• 3abas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    8 days ago

    These people live in high cost care facilities on the taxpayer’s dime for 10-20 years?

    First, yes. Presumably they worked a full life and contributed to the taxes, it’s their dime. Second, these people?

    They cost 10-20K a month, or 120-200K a year

    No they don’t. That’s what they cost in the exploitative private for profit system.

    The demand for healthcare resources is simple vast out supplies care that is available, especially as the population ages. Hence in ‘affordable’ healthcare systems you are still undeserved and it’s still expensive.

    That’s true, but not an issue of cost. It results in expensive private care, but the issue itself is the lack is labor, not that each patient costs $20k/month.

    That’s compiled by the fact healthcare workers, while in demand, and often getting good pay, burn out rapidly due to the demands of the job.

    That’s another real problem, but it’s again irrelevant. It exists regardless of how socialized or privatized the system is…

    Now we can keep people alive on machines for decades

    Is that what you think happens in elderly care? Every patient receives terminal care for decades?

    There are only so many beds, and so many staff that can work in these facilities.

    You can fix that by better planning your economy, encourage students to pursue nursing and guarantee them jobs when they graduate.

    Whatever the case, there are loads of “alternatives” to dropping them off at homeless shelters we can explore. Holy moly.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      31
      ·
      8 days ago

      You realize the laborers in these facilities don’t make very good pay, right? If they want better pay, that increases costs.

      • 3abas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        8 days ago

        If we eliminate the profit margin and the layers of office jobs needed to work through complex insurance obstacles and to come up with great ideas like dropping patients off at homeless shelters when their insurance doesn’t pay, we can pay the remaining staff doing meaningful labor more.

        If the CEO is buying yachts and mansions, there is no luck of money to pay staff, there’s lack of intent.

        • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          8 days ago

          OK, so why do those same issues persists in nationalized systems then? Or do they still suffer from the ‘profit motive’?

          Your argument seems to hinge on the idea that it’s a matter of emotion or will, rather than physical and economic resources.

          You can pay them more, but that increases costs. The single biggest cost is the labor staffing.

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 days ago

            They don’t, not even close to the level of dumping residents off at homeless shelters. Hell all the issues I have seen are mostly due to a lack of funding and having a “hybrid” system (and can you guess that the for profit side is the issue?).

            And at least here the jobs at most elder care pay well. Lots of little towns have the “lodge” as the main employer.