Comments on: The danger of “healthcare is a RIGHT”

By: Jared McKiernan

Jared McKiernan — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:00:01 +0000

This is a great post, Andy. Just saw it from today's link at AVC.

Much of the healthcare that is provided under our current system actually doesn't improve health at all- it merely lines the wallets of those involved with the system.
Of course, logic isn't really a big part of the healthcare debate. Straw men and misinformation tend to be the preferred method of national discourse.

By: Charlie Crystle

Charlie Crystle — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:24:07 +0000

not at all. providers are paid in a single-payer system, and businesses get out of the healthcare business. it's a fucking nightmare, andy.

By: JakeGint

JakeGint — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:47:59 +0000

LOL. I can see this post brought out a panopoly of "deep thinkers" on the Left. It's interesting to see how they all seem to be reading from the one single-page pamphlet (for easy repetition).

Take the Phone, above. Is he actually equating government service with slavery? Does he not realize that there are no private sector alternatives to a local municipally provided police (and fire) services?

Also, another commenter above refers to the ability of healthcare providers to leave the system should it not suit them (due, ostensibly, to gov't cost caps, one is assuming).

This reader stumbles upon exactly why free market advocates (who are looking at other gov't healthcare "solutions" provided in other States) reject fiat limited care (such are price controls) -- namely, the drop off in supply! Why do you think government payor healthcare in every other Western nation is marked by long queues?

Moreover, why in the world would we want to discourage our best and brightest from investing eight to ten years of their lives (and in some specialties, even more) in order to bring us the best and most innovative healthcare on the globe? Seems like an awfully steep price to pay (and the globe would be paying for it) to ensure free stuff for all.

There are ways to ensure 100% coverage with efficiency, and without a drop off in supply or quality of care. Government payor is not one of those.

By: Vijay Goel, M.D.

Vijay Goel, M.D. — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:21:16 +0000

What's required is that incentives are aligned. The worst part about the current governmental distortion of the health care market is that incentives are pointed toward: 1) volume, 2) disease treatment (vs. primary disease prevention), 3) fragmented “services” rather than integrated programs, 4) commodity services vs. personalized, 5) “average impact across a group” rather than “optimized impact for each individual”

The government structure under Medicare/ Medicaid is a key reason why disruptive innovation rewarding higher value approaches have not emerged. With aligned incentives (e.g., the Lasik market) you do see profits tied to impact.

By: phoneranger

phoneranger — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:29:34 +0000

Cops and firemen. Slaves. Soldiers and marines. Slaves. McConnell and Bunning. Slaves.

Why do you hate patriots Andy?

By: Pierre Bastien

Pierre Bastien — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:53:58 +0000

Thought-provoking. But… in America don't we have a right to fair trial by a jury of our peers? I don't feel like jurists have been enslaved, even though their services are required to make it happen.

By: McLarty

McLarty — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 04:54:07 +0000

Clearly, I'm not thinking properly. Obviously, a free market couldn't
possibly offer advantages to a tax-subsidized government controlled one.

By: andyswan

andyswan — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:45:51 +0000

Funny….because every time I (or anyone I know) needs something looked at…from cancer to ACL tears, the “shopping around” process is intense.

“Oh…ACL? You gotta go to Dr. Tillet….he's the best…does all of the UofL football guys and did my sister's awesome”

By: guest1

guest1 — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:28:10 +0000

You're not thinking properly. “margins in the health care industry, would work the same way as every other industry.” Whenever you look at an industry you have to catagorize it into a market structure. The one you're using to let do your thinking for you (instead of thinking for yourself) is the model of perfect competition. Listen, all outside observers can do when they see extra normal profit in the healthcare industry is salivate all over their neckties, because the barriers to entry are enormous.

Secondly, you're overlooking that healthcare demand is relatively inelastic. If you buy a crummy bicycle from China, fine don't go to that firm again. If you need some medicine to manage some horrid malady you'll be in such a state (emotionally, mentally, physically, perhaps financially if your ability to work has suffered that you will take what you can get. You'll do this not necessarily because the product is so wonderful but because when one's health is suffering even a sub standard remedy is better than no remedy at all.

By: McLarty

McLarty — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 01:47:54 +0000

Easy. I wouldn't go to that firm again, and I wouldn't refer my friends.
And, I trust margins in the health care industry, would work the same way as
every other industry. That is, if excess profit exists, more firms would
enter to compete…levelling the margins, to account for the risk and
liquidity.