Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
so i decided before making pasta to see a bdg video. watching it gave me an absolute headache of a void, which i'll only be able to cover with some distracting cartoons & the delicious pasta imma make in a moment.
let's go (and i have a point to make)
here's the thing. i'm quite entrenched in regards to structural analyses of the american healthcare system, specifically in regards to its expense, inefficiency, byzantine bureaucracy, and obfuscation. at least i understand the issues on an abstract level. comparative analyses usually provide real empirical facts (costs, services) as to the horrors of american healthcare compared to universal healthcare/single payer/german model/whatever. but they rarely go into the concrete minutiae of the insurance system. i am in this case, because of efficiency, far for public healthcare over the hellscape that's states healthcare.
however, again, when it comes to the minutiae of the system, dealing with the details of navigating insurance; understanding ideas like deductibles, out-of-pocket, qle's, and so on... my eyes have always glazed over. isn't this a black spot irt what i believe when it comes to healthcare? i usually appeal to understanding & dealing with the concrete, and here i'm tied in comparative papers of modeled abstractions rather than understanding the minutiae of the system. shouldn't i intricately learn how the system works, its material procedures, before criticizing it?
so ok. i watched an upbeat (simultaneously fever dreamscape) rundown of the system. i got an overview of it. (yea yea it's bdg, but i've previously seen & read drier rundowns elsewhere.) now, on the other side of watching... i still have no clue about the minutiae of it. and i'm not going to remember it, as i was unable to before. my brain will find it too difficult, and i'm more concerned with my pasta.
so thread title. wth is a copay. i learned now that a copay is a cost you always pay out of pocket even if insured. it maxes out towards your out-of-pocket maximum, but not your deductible. and i'm not going to remember it. (and if i've still misunderstood, that's better for my point -)
thesis. let's for the sake of argument presume there's an option for everyone in the united states to get healthcare that's cheaper than & as efficient as the tax-funded stuff people do elsewhere. we'll call it a tailored service. maybe it's even stellar in comparison to the public option. and when discussing healthcare, sometimes people appeal to the tailored service. it's private choice of services, the shrewd individual at its finest. the appeal is to the concrete world of being; statistics don't necessarily matter to the individual. if you manage to understand & deal with the concrete, you'll identify the superior option.
however, i don't see that as relevant at all. it all comes down to obfuscation, which bdg of course talks about. the thing is that the language and simultaneous segmentation+overlapping of options makes the concrete so adverse that the system necessiates abstraction. the services themselves refuse to let me deal with them concretely.
so my point is, i don't have to know what a copay is. because they refuse to make it parseable. understanding what good a copay can do for you is completely irrelevant as to the viability of the system; the tailored service is impractical and bad.
(sidenote: it's not because i'm a dirty foreigner; american healthcare is an absolute jargon of nonsense, obviously full with traps even for the americans themselves, where every shred of the system refers to something else as a schrödinger's option; simultaneously a hindrance or an option until observed; and the available services themselves opaque with tiered options and asterisks at every damn corner of the document. avalanches of acronyms ptsdbbq.)
now imma make pasta. and the americans parsing this don't have that luxury.
thread topics/discussion: is my stance a fair one to have, and would it be good to do away with the current system and replace it with eg a german or nordic model
let's go (and i have a point to make)
here's the thing. i'm quite entrenched in regards to structural analyses of the american healthcare system, specifically in regards to its expense, inefficiency, byzantine bureaucracy, and obfuscation. at least i understand the issues on an abstract level. comparative analyses usually provide real empirical facts (costs, services) as to the horrors of american healthcare compared to universal healthcare/single payer/german model/whatever. but they rarely go into the concrete minutiae of the insurance system. i am in this case, because of efficiency, far for public healthcare over the hellscape that's states healthcare.
however, again, when it comes to the minutiae of the system, dealing with the details of navigating insurance; understanding ideas like deductibles, out-of-pocket, qle's, and so on... my eyes have always glazed over. isn't this a black spot irt what i believe when it comes to healthcare? i usually appeal to understanding & dealing with the concrete, and here i'm tied in comparative papers of modeled abstractions rather than understanding the minutiae of the system. shouldn't i intricately learn how the system works, its material procedures, before criticizing it?
so ok. i watched an upbeat (simultaneously fever dreamscape) rundown of the system. i got an overview of it. (yea yea it's bdg, but i've previously seen & read drier rundowns elsewhere.) now, on the other side of watching... i still have no clue about the minutiae of it. and i'm not going to remember it, as i was unable to before. my brain will find it too difficult, and i'm more concerned with my pasta.
so thread title. wth is a copay. i learned now that a copay is a cost you always pay out of pocket even if insured. it maxes out towards your out-of-pocket maximum, but not your deductible. and i'm not going to remember it. (and if i've still misunderstood, that's better for my point -)
thesis. let's for the sake of argument presume there's an option for everyone in the united states to get healthcare that's cheaper than & as efficient as the tax-funded stuff people do elsewhere. we'll call it a tailored service. maybe it's even stellar in comparison to the public option. and when discussing healthcare, sometimes people appeal to the tailored service. it's private choice of services, the shrewd individual at its finest. the appeal is to the concrete world of being; statistics don't necessarily matter to the individual. if you manage to understand & deal with the concrete, you'll identify the superior option.
however, i don't see that as relevant at all. it all comes down to obfuscation, which bdg of course talks about. the thing is that the language and simultaneous segmentation+overlapping of options makes the concrete so adverse that the system necessiates abstraction. the services themselves refuse to let me deal with them concretely.
so my point is, i don't have to know what a copay is. because they refuse to make it parseable. understanding what good a copay can do for you is completely irrelevant as to the viability of the system; the tailored service is impractical and bad.
(sidenote: it's not because i'm a dirty foreigner; american healthcare is an absolute jargon of nonsense, obviously full with traps even for the americans themselves, where every shred of the system refers to something else as a schrödinger's option; simultaneously a hindrance or an option until observed; and the available services themselves opaque with tiered options and asterisks at every damn corner of the document. avalanches of acronyms ptsdbbq.)
now imma make pasta. and the americans parsing this don't have that luxury.
thread topics/discussion: is my stance a fair one to have, and would it be good to do away with the current system and replace it with eg a german or nordic model
Last edited: