I'm a doctor in the US and my opinion on the higher than average global doctor pay is due to the letigius society we live in. My malpractice insurance is very high and there are many times that I need to run costly tests to confirm what I already know just by looking at the patient. If I am wrong in my diagnosis or miss anything, I get sued. By having all these extra tests to confirm my diagnosis, I have a leg to stand on in court to defend myself. I don't know who is going to sue me, so I have to do all these tests on everyone. This drives the total cost up (due to the quantity of procedures) and the cost per procedure is high to cover my costs associated with running my practice. They call it "defensive medicine" because you are doing all these extra things to defend yourself in court when you get sued.
+Herby Benavent Curious. Living in the UK myself the last time I had to go in for surgery (long time ago fortunately) A slip of paper had to be signed by my parents agreeing not to sue the doctors if something went wrong. I wonder which is the best of these two evils?
That's what Singapore's late Prime Minister said if the US; quality of healthcare is the best around, but costly and unnecessary tests ruin the whole thing.
+Herby Benavent Not to mention the risk and cost of false positives from over testing. Money aside, it isn't always better to take every test, as no test is perfect and if you get tested for enough stuff you'll get a false positive eventually, which leads to more unnecessary tests and treatments.
+Herby Benavent It's not a culture thing, its a law thing. Countries with a sane law system make whoever loses the civil trial pay for the trial and there are additional fines for filing fraudulent lawsuits. The US doesn't have this, and so there is a big incentive for consumers to sue hospitals so they will settle to avoid legal fees. It's basically legalized extortion. tl;dr The iron triangle leaves the US laws all messed up.
Please do not use the blinking edges in future episodes, it's headache inducing for some and could induce epileptic seizures in others. It's also just distracting lol.
+ProfessorBorax I think it is a way of keeping people from zoning out. It can be good to have a wtf break in a video when there is a lot of information.
+GLT Music My personal conspiracy theory is that these educators have determined that this facilitates attention-keeping, while heightening aggravation (promoting the release of adrenaline), to reinforce the point being made and transferring it into long-term memory. This has occurred since the beginning of CrashCourse.
+Vincent Von Dudler This makes me both amazed and scared... yet my brain is being hacked for my own betterment... and holy crap my brain is being hacked!
GLT Music good grief the picture bouncing off a satellite or travel like lightening through tiny wires ...still ungrateful good god only been 2 generations since we had color tv jeez
"When you are having a heart attack you aren't going to shop around for the hospital with the lowest prices..." Screw you, I am. I can pinch a nickle so hard Jefferson screams.
good luck. If you actually do it, it'll likely be the last nickle you pinch since immediacy of treatment is the DOMINANT factor in heart attacks. As they say, shop 'TIL YOU DROP. Dead that is.
Good episode, but it would have been interesting to have a little about the forces that have made health insurance cover things that would not leave patients destitute if paid, like relatively cheap prescription drugs, and why homeowner's insurance won't similarly help pay for roof sealant, or auto insurance won't pay to replace your brake pads.
Fun fact: as of right now, in the UK, junior doctors are on strike over a contract being imposed by the government. Not least of the issues doctors are concerned over is the creeping influence of American-style private companies into our beloved NHS. This episode couldn't have come at a better time!
I'm a medical laboratory professional and the number of "lab errors " can differ depending on the source . Many times preanalytical errors , like those made by the Doctor or nurse before the lab got the samples are called ," lab errors " and are falsely recorded as such . Many places have nurses drawing blood , which does not make much sense , nurses get little if any training on proper specimen collection in school . The quality of the lab results are only as good as the samples the lab receives
You have to swipe your credit card first. The cost is itemized though so you know you aren't getting ripped off. The buns are $1,383.65 Meat Patty 16, 472.14 Cheese 2.392.45 You get one free pack of ketchup though Murica
I notice that all of the European countries that you mention at 4:20 with cheaper health care also have considerable more doctors per capita. The US has 24 doctors per 10,000 people while these countries range from 28 for the UK to 42 in Norway. The average in Western Europe seems to be in the mid-30's which gives them about a 40-50% more doctors, relatively speaking. Do you think this major difference in supply has a major impact on the difference between US & European health costs? Does the fact that America has fewer doctors per capita than Uzbekistan or Slovenia possibly account for the differences?
@@erth2man It's precisely the strong regulation of countries with universal healthcare, what makes MRI's, drugs and other equipment, affordable in the first. With the help of monopsony .
@@granudisimo Regulation can reduce and increase cost as well. When bureaucrats make more requirements and demands on health providers, that really has little to do with being universal or not. With our medicare and medicaid programs combined, we already are the largest single payer (universal) healthcare provider in the world. As you can clearly see, universality has little to do with reducing the cost for those services. Probably the biggest factor that I've witnessed is doctors over testing to cover their malpractice liability exposure and to make up for lower price per visit requirements dictated by medicare and medicaid. How much do you suppose European doctors pay for malpractice insurance? That is most likely a big factor why it costs more here in the US as well and will universal healthcare reduce that cost? That is yet to be proven and comparing what goes on in other nations might not translate here at all.
I think it's very simple as to why healthcare costs so much; unlike most products, healthcare is a necessary one. I can choose not to buy a certain TV or something that I want but costs too much, and my refusal to buy it leads to its depreciation over time, so that I could probably buy it for less in half a year or more. With healthcare, I cannot refuse to pay. If I break my leg, I cannot work, and so I must get it treated ; I must accept the price of the health provider. If I refuse their price and look for another one, not only will I find myself in an administrative hassle but also I will not be able to work for weeks, sometimes months, putting myself in great debt. This is why regulations exist. You can't expect the free market to govern itself when it's making a profit off of sickness and disease.
I would add two more reasons: 1) lack of discussion of costs at time of MD -patient decision making and 2) lack of transparency of costs per item at provider level. The later is improving.
+Chad Leach The difference is that you pretty much know how much food you demand. With healthcare, you have no idea what you need until you go to the doctor.
+Chad Leach Haha I see your point but alot of what your saying are supply side factors. The point I was trying to make is that it's very hard which health services I need before I go to the doctor. Do I need an MRI? Medication? Surgery? The doctor has a lot of power over patients because they basically dictate my 'demand' by ordering tests and prescribing drugs for me. Not to mention that I'm still paying them (or my insurance) in the end. Doctors both supply and demand. No other market that I can think of has that. At least I know when I'm hungry or that I want to buy a house and don't need a specialist (well except a real estate broker or a nutritionist but they are not strictly necessary for me to make decisions) but obviously it's alot more complex than that. "Specialist opinions can help but that is no justification to force others to pay for your expenses, whether it be food, shelter or medical care." Not sure what you're getting at here.
+Chad Leach In same ways yes. I'm sure most doctors only want what's best for the patient but that shouldn't discount the fact that they can be motivated by financial incentives. There are studies out there that show that doctors change their behavior under different financial incentives. Regarding searching for an second opinion, in an ideal world I would agree. But in reality you have things like in-network and out-of-network doctors that complicates things. Interestingly, I read an article about how consumers view healthcare prices. It's pretty interesting khn.org/news/prices-and-health-care-quality-many-consumers-dont-see-a-link/
Another important consideration is the mixture of a for-profit system, that is also heavily subsidized. When the majority of healthcare dollars flowing through the system are from the government, the normal market forces that control costs in other industries, are essentially disabled. Add to that the tax incentives to employers to provide health insurance for employees, and that removes the consumer from the market even further.
I had a small heart attack when she said it was the end of the textbook Economics episodes. I'm glad she's sticking around a little longer. Good luck Jacob, hope you don't need that 'sweet' healthcare though.
The Canadian system is often cited by Americans advocating for single payer, but it is rarely portrayed with any nuance. Single payer healthcare in Canada worked well when the baby boomers were entering th work force and contributed heavily into a system with few older users. Now it is becoming increasingly rationed and a parallel private system is slowly supplementing procedures like MRIs, x-rays and elective surgeries. Patients unable to afford access to the parallel private system who don't face imminent health issues languish for months or years on waiting lists. For instance, I was once put on a five year waiting list for a consultation with and an orthopaedic surgeon. I paid out of pocket and had a consultation with the same surgeon at his private clinic two weeks later. The single payer system has its strengths as well but it does no one any good to give short shrift to its weaknesses.
