| |
| ▲ | Ferret7446 3 months ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm pretty sure medical procedures cost a lot more than an iPhone, no matter how cheaply you're sourcing all of your materials and labor. | |
| ▲ | gruez 3 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why compare to Apple, when the healthcare is arguably more complex and expensive? | | |
| ▲ | lordnacho 3 months ago | parent | next [-] | | They are just other things people commonly spend money on | |
| ▲ | chii 3 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | the original OP is claiming that the healthcare industry is too profitable. So you have to compare it to something to see if it is too profitable. | | |
| ▲ | gruez 3 months ago | parent | next [-] | | Right, but why use Apple ($800 phone every 2-4 years) compared to say, an automaker ($40k in depreciation over 10 years) or a REIT ($2000 in rent every month)? Moreover, why focus on absolute profits? If the healthcare industry split into 3 (eg. doctors, dental, drugs) but with the same margins, does that mean they're suddenly not "too profitable"? | |
| ▲ | intended 3 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | Nothing compares to tech. These are not equivalent comps. |
|
|
|
