase costs, sometimes by more than 20 percent.
When Health Insurers Merge Consumers Often Lose http://nyti.ms/2a9swsR
Healthcare, healthcare, healthcare. Nobody is ever really satisfied. It’s just a crappie system her in the US. It’s little surprise that providers don’t like the light being shined upon their pricing practices.
It’s also little surprise that the more transparent the pricing and quality are the lower the cost is to patients.
Shopping for Health Care: A Fledgling Craft http://nyti.ms/1WoYjtT