In the US system basically, you get hit hard with high medical bills if you don't have great insurance so some people decided not get treated and die than put their family in terrible debt so a five-year waiting list doesn't seem that bad for something not urgent. Also, like you said you do have a choose to pay for private insurance.
+ACDCLeadership You too! I can't wait to take Economics next year. I feel so prepared and the series isn't even over yet! Is Adrienne going to be focusing more on the real-world applications now?
Excellent synopsis of US healthcare system. As a healthcare advocate knowing the many complexities within our system, I appreciate your easy-to-understand presentation and will point others to it when they have questions.
+drz (from my post further up, talking about Trump policies) I can beat his ridiculous $12billion (+upkeep and staffing costs) wall with a few spades, a few pickaxes, some friends/lackeys and a bit of time. El Chapo was dug out of a prison for goodness sake, the criminals can dig into a maximum security prison, they can dig under one wall (these tunnels already exist due to the US' border fence, which does bugger all). Even if they can't dig under the wall, a thirty foot (which was the last number I heard for it) wall would create a market for a thirty one foot tall ladder. Or let's use that other famous wall, the one in China, they will just bribe the border guards, as it will be impossible to hire enough guards that will not take a bribe. Or they will take the drugs around the wall on a boat, the wall is fucking useless and if anything will inhibit the US because it will be so expensive (Mexico would not pay for the wall, there is no way in hell he could make them pay). The illegal immigrants (because let's use the correct term rather than the offensive one) pay taxes, but cannot use welfare programs, like medicare, medicaid or social security. They also have a hard time getting jobs due to them usually lacking documentation and the systematic racism against foreigners that exists in border states that the immigrants are likely to try and settle in (especially as the Republicans have done their best to bankrupt some of the border states out of ideology, looking at you Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and the rest). Trump's tax cuts will cost $12 trillion (Time) in ten years (using today's economy as a basis, growth would make it cost even more). Far more than he could cut out the government budget without eliminating either the military or social security, or halving either, which would see riots and mass protest either way His 'business expertise' has seen him be bankrupted three times, have multiple failed product (Trump airline anyone? How about Trump steaks? Or Trump magazine?), he would be wealthier if he had invested his inheritance into the stock market, he is worth less now than when he inherited his father's fortune (when adjusted for inflation). He is a failure of a businessman and an utterly unlikeable man (which would make him awful at treaty negotiation). Let's not forget that Trump has called for war crimes to be committed by carpet bombing Iraq and Syria and "going after their [terrorists'] families" who are civilians.
Jack Lovejoy He is a billionaire so he is successful in business. Only healthy Mexicans could climb the wall so sick Mexicans will stay a burden on the Mexican healthcare system only. Plus his lovely wife Melania will be a great role model for female fitness.
+drz You can't judge success by money. His father was already rich, investors calculated if trump simply put money inherited from his parents in savings, today he would have the same amount of money that he has.
Nice summary. One minor quibble. The electronic medical records requirement is part of the HITECH act which was passed separately and prior to the ACA.
I aggressively negotiate. $50 for leg MRI. $1000 Sinuplasty with three nights in a private hospital room. $2000 for ACL repair with 5 nights in a shared hospital room. Subsequent to both surgeries check-ups with the surgeon were free.
At the end of the video when they said: This is the end of our textbook economics... I almost panicked thinking this course ended. Pfhew there's going to be another one next week. I find these lessons very interesting and enjoyable.
I live in Canada and have no family doctor. I am not able to see a specialist either. Many European countries have adopted a mixed system private and public and have the best results. Restricting billing is like controlling prices; the result is shortages, just like any other consumer or good.
Maaan the too early to tell on the Affordable Care Act comment... when this video came out I was on ACA. Two months after this video came out I had a stroke, at 30 (I'm in great health it was just a freak injury that caused it). I am so so grateful I was able to get proper healthcare and afford the follow up to make sure I didn't have another. No way I could have afforded the two hour ambulance ride from my local hospital to the specialist hospital without insurance or probably even with the employer insurance I have now. Just an anecdote but I may well owe my life to ACA.
This is why I love my country (Britain) when it comes to healthcare, no worries about paying health care costs etc, albeit it's not as effective as we would like and the government are ruining the lives of junior doctors through contractual issues, but it's just one less burden for people to worry about.
+scorpioninpink partially, I don't think they have enough time now in this term because of their plans to essential privatised the education system but I HOPE TO FRICKING SANTA that education and health care is never privatised
+Jerome Hart Well, what they are doing to the teachers and the junior doctors is an indication that they are planning on it. Remember that they did that to the public railways and privatized it. We can only hope that before the election in 2020 that the damage done could be reversable.
The Rand study cited at about 5 minutes found that people did indeed cut their use of unneeded health care if they had deductibles and copays. Unfortunately they also cut their use of needed health care, particularly among the poor.
V E R Y G O O D TO E X C E L L E N T ! These CrashCourse series of videos are very good to excellent, and the basic economic concepts are explained most clearly. On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate these lessons 9 to 10. Thank you so much to both the lady and the gentleman for the videos!
But that would eliminate or reduce the profitability the private firms by competition, and thus saves too much money that deserves to be in pockets of billionaire insurance CEOs rather than "lazy" poor Americans!
***** Obama put more regulations. If we could make a deal of repealing Obamacare and all of the other regulations, and at the same time replace medicaid and medicare with a public option...I think it would be possible to make that deal.
I'd like to see an economists take on decriminalizing all drugs. Portugal has had great success with this. I'd like an economist to crunch the numbers for the US based on the reductions in incarceration, use, HIV and crime Portugal reports after over ten years of this policy. Here's a link to an economists paper on Portugal drug policy from 2012. www.iza.org/conference_files/riskonomics2012/portugal_p772.pdf
+Chris K Product is legal, therefore taxable and controllable, therefore the money is recycled into the community rather than going into a crime syndicate, therefore more money for government to spend and growth increased due to emergence of a new sector
unematrix Your article talks about the legalization of pot. Two big differences here. Legalization means commercialization and that will lead to increased use. Sure you get to tax it and regulate it but you get more users. Portugal decriminalized all drugs. As long as you're caught with ten days worth or less you don't get put through the legal system, you get encouraged to get treatment (and fined if you refuse). This has lead to a decrease in use of all recreational drugs except booze and cigarettes and that's because those two are fully legal and sold commercially. Now booze nets the US over 9 billion a year in tax revenue but costs a butt load more in crime, accidents, lost time and health damage. Legalizing pot is just going to make a few people very rich while the majority pay for the damage.
+Jack Lovejoy Sorry I answered Unematrix in a reduced window and missed your comment. I think my reply there works equally well for your comment. Legalization of drugs is a false economy. You make money in taxes but the increase in consumption that commercialization brings costs the economy more than its worth. Pot may be an exception but I think the long term effects of THC rich varieties is going to be a lot higher than most think. More THC, less natural anti psychotic. Psychosis, not good, very expensive.
+Chris K if it's commercialized it's automatically decriminalized. legalizing weed doesn't make a few people rich and most people don't have to pay for the damage. in the netherlands it's legal, there are no legal-drug barrons, and people don't have to pay for damages because there are no damages.
From the perspective of a person who has used healthcare in India and US, I noticed that the it's not about the number of tests, but the inflated cost of everything they have to sell. While quality healthcare is not cheap in India but the cost of say a CAT scan or MRI is way cheaper. Even though through I had insurance that covered most of it the 15% deductible for cat scan costed more in US compared to 100% for the same in India. There's also hyper inflated costs for everything irrespective of the country. I knew of a person whose factory made a surgical instrument that he sold to the hospitals for Rs. 0.10/pc and the hospital charged the patients Rs. 100/pc. So yeah that's a little too much
I am glad you used the MRI in your explanation. $1,500 verses $500. This sounds like a great investment opportunity. I will set one up and charge only $1,000. Let's see how easy it is to setup an MRI business, ready? Ok let's go.......FAIL, darn I am not allowed to compete with the protected firms that operate them. I guess I will just open a Party Rental store and sell all the helium the MRI's need to operate instead.
