Medicare might not technically be a monopsony, but it acts like one, and all the rest of us working folks end up paying the gap that rounds out the rest of the costs.
We have a few generations that have had easy lives, where they had easy access to homes, to higher education, to wealth building, and decided to cut off access to the same as soon as they got it, while still living off the labor of current working people that are not even allowed to build new apartments next to these wealthy people while they pay for all their health care.
The economy is a massive multiple player rpg with a point system economy that's fixed by federal and state laws, and it's been rigged both at the health care level and at every level to extract wealth for those that had it easy in the past.
That's partly because we have a doctor shortage here (medical schools collude to limit the number of new doctors created each year).
Another part of the problem is the bloated administrative bureaucracy of hospitals in the US, we well as the fact that you aren't allowed to build a new hospital (and yes, this is actually true) unless you can prove that a hospital is needed in a particular community.
With no competitive market for healthcare providers, nor a competitive market for places where they work, why shouldn't they extract as much as they can from the rest of us?
They get away with it, too, because "medical doctor" is one of the highest trusted and most reputable professions. It's badthink to discuss these things in polite company.
Until we fix those things, it simply doesn't matter how the insurance/payment system works. Every time I hear that we need to get rid of private insurers, nobody can seem to explain how doing that will save more than 10-15% despite the fact that insurance companies have a statutorily-limited profit margin.
I agree that certificate of need laws should be repealed to increase competition between healthcare facilities. That only impacts some states, not the whole country.
https://nashp.org/state-tracker/50-state-scan-of-state-certi...
Odd how the most popular programs in the US, social security + medicare, are the ones with zero means testing.
Maybe let's not blame one of the few only noble professions left in our greed fueled world.
Blame the hospital administrators or pharmaceutical reps before you start blaming doctors.
Doubt.
> That's partly because we have a doctor shortage here (medical schools collude to limit the number of new doctors created each year).
Now explain this trend[1].
Physician pay depends on specialty, but it can range from the low $100kish mark for pediatricians to $500-750k for certain kinds of surgeons. Family medicine tends to be around $200k. However, this amount ranges vastly by market and top pay often goes to those willing to work in more rural hospitals because no one wants to. For example, pay in NYC for physicians is appalling low compared to the rest of the U.S. market. In addition, certain systems have hard caps. For example, the VA hospitals cap physician pay inclusive of bonus at $400k. This is documented and you can in fact just look up a random doc at the VA with one of the many federal pay search tools.
While some doctors can make more, it typically because they own a practice and that increased pay comes from good old fashioned capitalism. Meaning, they tax the amount their nurses, NPs, medical assistants, etc. make just like all businesses make money per head on their employees. Whether you believe this is right or wrong is up to you. However, this is not any different that someone who runs, for example, a yard care business. More accurate pay can be found by those who work directly for large hospitals.
Next, the cost of medical education in the United States is vastly higher than other countries. Right now, medical school will cost you somewhere from $400-600k. This is in addition to whatever debt accrued during undergraduate. Further, medical school applications are highly competitive, so students often accrue additional debt by completing a masters in something like public health prior to entry to medical school. This means that someone may have upwards of $750k of debt when they finish medical school, but they still have somewhere between 3-10 years of residency and fellowship before they make attending money. During this time, the debt accrues interest and balloons.
Now, once you become an attending, you're still not good and expenses are vast. Shift work can vary from something like 7 12-hour shifts in a row for intensivists to 14 shifts in a row for hospitalists. Note, just because it says its a 12-hour shift doesn't mean you work 12 hours. They still need to chart and bill and if it's busy, that may be another few hours after the shift is over. In some remote clinics, an ER physican may work 7 24-hour shifts in a row. That may sound absurd and unsafe and it likely is, but it's the reality of the work. If someone is working that schedule, they have increased expenses to just, frankly, live. On the low end, it's very difficult to cook in that environment, so you have to buy a lot of premade food. On a more expensive end, having children on this schedule is extremely difficult. You either require a spouse that doesn't work or you need something like a night nanny. If you're working 12 hour shifts, you must sleep at night and you can't be up to take care of a baby otherwise you run the risk of killing someone the next day. Unless you're paying someone under the table, current nanny rates in large markets are about $20-25/hour. Insurance rates are also high. I don't mean malpractice either. Generally speaking, one needs to carry disability insurance because if one gets into a car accident and breaks their magic hands, there's no way to pay back that debt otherwise. These policies are thousands a year. That's just the start. They pay a large amount of money to buy their time back because they don't have it.
