>But they can - and will - find other procedures. Not making enough money from that doctor's visit? Well, we better do some tests, then, just to be sure there's no lurking problem. Oh, there was a spot on that X-ray - more tests. We didn't find anything serious, but there was a benign growth that you probably should get taken care of. Don't worry, it's a quick procedure, it could potentially be done as an outpatient but you might want to make it an overnight hospital stay just to be sure. Shit, you contracted an infection in the hospital? Gotta extend that stay until you're better.

Right. This is exactly what we want (save the MRSA). The problem with the American healthcare system isn't just that it's expensive; it's expensive and still has worse outcomes than in other industrialized countries. Part of the reason for that is that patients cut off their care for financial reasons, and not because they've reached a satisfactory conclusion about their state of health.

The way you describe the mindset isn't a function of Medicare per se, but of the fact that there's still a profit motive involved, even when receiving Medicare funding, in a system that is largely privately-funded. Maybe releasing that source of pressure and competition and scarcity will change the way people on both sides of the doctor-patient relationship approach their care.

This sounds like an ignorant view of getting proper healthcare.

There are more things to check because older people have more medical problems, therefore more tests, more treatments, etc.

We would have to see what would happen if you gave a 25 year old medicare in this country, I doubt it would be the same experience that an elderly person would have.

There is a very strong correlation between which additional tests are requested and what the hospital can charge under Medicare reimbursement codes. (My mother's boyfriend is a former doctor, and intimately familiar with the health-care system from the other side of the table.) Both of them are also in fairly good health (my mom has no pre-existing conditions, her boyfriend has some issues with his back but nothing unexpected for an 80-year-old), and were definitely not treated like this while on private health insurance.

What do you think would be different between 25-year-olds and elderly people? The incentives are the same in both cases, produced by the billing code.

And yet for all that, Medicare is vastly cheaper per capita than private healthcare. You get more service for less money? Sign me up.

25 year olds have fewer health problems that need treatment than 80 year olds.

My point is that people are being treated for health problems that are not problems because the provider can then bill Medicare for it. That's not going to go away because there are fewer health problems; the whole issue is that it doesn't matter if there are health problems, the provider will find or create some that they can bill for.

Oh, okay. I can't speak to that specifically, that seems like an unethical healthcare provider if they're genuinely performing unnecessary procedures. They should probably be reported to the state medical board.

I think there is also a matter of what you view as 'necessary medical care'. Preventative medicine is vastly cheaper (and more effective) than reactive procedures to fix things that have become serious issues.

(It makes practical sense, right? You properly maintain your roof so it doesn't leak, that's cheaper than fixing the damage caused by the leaking roof).

This is particularly true with older people who have higher incidence of cancer, heart disease and major organ problems.

So yeah, they may send you for a battery of tests that they can charge the state for, but it might be preventing a much more expensive (and traumatic/painful) surgery down the line.

But people seem to focus on the collective bargaining and price aspect of everyone having proper healthcare, which is weird because it shouldn't be about that, it should be about increasing the efficiency of the overall system and quality of life of the people involved.

You're not wrong they are deeper problems, but you say these things as if M4A would cause them when they are happening now. I was recently asked by a dentist if I wanted a special kind of cleaning. She then nervously admitted that it wasn't necessary, but she "wanted to make sure." M4A won't fix all the problems, but it would definitely make things better, and hopefully, lead to people demanding more.

So your conclusion is that we shouldn’t fix the part that we can fix because people will still be assholes?