The quickest thing would be to read the entries at market-ticker.org/ about Healthcare. I recall a specific entry about MRI's there. The author has good articles about Healthcare. He gets a bit touchy about other issues but for a good explanation on US healthcare policy it is a credible place for facts.
+Louis Andrews Smith Germany has that. The German system isn't perfect but access is good, costs are low (though they still could and should be a lot lower) and as the video said we even get more tests and preventative care out of it.
Our legal system is another reason our costs are so high; malpractice insurance premiums for a doctor amounts to more money than most people make in total. Also, we're the fattest country in the world, and much of the chronic disease we treat is related to that.
In general our regulatory system contributes by allowing more pollution, less healthy food and older infrastructure than many developed countries. So we end up getting poisoned a little more than most europeans by just eating, drinking, and breathing. Car culture also hurts this. Many other high-tech urban cultures usually don't feel the need to drive as often. So while they're walking, biking, or taking a train, we're sitting on our asses in a car.
Jacob Collier Damn- we'll have to step up our game; We can't let Mexico beat us! It's anecdotal, but an OB-GYN I used to date had about 1/4 to 1/3 of her income tied up in malpractice insurance, and her income was pretty big.
She should consider working on her bedside manner, I've read several statistics that suggest that friendliness has more to do with malpractice suits than quality. If your OB-GYN is great, but unpleasant, and a radiologist they send you to makes a mistake. You don't track down the problem. You lump it on the doctor that you already don't like. Side note....I have two uncles, each doctors. both about the same quality of doctor. but with very different bedside manners. The amount they seem to deal with malpractice suits and insurance, matches the statistics I've read. (which is to say that the less pleasant is the one who is much more likely to get sued.)
If everyone really wants the free market, we could at least go for the Swiss system of baseline coverage that it private but can't be sold at a profit and then allow supplemental coverage to be sold from there
I don’t think doctors are actually at fault in this process of negotiating. Doctors are caught up in this messed up system but they don’t even know how much these things will cost either. They just have to go along with it all.
Litigation! They forgot to mention part of the reason doctors charge so much is they have to pay for malpractice insurance because Americans are more likely to sue. This also encourages the doctors to be more cautious and order more (expensive) tests to avoid lawsuits.
It annoys me they talk specifically about the American, healthcare here and not the healthcare in general. Other countries are just counter examples. It's supposed to be crush course economy, not American Economy!
I don't think that most people overconsume health care. If anything, we have a problem in America of underconsuming health care. Unnecessary tests should be discouraged, but diagnostic tests are valuable and can save lives. Doctors should be the ones to decide which tests and procedures are necessary, and that should not be dictated by the patient's ability to pay. Wastefulness seems to be on the part of providers and insurers, not patients. Putting up barriers to care is not a good idea, because health care has positive externalities. You WANT people to consume it when they need it.
Even when it is not an emergency, it is almost impossible to shop around for health care. Hospitals are under no requirements to give you a good faith cost estimate, and even when they are you usually have to request it, which goes against typical human behavior. Further even when you do your best to price out procedures. You can still be hit by suprise billing, even you you go to an in network hospital. For example when the anesthesiologist is out of network at an in network hospital. Healthcare has no transparency, and there is no competition driving down costs and increasing quality. We can just look at LASIK to see what happens when prices are advertised and publicly known. Prices have gone down, while quality has gone up.
Something they didnt talk about here, that I really want to know is: Why does the same treatment cost almost 200% more in the US compared to countries with "free health care"?
They didnt talk about it, they just gave us bullshit reasons why it might be higher. The people who made this video knows that the US heathcare service sucks, but tries there best to make it look like the superior system.
Governmental health care is one of the things I am thankful for in the UK. Shame the UK Govt are moving towards privatisation and dangerous underfunding of the NHS which means they don't have the resources to handle the demand.
I would be interested to see you discuss the impact of Medicare on charges vs. actual costs. Medicare reimburses about 13 cents on a dollar which reduces the actual cost figures. Medicare though requires that third parties be charged the same as medicare, therefore insurance companies are billed at the same rate and negotiate a reduction of reimbursement while uninsured are stuck with the entire charge. Has not the influence of government (Medicare) actually created our healthcare crisis.
I too was lulled into believing for a nanosecond, then my brain kicked in and I was questioning????, switch it up again & Oh now that makes sense! Adrienne don't play with my mind, I believe everything you say!!!
Original Medicare (parts A & B) doesn’t pay for all the healthcare of seniors. It only pays 80% and that doesn’t include all medical services, only some (and excludes all dental, vision and prescription). 20% of a medical bill is still a LOT for the average American senior (think about if its 20% of a hospital stay which could be 10’s of thousands of dollars!). And they still do have to pay the part b premium currently $144 every month. They’re not really getting a good deal.
Just a note: no one argues that the US spends more on health care because of the moral hazard (the all-you-can-treat buffet). While there are some who (incorrectly) argue that the US overspends and it is true that the moral hazard does lead to overspending, basically all other industrialized countries would have this problem worse, because they have better financial coverage than the US (through insurance or public care).
Health care should be covered by government. In my country, the people have the right to choose either public or private healthcare. The public hospitals and clinic here are fairly cheap. For general treatment, emergency and chronic disease you just need to pay minimum RM 1.00 for treatment and medication. Senior citizen and children below 2 years old are free. If you're a government servant, all of your family members can have access to specialists and other expensive procedure for free.
I wish you'd get rid of the annoying flickering in the frames around stock photos? It adds nothing, in annoying, and might even cause epileptic seizures. I'll even make a deal with you: Get rid of it and I'll support the channel on Patreon.
I miss my country in the review: Spain, where public owned+funded universal healthcare is under attack by conservative governments since years ago. Still, they can't challenge the facts: we have one of the most efficient and less expensive healthcare systems in the world. But private interests and lobbyists keep pressing to make business out of a captive market. And those are two points you don't consider: first, health is a basic need and a human right, one that NEVER should be left to the mercy of free market, because consumers aren't really free to choose wether they buy it or not, and it tends to become an oligopoly. And second, any corporation has the duty to provide profit to its shareholders, so any healthcare insurer will do so... but if healthcare is state runned and tax funded, you lift the weight of profit pursue. You can still have private healthcare, we do have it here, because sometimes you don't want to wait for a treatment or you want additional services like private room in a hospital and so. But even if you're a homeless, you won't die of a curable disease. And that's one of the major achievements of our civilization and of Humanity itself! P.S.: you also forgot other of the healthcare champions in the world: Cuba (check the stats). If an empoverished socialist island can do it, why can't the First World Power?
Healthcare is one of those things you really don't want provided to you by for profit companies. If it's for profit then insurers will try every trick not to pay (see Sicko for examples) and health care providers and pharmaceutical companies will do everything they can to make it as expensive as possible (including the iron triangle). Competition in the market place just doesn't seem to work. If Cuba can provide universal healthcare with cheap prescription medications, the USA has no excuse.
I paid my insurance 80€/month, student insurance and nothing for my apicoectomy. Now in the next month i will pay for 1 tooth implant (1300€) but i could pay nothing and make a "bridge", only the neccesary part (no real good esthatics, but it will work). But you know, if i would live in the USA, this 2 things would made me bancrupt
You guys are failing to address the real reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. It is because the healthcare providers (the hospitals and doctors and pharmacies) know that the government will give them whatever they say the price is. Over 35% of Americans are on Medicaid or Medicare. Those are the people that will use it the most because they don't have to pay for it. So the providers will end up making much more keeping the prices double or triple the amount of what is resonable because the government won't haggle to bring the price down. Now the private health insurances have to be more expensive in order to stay in business because the healthcare providers (the hospitals and pharmacies) never lower their prices because they know that with combination of the patients that can afford expensive insurance and the constant flow of socialized health insurance (Medicare/Medicaid) they will make more of a profit continuing to have them overpay. The solution would be to defund Medicare and Medicaid. Stop the constant flow of taxpayer dollars to the healthcare providers, and the free market will naturally bring down the prices. Competition would kick in and other health care businesses would be created, health insurance would go way down, and everyone would end up winning.