Next, there's a myth about limiting residency slots in order to increase pay, at least recently. I will not defend the AMA and some of they took, especially in the 1990s. Here's the 2025 residency match data:
https://www.nrmp.org/match-data/2025/05/results-and-data-202...
The number of offered and filled slots is on page 2 (or 13 depending on how you count). Some specialties filled all of their slots. Where the U.S. vastly lacks is pediatricians, family medicine, internal medicine (who can work like family medicine if need be.) Pediatricians had 147 unfilled slots. Family medicine had 805 unfilled spots. Internal medicine had 357 unfilled spots. These spots can be filled by people who graduated from U.S. medical schools, island medical schools, Mexican medical schools, or a vast array of other foreign medical schools. However, they're not filled because they don't have the applicants. That's not medical school collusion. That's the hard reality that medical school is extremely expensive and the training is extremely long.
Now, how do other countries handle things? One, their medical school is not as crushingly expensive. Two, places like Europe cap the number of hours a physican can work. If you want to pay American physicians less, you'd need to blow out their medical school debt, reduce their hours, and offer better benefits. Until then, no, really, they're not overpaid.
If you want to start pointing fingers, try the vertical integration of insurance companies, pharmacy benefit managers, and hospitals. I don't have the numbers readily available, so I'll stop here. But, really, it's not the docs.
State Medicaid and Workers Compensation funds were already insolvent before the 2024 election, and as such most states lack the fiscal overhead needed to fully support a fully funded single payer program today.
It would end up the same way the NHS has in the UK.
Vast swathes of the US are deeply fiscally troubled due to the impact of the COVID pandemic, and if that is not solved then we cannot even start to contemplate single payer.
This should not be used to justify austerity which is not the answer and does more harm than good, but points out that a reckoning is needed. From my personal experience dealing with the current crop of state and local politicos, it's looking dicey in portions of the US.
Edit: can't reply
> Gong single payer is a drastic drop in the cost of healthcare as a percentage of GDP. There’s no fiscal advantage to the current system whatsoever
Yes. But you need capital to build an insurance fund. And a large portion of that is going to service existing liabilities.
The core issue is it suddenly destroys a large number of companies and removes millions of unnecessary jobs from the economy. That’s a great deal of wealth and a great number of voters who don’t want you to save hundreds per month by making them redundant.
I'm also skeptical about putting the federal government in charge of establishing standards of care. We already see that some medical conditions have been heavily politicized by certain patient interest groups. And while evidence-based medicine is great, we still have nowhere near enough data to establish clear clinical practice guidelines for medically complex patients.
Utilities have had complete regulatory capture of most states' Public Utilities Commissions. It's blatant and obvious in places like Arizona that have open corruption in their elections and commission decisions. But in places like California it's far more hidden: the massive increase in cost of utilities is mostly from increased costs for the transmission and distribution grid, but CPUC has basically zero information for the public to understand why they keep on handing over more money to the big utilities. There definitely seems to be massive corruption but where is it and what is the actual mechanism? It's so well hidden and sophisticated that if there is corruption nobody understands what the F is going on.
How do you replace a state-sponsored monopoly like a utility into something competitive? I don't know, when I learned econ 101 utilities were given as the example of a "natural" monopoly. But clearly that's not working out... maybe it just needs to be "state" rather than "state sponsored monopoly." The only other state sponsored monopoly we really have is the state itself. What does the public gain by allowing monopoly utilities that giving away the public's money to investors? The incentives are all off.
Between ghost networks, death panels that deny you treatment, and the nature of deductibles, you have no fucking idea what you're buying, and whether or not you're getting ripped off.
This hits TFA's culprits, rising insurance and utilities costs. They're just the symptoms, not the source.
[0] - https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/docs/trustFundSolvReport2025...
Until the early 2000s, things were built to last, solid build, simple.
Now, even fridge has AI in it like what the actual f!!! Cars are tablets on wheels, Tesla and others, rather than just being cars.
And this weird desire to please modern audience costing movies, products, videos games billions of dollars, closing studios thousands of jobs lost unable to make the investment back as consequences and yet, companies seem to do not read the room.
Narrow banking now.
This is something the Federal Reserve can actually fix. Give every single US person (I am not a lawyer and I can't define what counts as a US person) a fee-free bank account with the Federal Reserve. Cut out the middle men of commercial banks. I think that alone will go a long way to drive down business costs.
Never, ever going to happen.
What you said, fee free banking + KYC + free instant transacting is something we definitely need, even if it hurts JP Morgan Chase a little bit.
