Hacker News Reader

Comment by upbeat_general | Hacker News Reader

Except that it’s their job to do so. It’s relatively trivial to check what a police officer is doing if the department cares.

Doctors can be sued for malpractice yet they still perform operations.

View on HN

But cost of healthcare is astronomical in part because malpractice insurance is expensive, because too many people abuse it.

If we increase (already high) risk of being a cop, then we will have to be ready to pay 200k-300k salaries.

What about the city/county where a few issues causes insurance to not want to touch the place? All of a sudden they can't hire enough police and this causes social issues.

> But cost of healthcare is astronomical in part because malpractice insurance is expensive, because too many people abuse it.

You pulled the “trigger a European” card. This is not why the US healthcare is astronomically high. The reason is: practically no meaningful regulation and thus free roaming oligopolies of a few providers with insane billing practices (which hospitals are covered, etc.). And much more...

And some of the meaningful regulation drastically increases costs. Mostly for good reasons.

Why would that be? In countries with universal health care (which would be pretty high up on the regulation scale) costs for medical procedures are significantly lower. [0] Americans have to understand that they are drastically overpaying for almost everything medical including drugs. There is no way around it.

[0]: https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/03/comparing-health-ca...

Oh yes, but it's pretty different when you're regulating interactions between complex network of private entities, and just telling state health fun to cover some procedure.

It's unfortunately not required that they do their jobs. This is established case law - in Castle Rock vs Gonzales.

Sure they may not be legally obligated but it's still their job. People perform non-governmental dangerous jobs without being legally obligated to do so.

The department can still fire an officer (assuming no union intervention) for failing to do their job, even if they can't be sued.

Why would you assume no union intervention?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com