I know most of your audience is American/European, but I think it's worth noting that in (my country) the Philippines, sometimes, hospitals *will* deny treatment, even in emergencies to people with no insurance or cash at hand. Many impoverished Filipinos are detained in hospitals for days after treatment if they can't pay.
Is it true that in Europe they cant take you to the Hospital unless they can stabilize you in the field? What happens when you have an injury that needs to be treated in the hospital, but they cant get you stable enough to take you there? If I got into a car accident, and twisted my heart, and they cant get a stable pulse from me what do they do? Open heart surgery at the scene?
Yeah, maybe, but just a reform like the Affordable Care Act makes the 2010 midterms the worst for the democratic party in a century, imagine if you do full socialized medicine that year.
+Maximilian Bloom If you consider the right as a protection against a corrupt government becoming a fascist regime (which is why I think it's in the constitution) then yeah, maybe the government should pay to arm well organized militia groups. Probably at the state level though. The governments only job is to protect its citizens. I think universal healthcare qualifies and maybe the AR-15s too.
+Chris K There's a serious problem with creating and interpreting rights this way. Your rights are things that are yours from birth and do not cost money to exercise. Even if there were no government, you have a right to arm yourself and protect your own rights. If someone tries to deny you your rights, you have a justification to defend them. Things like AR-15s and healthcare can't be rights. Those things require the labor of others, so having a right to their labor is a very serious ethical failure. You don't have a right to those things because what do you do if the only doctor in town wants to leave? How do you defend your right to healthcare? Do you force him to stay? What if no one can pay? Does he have no right to refuse healthcare? What if nobody pays because it's their right? You cannot have a right to the labor of other people.
+New American Fishkeeper Well, healthcare may or may not be a right, but should that make that healthcare free? Just because you have the right to bear arms does that mean you should get a free fire arm, or if you have the the freedom of press does that mean you don't have to pay the money to get your ideas out there, or face the consequenses for whatever garbage you have to share? My answer to all this would be no. In America, you will be treated in the case of an emergency, and there are many non-profit organizations that will help those in serious need, but you don't get free all you can access healthcare.
+grantcivyt I have a framed poster of the universal declaration of human rights. Article 25 states clearly that everyone has the right to medical and many other things that cost money regardless of their state of employment, health, age, disability, widowhood or any other "lack of livelihood" circumstance beyond their control. Article 26 says education should be free. Here's a link to the English language version. www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/Language.aspx?LangID=eng
+Jacob Collier In some cases (including medical) if you can't afford it, yes. Here is a link to the English language version of the universal declaration of human rights. www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/Language.aspx?LangID=eng
@CrashCourse I can't find the economics subject under playlists on your home page. I have to google it separately to find it. Just a friendly notification keep up the great work!!!!
If Free Healthcare is so good, why is the VA so horrible? Personally, I think healthcare should be privatized or left up to the states. I heard Vermont has a state wide free health care system. I don't wanna pay more in taxes for someone elses health care.
+chaosXP3RT It would be so much cheaper, if they break up the medical license monopoly. if people are evaluating each individual line items in the medical cost, they would be completely shock to find an overwhelming amount of waste that is protected by governmental rules.
I'm a doctor in the US and my opinion on the higher than average global doctor pay is due to the letigius society we live in. My malpractice insurance is very high and there are many times that I need to run costly tests to confirm what I already know just by looking at the patient. If I am wrong in my diagnosis or miss anything, I get sued. By having all these extra tests to confirm my diagnosis, I have a leg to stand on in court to defend myself.
I don't know who is going to sue me, so I have to do all these tests on everyone. This drives the total cost up (due to the quantity of procedures) and the cost per procedure is high to cover my costs associated with running my practice.
They call it "defensive medicine" because you are doing all these extra things to defend yourself in court when you get sued.
+Herby Benavent Curious. Living in the UK myself the last time I had to go in for surgery (long time ago fortunately) A slip of paper had to be signed by my parents agreeing not to sue the doctors if something went wrong. I wonder which is the best of these two evils?
That's what Singapore's late Prime Minister said if the US; quality of healthcare is the best around, but costly and unnecessary tests ruin the whole thing.
+Herby Benavent Not to mention the risk and cost of false positives from over testing. Money aside, it isn't always better to take every test, as no test is perfect and if you get tested for enough stuff you'll get a false positive eventually, which leads to more unnecessary tests and treatments.
Okay. Thanks for clarifying.
Guess I should take more prerogative with researching these things first in future.
+Herby Benavent It's not a culture thing, its a law thing. Countries with a sane law system make whoever loses the civil trial pay for the trial and there are additional fines for filing fraudulent lawsuits. The US doesn't have this, and so there is a big incentive for consumers to sue hospitals so they will settle to avoid legal fees. It's basically legalized extortion.
tl;dr The iron triangle leaves the US laws all messed up.
Stop that flickering dimming of the edge of the picture!
can't stand it, makes my eyes go funny =(
I wonder why they do it
It's supposed to be reminiscent of an old film projector but it doesn't really work.
agreed thats gonna give me sezers
You need bigger problems to deal with.
I was distracted by the acdc belt buckle for a moment
+SMARTART Eactly! I'm not taking economics advice or analysis from someone with an ACDC belt buckle.
+CaliforniaArchitect you won't have too starting next week
I only noticed it at the end did he wear it the whole time oo
exactly, the video lost all credibility with my class
Please do not use the blinking edges in future episodes, it's headache inducing for some and could induce epileptic seizures in others. It's also just distracting lol.
Who came up with that 'bermuda triangle "joke"'? And how did everyone say 'okay, let's go with this' ??? So random…
+ProfessorBorax I think it is a way of keeping people from zoning out. It can be good to have a wtf break in a video when there is a lot of information.
Adam Rasmussen Yea I thought about that, but it just made me lose my concentration. Maybe it works for others.
@@ProfessorBorax "I get my triangles confused"
Exactly it didn't even make sense "sorry I'm terrible at triangles" what does that even mean. I did not know triangles was a thing one could be bad at
Why do some of the stock photos flicker like that? It's REALLY offputting.
+GLT Music It looks like its an issue with the vignette they are using on all of the stills. The error is only happening on a few luckily.
+GLT Music thank you for pointing that out.. it was driving nuts... hopefully they fix it for next time.
+GLT Music My personal conspiracy theory is that these educators have determined that this facilitates attention-keeping, while heightening aggravation (promoting the release of adrenaline), to reinforce the point being made and transferring it into long-term memory. This has occurred since the beginning of CrashCourse.
+Vincent Von Dudler This makes me both amazed and scared... yet my brain is being hacked for my own betterment... and holy crap my brain is being hacked!
GLT Music good grief the picture bouncing off a satellite or travel like lightening through tiny wires ...still ungrateful good god only been 2 generations since we had color tv jeez
By Jacob, thanks! And glad Adriene is sticking around!
yeah just throw a triangle joke in there and keep everything else serious.
"When you are having a heart attack you aren't going to shop around for the hospital with the lowest prices..."
Screw you, I am.
I can pinch a nickle so hard Jefferson screams.
muffled screams.
good luck. If you actually do it, it'll likely be the last nickle you pinch since immediacy of treatment is the DOMINANT factor in heart attacks.
As they say, shop 'TIL YOU DROP. Dead that is.
ALERT: Politics and controversy below! Proceed with caution!
+Connor Mowry ALERT VERY ANGRY PEOPLE COMING IN SOON
+Connor Mowry I'm too dumb to listen to that.
