You probably meant “No bank would give them a real estate loan for 10 years”. Which is a penalty, but it’s not the one you wrote, nor is it necessarily much of one. Plenty of people do just fine without ever owning real estate.
The problem is a lack of accountability. A salary cap doesn’t change that, there are plenty of other ways to waste money. The idea is well intentioned but pointless.
Not really.
By “healthcare administrator”, does the OP mean “CEOs and top executives of health insurance companies”?
Because they do make a shitload of cash. At Wellpoint, for example, top executives received pay increases of up to 75% in 2009.
Oh?
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/37982567/ns/health-health_care/t/docs-blame-lawsuit-fears-overtesting/
Ha. No offense but your level of ignorance is unbelievable. Do you seriously actually think that you received a service for which you did not pay? The hospital billed your insurance company probably for dozens and dozens of procedures at a total cost of three times higher than every other industrialized nation on earth, and the insurance company in turn billed your employer, and your employer in turn pays you less than otherwise possible to make up the difference. Do you seriously not understand how this works? I was under the impression that every Highschool taught economics in the 10th or 11th grade.
I’m guessing Ken001 doesn’t live in the US, since here almost all doctors visits involve some sort of co-pay. Sure the money comes from somewhere, but in many places you pay the doctor in the same sense as you pay the cop who comes to help when you have a car accident.
BTW, you don’t seem to understand the system either, because the insurance company does not bill the employer on a per-case basis. The employer’s payment to the insurance company is the same whether you have no claims or a dozen claims.
One approach might be to compare health-care expenditure with similar countries like Canada and Australia, to see where per-capita expenditure is significantly higher in the U.S. My guess is that if you did that, you’d find the biggest differences in the total cost are caused by:
(1) health insurance expenditure, caused by higher profits for the health-insurance companies and higher expenditure on claim checking;
(2) higher costs of pharmaceuticals in the U.S., since prices are more controlled by governments outside the U.S.;
(3) higher salaries for physicians and surgeons, which in turn is partly caused by
(4) higher costs of medical education.
I don’t think that administrator salaries would contribute a significant amount, even if they are too high.
Ken001 posts from New Zealand, so would not necessarily be aware of any of that, in the US system.
In places like NZ, Canada and the UK, you go to the hospital, you get treated, and you don’t worry about bills or insurance.
Although they do have health-care administrators in NZ, and Ken001 helps to pay their salaries – but indirectly, through general taxation like income tax and GST.
Ok so he’s not participatory to the delights that is the US healthcare system, I incorrectly thought we were all taking about it here exclusively. And my post wasn’t meant to say that the insurance company bills their customer companies procedure by procedure, but in fact insurance companies do adjust the amount paid yearly by the customer companies, and furthermore a lot of companies are “self-insured” and utilize the insurance infrastructure only as a service provided by the insurance.
Haha! Big hospital administrators get paid WAY more than a majority of the physicians on staff at their hospital.
And in NHS the amount the taxpayers pay depends to some extend on usage. But what each person pays is smoothed out and depends in some part on the ability to pay. My daughter lives in Germany, and I believe that she doesn’t have to pay the provider for a visit - though she does pay for insurance - a laughably small amount compared to here though.