The answer is simple…
because we treat it as a business, a commodity subject to competition based on price, quality and demand.
It isn’t any of those things.
Consumers (patients) don’t voluntarily create demand, they have no ability to evaluate quality – to some extent that is limited for anyone – and they are not (nor should they) going to shop for care based on price.
The healthcare system is more like a public utility.
It is essential to everyone, multiple providers can be counter productive to the delivery of services and the cost needs to be monitored with profits driven by efficiency and in this case by quality.
Every element of the healthcare system deserves fair and adequate compensation from the orderly to the hospital executive, nurses, physicians and PAs, technicians, etc.
What we need to decide is how to do that on a basis fair to those who pay the bills directly or through insurance premiums or taxes.
How can we support a system where five people having the same procedure, in the same place at the same time, by the same health care provider are charged differently and providers paid vastly different amounts?
How can hospitals advertise the latest and best care and results than the hospital down the street?
Why do we allow prescription drugs to be advertised thereby creating demand, higher costs and pressure on the health care system?
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
Some of the biggest and best companies tried and couldn’t figure out healthcare:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haven_Healthcare
LikeLike
I designed and managed employer health benefit plans for nearly fifty years. We tried every new idea, every new concept, HMOs, HDHP, choice FSAs – everything. Nothing controlled costs and eventually we and now all employers simple shift costs via higher deductibles and higher premium sharing. That is no solution. Part of the private sector problem is that it picks up the costs not paid by Medicare and Medicaid because of low fee schedules. That’s why one uniform fee schedule if important.
LikeLike
The fantastic advances in medicine that we enjoy are largely developed in the US, the center of capitalism. There’s a lot of money to made in healthcare, and that’s what drives research and development. Having the government trying to manage the money flow for the sake of equity instead of letting market forces do it will stagnate development.
LikeLike
Nobody says companies can’t develop new technology for profit. Medicare doesn’t manage any of that. We can keep making all the excuses we want and get no where.
LikeLike
good points made by brother Quinn but socialized it would be–sometimes it is worthwhile to see how other countries handle this–Germany and Switzerland might prove to be good models–no doubt something needs to be done
LikeLike
Is Medicare socialized medicine?
LikeLike
once we did “medicare for all” it most likely would evolve into what I call socialized medicine–you are right about the crazy quilt we now have–and we know medicare as severe financial issues–it is not as simplistic as “medicare for all” nor should we overlook the issues you raise.
LikeLike
Medicare for all (not the Sen Sanders version) is a viable place to start along with the changes I mention and others. The system is in place despite problems, it works.i would like to see a start with a gradual transition such as lower eligibility age gradually and enroll newborns in the future.
LikeLike
Is Medicare socialized medicine? We would have to define terms and agree on the definitions in order to not talk past each other and that is a big hurdle in and of itself. I don’t have any expectations that all the barriers can be overcome to offer a comprehensive system. The costs of getting an adequate uniform delivery of care nationwide is beyond our budget. I just don’t see it.
LikeLike
no, clearly it is not. It is a social insurance system where premiums are socialized for some of the population (Part A) less so for Part B and D – where only a minority shoulder the majority of the cost. If all providers were all working for the government, where the government decided their income, that would be socialized medicine. The gov’t Doesn’t set provider income for those who are in a Medicare Advantage plan, and traditional Medicare is still fee for service.
LikeLike
We, naive and misinformed as we are, illogically oppose what change. There are as many changes proposed as there are stakeholders out there. The consumer can only do as they are told.
LikeLike
Patients/consumers can support changes that meet the criteria for universal coverage, a universal payment system and universal cost management and be willing to pay for what they want on an equitable basis. No it’s not socialized medicine or government provided healthcare, it’s just an organized system that doesn’t unfairly shift costs to this group or that. Everyone in the same risk pool, everyone paying according to their means. Serious issues to deal with, sure, long transition, yup, but we have to start somewhere?
LikeLike
If the government manages health care it absolutely is socialized medicine. There may be a way to accomplish this but please make no mistake about it, it is socialize medicine!
LikeLike
Can you give an example of some other organized system that we have in this country that meets some criteria you have laid out? What would it be akin to? What could I look to as an example?
LikeLike