Good episode, but it would have been interesting to have a little about the forces that have made health insurance cover things that would not leave patients destitute if paid, like relatively cheap prescription drugs, and why homeowner's insurance won't similarly help pay for roof sealant, or auto insurance won't pay to replace your brake pads.
Fun fact: as of right now, in the UK, junior doctors are on strike over a contract being imposed by the government. Not least of the issues doctors are concerned over is the creeping influence of American-style private companies into our beloved NHS. This episode couldn't have come at a better time!
I'm a medical laboratory professional and the number of "lab errors " can differ depending on the source . Many times preanalytical errors , like those made by the Doctor or nurse before the lab got the samples are called ," lab errors " and are falsely recorded as such . Many places have nurses drawing blood , which does not make much sense , nurses get little if any training on proper specimen collection in school . The quality of the lab results are only as good as the samples the lab receives
+Michael Trudell (-MikeT) and yet I've never had my blood taken by an MD in Europe, always a nurse...
US MRI machines offer patients a Big Mac while they're in the machine.
Mounted Czarina Fake news
That’d be nice
You have to swipe your credit card first. The cost is itemized though so you know you aren't getting ripped off.
The buns are $1,383.65
Meat Patty 16, 472.14
Cheese 2.392.45
You get one free pack of ketchup though
Murica
I notice that all of the European countries that you mention at 4:20 with cheaper health care also have considerable more doctors per capita. The US has 24 doctors per 10,000 people while these countries range from 28 for the UK to 42 in Norway. The average in Western Europe seems to be in the mid-30's which gives them about a 40-50% more doctors, relatively speaking.
Do you think this major difference in supply has a major impact on the difference between US & European health costs?
Does the fact that America has fewer doctors per capita than Uzbekistan or Slovenia possibly account for the differences?
most of those countries had or have free university too maybe charging your best and brightest $600,000 to become a doctor is a stupid idea.
You clearly missed the part where a MRI costs $200 elsewhere, and $1500 here. That has NOTHING to do with the number of doctor's per capita.
@@brianmi40 Some of that could be attributed to higher regulation and overhead costs here in the US.
@@erth2man It's precisely the strong regulation of countries with universal healthcare, what makes MRI's, drugs and other equipment, affordable in the first. With the help of monopsony .
@@granudisimo Regulation can reduce and increase cost as well. When bureaucrats make more requirements and demands on health providers, that really has little to do with being universal or not. With our medicare and medicaid programs combined, we already are the largest single payer (universal) healthcare provider in the world. As you can clearly see, universality has little to do with reducing the cost for those services. Probably the biggest factor that I've witnessed is doctors over testing to cover their malpractice liability exposure and to make up for lower price per visit requirements dictated by medicare and medicaid. How much do you suppose European doctors pay for malpractice insurance? That is most likely a big factor why it costs more here in the US as well and will universal healthcare reduce that cost? That is yet to be proven and comparing what goes on in other nations might not translate here at all.
I think it's very simple as to why healthcare costs so much; unlike most products, healthcare is a necessary one. I can choose not to buy a certain TV or something that I want but costs too much, and my refusal to buy it leads to its depreciation over time, so that I could probably buy it for less in half a year or more.
With healthcare, I cannot refuse to pay. If I break my leg, I cannot work, and so I must get it treated ; I must accept the price of the health provider. If I refuse their price and look for another one, not only will I find myself in an administrative hassle but also I will not be able to work for weeks, sometimes months, putting myself in great debt.
This is why regulations exist. You can't expect the free market to govern itself when it's making a profit off of sickness and disease.
so true
I would add two more reasons: 1) lack of discussion of costs at time of MD -patient decision making and 2) lack of transparency of costs per item at provider level. The later is improving.
+Chad Leach The difference is that you pretty much know how much food you demand. With healthcare, you have no idea what you need until you go to the doctor.
+Chad Leach Haha I see your point but alot of what your saying are supply side factors. The point I was trying to make is that it's very hard which health services I need before I go to the doctor. Do I need an MRI? Medication? Surgery? The doctor has a lot of power over patients because they basically dictate my 'demand' by ordering tests and prescribing drugs for me. Not to mention that I'm still paying them (or my insurance) in the end. Doctors both supply and demand. No other market that I can think of has that. At least I know when I'm hungry or that I want to buy a house and don't need a specialist (well except a real estate broker or a nutritionist but they are not strictly necessary for me to make decisions) but obviously it's alot more complex than that.
"Specialist opinions can help but that is no justification to force others to pay for your expenses, whether it be food, shelter or medical care." Not sure what you're getting at here.
+Chad Leach In same ways yes. I'm sure most doctors only want what's best for the patient but that shouldn't discount the fact that they can be motivated by financial incentives. There are studies out there that show that doctors change their behavior under different financial incentives. Regarding searching for an second opinion, in an ideal world I would agree. But in reality you have things like in-network and out-of-network doctors that complicates things. Interestingly, I read an article about how consumers view healthcare prices. It's pretty interesting
khn.org/news/prices-and-health-care-quality-many-consumers-dont-see-a-link/
I have enjoyed Adrianne and Jacob so much in this Crash Course series for my Business Economics class. Thanks Guys! Have a great summer.
Stunning that you mention bureaucrats as part of the iron triangle and not the insurance companies. Glad to see who your covering for..
Your videos are so helpful as I'm preparing for my Economics degree, thanks guys! :)
Another important consideration is the mixture of a for-profit system, that is also heavily subsidized. When the majority of healthcare dollars flowing through the system are from the government, the normal market forces that control costs in other industries, are essentially disabled. Add to that the tax incentives to employers to provide health insurance for employees, and that removes the consumer from the market even further.
I had a small heart attack when she said it was the end of the textbook Economics episodes.
I'm glad she's sticking around a little longer. Good luck Jacob, hope you don't need that 'sweet' healthcare though.
+Jochem Broodhuys Don't worry there should be at least 11 more episodes
The Canadian system is often cited by Americans advocating for single payer, but it is rarely portrayed with any nuance.
Single payer healthcare in Canada worked well when the baby boomers were entering th work force and contributed heavily into a system with few older users. Now it is becoming increasingly rationed and a parallel private system is slowly supplementing procedures like MRIs, x-rays and elective surgeries. Patients unable to afford access to the parallel private system who don't face imminent health issues languish for months or years on waiting lists. For instance, I was once put on a five year waiting list for a consultation with and an orthopaedic surgeon. I paid out of pocket and had a consultation with the same surgeon at his private clinic two weeks later.
The single payer system has its strengths as well but it does no one any good to give short shrift to its weaknesses.
In the US system basically, you get hit hard with high medical bills if you don't have great insurance so some people decided not get treated and die than put their family in terrible debt so a five-year waiting list doesn't seem that bad for something not urgent. Also, like you said you do have a choose to pay for private insurance.
Your expectations for adequate, timely care are quite low.
Eitan, I think you have a salient point. Thank you for sharing this!
@@SammiScoop_1 but you pay for gov healthcare because it's included in the taxes you pay
Jacob have fun in Canada, I hope you get some maple syrup and sell it to Adriene.
By the way, I used to be a banker.
Until I lost Interest.
BaDum Boosh
+David Hu Heyyyy!! you're not a Hu you sound like a good guy
+Isaac Liu Nice picture.
EatShitCh Because I am a nice guy
I can't believe this is Jacob's final CC episode. :( It was great learning from you! I can't wait to see what Adrienne has coming up though!
+Phoenix Thanks you rock!
+ACDCLeadership You too! I can't wait to take Economics next year. I feel so prepared and the series isn't even over yet! Is Adrienne going to be focusing more on the real-world applications now?
Yes, things that are super important, but not really in a textbook
Excellent synopsis of US healthcare system. As a healthcare advocate knowing the many complexities within our system, I appreciate your easy-to-understand presentation and will point others to it when they have questions.
Good luck on your textbook in Canada Jacob, you've been most informative.
We all know the candidate to solve that
+BRVvideos Yep, Trump will bring his business expertise to the US healthcare system. Plus wall building should be good exercise.
+drz (from my post further up, talking about Trump policies) I can beat his ridiculous $12billion (+upkeep and staffing costs) wall
with a few spades, a few pickaxes, some friends/lackeys and a bit of
time. El Chapo was dug out of a prison for goodness sake, the criminals
can dig into a maximum security prison, they can dig under one wall
(these tunnels already exist due to the US' border fence, which does
bugger all). Even if they can't dig under the wall, a thirty foot (which
was the last number I heard for it) wall would create a market for a
thirty one foot tall ladder. Or let's use that other famous wall, the
one in China, they will just bribe the border guards, as it will be
impossible to hire enough guards that will not take a bribe. Or they
will take the drugs around the wall on a boat, the wall is fucking
useless and if anything will inhibit the US because it will be so
expensive (Mexico would not pay for the wall, there is no way in hell he
could make them pay).
The illegal immigrants (because let's use the correct term rather than
the offensive one) pay taxes, but cannot use welfare programs, like
medicare, medicaid or social security. They also have a hard time
getting jobs due to them usually lacking documentation and the
systematic racism against foreigners that exists in border states that
the immigrants are likely to try and settle in (especially as the
Republicans have done their best to bankrupt some of the border states
out of ideology, looking at you Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and the
rest).
Trump's tax cuts will cost $12 trillion (Time) in ten years (using
today's economy as a basis, growth would make it cost even more). Far
more than he could cut out the government budget without eliminating
either the military or social security, or halving either, which would
see riots and mass protest either way
His 'business expertise' has seen him be bankrupted three times, have multiple failed product (Trump airline anyone? How about Trump steaks? Or Trump magazine?), he would be wealthier if he had invested his inheritance into the stock market, he is worth less now than when he inherited his father's fortune (when adjusted for inflation). He is a failure of a businessman and an utterly unlikeable man (which would make him awful at treaty negotiation).
Let's not forget that Trump has called for war crimes to be committed by
carpet bombing Iraq and Syria and "going after their [terrorists']
families" who are civilians.
+drz Best joke I have heard all day, thanks
Jack Lovejoy He is a billionaire so he is successful in business. Only healthy Mexicans could climb the wall so sick Mexicans will stay a burden on the Mexican healthcare system only. Plus his lovely wife Melania will be a great role model for female fitness.
+drz You can't judge success by money. His father was already rich, investors calculated if trump simply put money inherited from his parents in savings, today he would have the same amount of money that he has.
I've binged this Crash Course for hours.
I regret nothing.
In the MRI scene, they changed the cityscape outside the window, but the outlets inside the room were still European.
+Ian Buck nice catch!
nice one;)))
Nice summary. One minor quibble. The electronic medical records requirement is part of the HITECH act which was passed separately and prior to the ACA.
I'm so going to miss Mr. Clifford's sweet AC/DC belt buckle
I aggressively negotiate. $50 for leg MRI. $1000 Sinuplasty with three nights in a private hospital room. $2000 for ACL repair with 5 nights in a shared hospital room. Subsequent to both surgeries check-ups with the surgeon were free.
The flashing screen at 04:40 could be an epilepsy hazard? But hey, at least it's on a healthcare video!
screw u
Oh no. They're in on the triangle.
At the end of the video when they said: This is the end of our textbook economics... I almost panicked thinking this course ended. Pfhew there's going to be another one next week. I find these lessons very interesting and enjoyable.
Good job, Jacob! I hope you do well in Canada!
+HazaQuiroz Thanks
Jacob Clifford Yo why you not verified?
I live in Canada and have no family doctor. I am not able to see a specialist either. Many European countries have adopted a mixed system private and public and have the best results. Restricting billing is like controlling prices; the result is shortages, just like any other consumer or good.
Canadian Healthcare is excellent. I worked ER for years and must say...You will NEVER get a hospital bill and there are no co-pays.
Maaan the too early to tell on the Affordable Care Act comment... when this video came out I was on ACA. Two months after this video came out I had a stroke, at 30 (I'm in great health it was just a freak injury that caused it). I am so so grateful I was able to get proper healthcare and afford the follow up to make sure I didn't have another. No way I could have afforded the two hour ambulance ride from my local hospital to the specialist hospital without insurance or probably even with the employer insurance I have now. Just an anecdote but I may well owe my life to ACA.
I think healthcare is the single biggest argument for anyone debating economics/politics.
We don't have this on the UK A-Level Syllabus because we have the NHS. And so we don't view Healthcare as a Market
This is why I love my country (Britain) when it comes to healthcare, no worries about paying health care costs etc, albeit it's not as effective as we would like and the government are ruining the lives of junior doctors through contractual issues, but it's just one less burden for people to worry about.
But the Tories wants to privatized it.
+scorpioninpink partially, I don't think they have enough time now in this term because of their plans to essential privatised the education system but I HOPE TO FRICKING SANTA that education and health care is never privatised
+Jerome Hart Well, what they are doing to the teachers and the junior doctors is an indication that they are planning on it. Remember that they did that to the public railways and privatized it. We can only hope that before the election in 2020 that the damage done could be reversable.
+scorpioninpink yes definitely, I just wish that Milliband was in power rather than Cameron :(
The Rand study cited at about 5 minutes found that people did indeed cut their use of unneeded health care if they had deductibles and copays. Unfortunately they also cut their use of needed health care, particularly among the poor.
V E R Y G O O D TO E X C E L L E N T ! These CrashCourse series of videos are very good to excellent, and the basic economic concepts are explained most clearly. On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate these lessons 9 to 10. Thank you so much to both the lady and the gentleman for the videos!
Just get rid of all the regulations and establish a public option. That should be a bypartisan approach.
Jeremiah B True
But that would eliminate or reduce the profitability the private firms by competition, and thus saves too much money that deserves to be in pockets of billionaire insurance CEOs rather than "lazy" poor Americans!
Jeremiah B I just read into it it might be a good Idea I changed my mind I like the idea.
***** Obama put more regulations. If we could make a deal of repealing Obamacare and all of the other regulations, and at the same time replace medicaid and medicare with a public option...I think it would be possible to make that deal.
I don't think anyone wants to get rid of all regulations in health care. You need those to protect people from abusive practices.
I'd like to see an economists take on decriminalizing all drugs. Portugal has had great success with this. I'd like an economist to crunch the numbers for the US based on the reductions in incarceration, use, HIV and crime Portugal reports after over ten years of this policy. Here's a link to an economists paper on Portugal drug policy from 2012. www.iza.org/conference_files/riskonomics2012/portugal_p772.pdf
+Chris K www.economist.com/news/leaders/21692881-argument-legalisation-cannabis-has-been-won-now-difficult-bit-right
this article talks about that.
+Chris K Product is legal, therefore taxable and controllable, therefore the money is recycled into the community rather than going into a crime syndicate, therefore more money for government to spend and growth increased due to emergence of a new sector
unematrix
Your article talks about the legalization of pot. Two big differences here. Legalization means commercialization and that will lead to increased use. Sure you get to tax it and regulate it but you get more users. Portugal decriminalized all drugs. As long as you're caught with ten days worth or less you don't get put through the legal system, you get encouraged to get treatment (and fined if you refuse). This has lead to a decrease in use of all recreational drugs except booze and cigarettes and that's because those two are fully legal and sold commercially. Now booze nets the US over 9 billion a year in tax revenue but costs a butt load more in crime, accidents, lost time and health damage. Legalizing pot is just going to make a few people very rich while the majority pay for the damage.
+Jack Lovejoy Sorry I answered Unematrix in a reduced window and missed your comment. I think my reply there works equally well for your comment. Legalization of drugs is a false economy. You make money in taxes but the increase in consumption that commercialization brings costs the economy more than its worth. Pot may be an exception but I think the long term effects of THC rich varieties is going to be a lot higher than most think. More THC, less natural anti psychotic. Psychosis, not good, very expensive.
+Chris K if it's commercialized it's automatically decriminalized.
legalizing weed doesn't make a few people rich and most people don't have to pay for the damage. in the netherlands it's legal, there are no legal-drug barrons, and people don't have to pay for damages because there are no damages.
From the perspective of a person who has used healthcare in India and US, I noticed that the it's not about the number of tests, but the inflated cost of everything they have to sell. While quality healthcare is not cheap in India but the cost of say a CAT scan or MRI is way cheaper. Even though through I had insurance that covered most of it the 15% deductible for cat scan costed more in US compared to 100% for the same in India.
There's also hyper inflated costs for everything irrespective of the country. I knew of a person whose factory made a surgical instrument that he sold to the hospitals for Rs. 0.10/pc and the hospital charged the patients Rs. 100/pc. So yeah that's a little too much
I am glad you used the MRI in your explanation. $1,500 verses $500. This sounds like a great investment opportunity. I will set one up and charge only $1,000.
Let's see how easy it is to setup an MRI business, ready? Ok let's go.......FAIL, darn I am not allowed to compete with the protected firms that operate them.
I guess I will just open a Party Rental store and sell all the helium the MRI's need to operate instead.
+ImNotPotus Could you give me some sources to read up on that? I'd really appreciate it!
The quickest thing would be to read the entries at market-ticker.org/ about Healthcare. I recall a specific entry about MRI's there. The author has good articles about Healthcare. He gets a bit touchy about other issues but for a good explanation on US healthcare policy it is a credible place for facts.
Get a mixed system of public and private. Both can be beneficial and synergistic to each other.
+Louis Andrews Smith Germany has that. The German system isn't perfect but access is good, costs are low (though they still could and should be a lot lower) and as the video said we even get more tests and preventative care out of it.
Our legal system is another reason our costs are so high; malpractice insurance premiums for a doctor amounts to more money than most people make in total.
Also, we're the fattest country in the world, and much of the chronic disease we treat is related to that.
+blurglide We're actually second fattest. Mexico has a slightly higher percentage than us.
malpractice is a relatively small factor in the cost problem of US healthcare
In general our regulatory system contributes by allowing more pollution, less healthy food and older infrastructure than many developed countries. So we end up getting poisoned a little more than most europeans by just eating, drinking, and breathing. Car culture also hurts this. Many other high-tech urban cultures usually don't feel the need to drive as often. So while they're walking, biking, or taking a train, we're sitting on our asses in a car.
Jacob Collier Damn- we'll have to step up our game; We can't let Mexico beat us!
It's anecdotal, but an OB-GYN I used to date had about 1/4 to 1/3 of her income tied up in malpractice insurance, and her income was pretty big.
She should consider working on her bedside manner, I've read several statistics that suggest that friendliness has more to do with malpractice suits than quality.
If your OB-GYN is great, but unpleasant, and a radiologist they send you to makes a mistake. You don't track down the problem. You lump it on the doctor that you already don't like.
Side note....I have two uncles, each doctors. both about the same quality of doctor. but with very different bedside manners. The amount they seem to deal with malpractice suits and insurance, matches the statistics I've read. (which is to say that the less pleasant is the one who is much more likely to get sued.)
this episode
predict the tandem of wolverine and deadpool hahaha
1:18
Can you guys not do whatever border effect you did from about 5:45-5:50 in the future please, more distracting then helpful.
If everyone really wants the free market, we could at least go for the Swiss system of baseline coverage that it private but can't be sold at a profit and then allow supplemental coverage to be sold from there
I don’t think doctors are actually at fault in this process of negotiating. Doctors are caught up in this messed up system but they don’t even know how much these things will cost either. They just have to go along with it all.
Litigation! They forgot to mention part of the reason doctors charge so much is they have to pay for malpractice insurance because Americans are more likely to sue. This also encourages the doctors to be more cautious and order more (expensive) tests to avoid lawsuits.
It annoys me they talk specifically about the American, healthcare here and not the healthcare in general. Other countries are just counter examples. It's supposed to be crush course economy, not American Economy!
I don't think that most people overconsume health care. If anything, we have a problem in America of underconsuming health care. Unnecessary tests should be discouraged, but diagnostic tests are valuable and can save lives. Doctors should be the ones to decide which tests and procedures are necessary, and that should not be dictated by the patient's ability to pay. Wastefulness seems to be on the part of providers and insurers, not patients. Putting up barriers to care is not a good idea, because health care has positive externalities. You WANT people to consume it when they need it.
WE LOVE YOU JACOB!!!!!!!!!
Even when it is not an emergency, it is almost impossible to shop around for health care. Hospitals are under no requirements to give you a good faith cost estimate, and even when they are you usually have to request it, which goes against typical human behavior. Further even when you do your best to price out procedures. You can still be hit by suprise billing, even you you go to an in network hospital. For example when the anesthesiologist is out of network at an in network hospital.
Healthcare has no transparency, and there is no competition driving down costs and increasing quality. We can just look at LASIK to see what happens when prices are advertised and publicly known. Prices have gone down, while quality has gone up.
Something they didnt talk about here, that I really want to know is: Why does the same treatment cost almost 200% more in the US compared to countries with "free health care"?
+Agati
They do mention it, at 5:05 and 6:23. Did you watch the video, or just guess what the content was gonna be? :)
They didnt talk about it, they just gave us bullshit reasons why it might be higher.
The people who made this video knows that the US heathcare service sucks, but tries there best to make it look like the superior system.
+Agati well they covered the main points- they even alluded to the lack of free market competition between hospitals.
Governmental health care is one of the things I am thankful for in the UK. Shame the UK Govt are moving towards privatisation and dangerous underfunding of the NHS which means they don't have the resources to handle the demand.
We'll miss you Mr Clifford.
I would be interested to see you discuss the impact of Medicare on charges vs. actual costs. Medicare reimburses about 13 cents on a dollar which reduces the actual cost figures. Medicare though requires that third parties be charged the same as medicare, therefore insurance companies are billed at the same rate and negotiate a reduction of reimbursement while uninsured are stuck with the entire charge. Has not the influence of government (Medicare) actually created our healthcare crisis.
When she said the iron triangle, I believed her. Her voice is that soothing. Is that weird?
It's not weird. If she said the sky was green and the world was flat, I would be convinced.
I too was lulled into believing for a nanosecond, then my brain kicked in and I was questioning????, switch it up again & Oh now that makes sense! Adrienne don't play with my mind, I believe everything you say!!!
Original Medicare (parts A & B) doesn’t pay for all the healthcare of seniors. It only pays 80% and that doesn’t include all medical services, only some (and excludes all dental, vision and prescription). 20% of a medical bill is still a LOT for the average American senior (think about if its 20% of a hospital stay which could be 10’s of thousands of dollars!). And they still do have to pay the part b premium currently $144 every month. They’re not really getting a good deal.
Good bye, Jacob. Thanks for everything!
+L Galicki You are welcome
Just a note: no one argues that the US spends more on health care because of the moral hazard (the all-you-can-treat buffet). While there are some who (incorrectly) argue that the US overspends and it is true that the moral hazard does lead to overspending, basically all other industrialized countries would have this problem worse, because they have better financial coverage than the US (through insurance or public care).
live in the uk not a issue lol free healthcare via tax having a single unified system drive down costs.
lol so true Britain ftw
+Sam eldridge (Darkfox) until Osbourne privatises it
+Chad Leach
ummm how is that even a problem. you would just have more people paying for it. duhh
It's hardly going well though is it
The NHS, free at the point of use and will normally be worth ~£2K of your annual raxes if you are earning over £20K per year.
+03germas Less really, that 2k doesn't go just towards healthcare.
Your segways with the flashing black boarder surrounding a stock picture is really annoying. Might give someone a seizure
+avoqado89 agreed, that is a really weird thing to put in the video
Health care should be covered by government. In my country, the people have the right to choose either public or private healthcare. The public hospitals and clinic here are fairly cheap. For general treatment, emergency and chronic disease you just need to pay minimum RM 1.00 for treatment and medication. Senior citizen and children below 2 years old are free. If you're a government servant, all of your family members can have access to specialists and other expensive procedure for free.
I wish you'd get rid of the annoying flickering in the frames around stock photos? It adds nothing, in annoying, and might even cause epileptic seizures. I'll even make a deal with you: Get rid of it and I'll support the channel on Patreon.
+D Gary Grady
Agreed.
Nice belt! I enjoyed a two host CC. Thanks Jacob, good luck.
Dat Wolverine and Deadpool blip though!
I know this video is 7 years old but Imma miss Jacob :( I love both of them and their dynamic, it sucks that I'm almost done with this course! DFTBA!
FEEL THE BERN!!! You social-fearing Americans !!! *Laughs in Canadian goose*
Woo! I watched the entire series! Time to move onto the next crash course series
I miss my country in the review: Spain, where public owned+funded universal healthcare is under attack by conservative governments since years ago. Still, they can't challenge the facts: we have one of the most efficient and less expensive healthcare systems in the world.
But private interests and lobbyists keep pressing to make business out of a captive market.
And those are two points you don't consider: first, health is a basic need and a human right, one that NEVER should be left to the mercy of free market, because consumers aren't really free to choose wether they buy it or not, and it tends to become an oligopoly. And second, any corporation has the duty to provide profit to its shareholders, so any healthcare insurer will do so... but if healthcare is state runned and tax funded, you lift the weight of profit pursue.
You can still have private healthcare, we do have it here, because sometimes you don't want to wait for a treatment or you want additional services like private room in a hospital and so. But even if you're a homeless, you won't die of a curable disease. And that's one of the major achievements of our civilization and of Humanity itself!
P.S.: you also forgot other of the healthcare champions in the world: Cuba (check the stats). If an empoverished socialist island can do it, why can't the First World Power?
Healthcare is one of those things you really don't want provided to you by for profit companies. If it's for profit then insurers will try every trick not to pay (see Sicko for examples) and health care providers and pharmaceutical companies will do everything they can to make it as expensive as possible (including the iron triangle). Competition in the market place just doesn't seem to work. If Cuba can provide universal healthcare with cheap prescription medications, the USA has no excuse.
Remember, Breaking Bad happened because Walter White couldn't afford his medical bills and his family had no money.
Nice AC/DC belt buckle, Jacob.
Oh God, the video flashes a lot when the images with Vignettes come up, It creates such a seizure inducing effect @_@
JayZhang516 3 years later, are you okay?
I paid my insurance 80€/month, student insurance and nothing for my apicoectomy.
Now in the next month i will pay for 1 tooth implant (1300€) but i could pay nothing and make a "bridge", only the neccesary part (no real good esthatics, but it will work).
But you know, if i would live in the USA, this 2 things would made me bancrupt
*sounds of European laughter*
+Zuthal Soraniz
"Cherry HO old boy, I say..."
"Je ris aux gens stupides!"
"Sie wissen einfach nicht unser Stil. ha ha"
*Crackling intensifies as the Bern builds to a low roar*
OMG the lemonade intro is awesome!
You guys are failing to address the real reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. It is because the healthcare providers (the hospitals and doctors and pharmacies) know that the government will give them whatever they say the price is. Over 35% of Americans are on Medicaid or Medicare. Those are the people that will use it the most because they don't have to pay for it. So the providers will end up making much more keeping the prices double or triple the amount of what is resonable because the government won't haggle to bring the price down. Now the private health insurances have to be more expensive in order to stay in business because the healthcare providers (the hospitals and pharmacies) never lower their prices because they know that with combination of the patients that can afford expensive insurance and the constant flow of socialized health insurance (Medicare/Medicaid) they will make more of a profit continuing to have them overpay. The solution would be to defund Medicare and Medicaid. Stop the constant flow of taxpayer dollars to the healthcare providers, and the free market will naturally bring down the prices. Competition would kick in and other health care businesses would be created, health insurance would go way down, and everyone would end up winning.
what do you think is better the NHS or the american healthcare system?
Anyone else getting funky artifacts in the video?
I know most of your audience is American/European, but I think it's worth noting that in (my country) the Philippines, sometimes, hospitals *will* deny treatment, even in emergencies to people with no insurance or cash at hand. Many impoverished Filipinos are detained in hospitals for days after treatment if they can't pay.
God bless Philippines. Duterte and Mirriam is your very last hope. :D
I don't feel much confidence in someone called the "Punisher of the South". And Mirriam has cancer.
Then have faith in daan matuweeds sequence lol
universal single-payer is cheaper. Evidence: every developed state that isn't the USA.
you did get one thing right in that video the iron triangle that is were 80% of the proplem is support represent.us
sigh... I miss John Green.
Is it true that in Europe they cant take you to the Hospital unless they can stabilize you in the field? What happens when you have an injury that needs to be treated in the hospital, but they cant get you stable enough to take you there? If I got into a car accident, and twisted my heart, and they cant get a stable pulse from me what do they do? Open heart surgery at the scene?
The fact that Obama didn't go full NHS (which still allows the rich to go privately too!) is disappointing.
Yeah, maybe, but just a reform like the Affordable Care Act makes the 2010 midterms the worst for the democratic party in a century, imagine if you do full socialized medicine that year.
Medical school in the US cost two or three times as much as in other countries so the doctors have to pass on that cost to pay off their bills.
If healthcare is a right and not a privledge, is it not the job of a government to protect that right?
+Maximilian Bloom If you consider the right as a protection against a corrupt government becoming a fascist regime (which is why I think it's in the constitution) then yeah, maybe the government should pay to arm well organized militia groups. Probably at the state level though. The governments only job is to protect its citizens. I think universal healthcare qualifies and maybe the AR-15s too.
+Chris K There's a serious problem with creating and interpreting rights this way. Your rights are things that are yours from birth and do not cost money to exercise. Even if there were no government, you have a right to arm yourself and protect your own rights. If someone tries to deny you your rights, you have a justification to defend them.
Things like AR-15s and healthcare can't be rights. Those things require the labor of others, so having a right to their labor is a very serious ethical failure. You don't have a right to those things because what do you do if the only doctor in town wants to leave? How do you defend your right to healthcare? Do you force him to stay? What if no one can pay? Does he have no right to refuse healthcare? What if nobody pays because it's their right?
You cannot have a right to the labor of other people.
+New American Fishkeeper Well, healthcare may or may not be a right, but should that make that healthcare free? Just because you have the right to bear arms does that mean you should get a free fire arm, or if you have the the freedom of press does that mean you don't have to pay the money to get your ideas out there, or face the consequenses for whatever garbage you have to share? My answer to all this would be no. In America, you will be treated in the case of an emergency, and there are many non-profit organizations that will help those in serious need, but you don't get free all you can access healthcare.
+grantcivyt I have a framed poster of the universal declaration of human rights. Article 25 states clearly that everyone has the right to medical and many other things that cost money regardless of their state of employment, health, age, disability, widowhood or any other "lack of livelihood" circumstance beyond their control. Article 26 says education should be free. Here's a link to the English language version. www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/Language.aspx?LangID=eng
+Jacob Collier In some cases (including medical) if you can't afford it, yes. Here is a link to the English language version of the universal declaration of human rights. www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/Language.aspx?LangID=eng
@CrashCourse I can't find the economics subject under playlists on your home page. I have to google it separately to find it. Just a friendly notification keep up the great work!!!!
Bernie Sanders has entered the chat.
Where can I find more information about this topic? Especially healthcare in the USA? Please help me out.
I see that acdc belt.
If Free Healthcare is so good, why is the VA so horrible? Personally, I think healthcare should be privatized or left up to the states. I heard Vermont has a state wide free health care system. I don't wanna pay more in taxes for someone elses health care.
+chaosXP3RT
It would be so much cheaper, if they break up the medical license monopoly. if people are evaluating each individual line items in the medical cost, they would be completely shock to find an overwhelming amount of waste that is protected by governmental rules.