Let's unpack some of the right wing's delusion and dishonesty. Is universal healthcare socialism?

[Brain357]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

 

[justinacolmena]

Republicans will always threaten to drop abortion and birth control coverage,

That's “single-payer” system -- health care for singles. Sometimes people get married, and they get more conservative, stay faithful to their spouses and children, you know.

Democrats will be pushing to have the government paying for sex reassignment surgery,

So who pays for all the routine mayhem of FGM, “bris” circumcision of male infants and all that?

It will turn healthcare into a political football.

The football players ain't got a normal dick and balls after all that doctoring and they're kneeling for the national anthem. What else do you expect out of those doctors offices? A prescription for anabolic steroids?

 

[dblack]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

 

[Brain357]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost? I can't see the company ever discounting that much. $325 means nothing if nobody is paying that. Would you be happy if the real price was $100 and you paid that instead? Sounds like you increased the price.

 

[justinacolmena]

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

The problem here is that you need some kind of unscented dye-free perfume-free laundry detergent without the fabric softener, and maybe some kind of generic dye-free perfume-free skin lotion or moisturizing cream that is available without a prescription. What kind of soap or shampoo or body wash do you shower with?

Get rid of the artificial dyes and perfumes whatever you are putting on your skin already and your problems will likely go away on their own without the steroids. Don’t rush to the pharmacy to buy some magic cream.

 

[dblack]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

 

[dblack]

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

The problem here is that you need some kind of unscented dye-free perfume-free laundry detergent without the fabric softener, and maybe some kind of generic dye-free perfume-free skin lotion or moisturizing cream that is available without a prescription. What kind of soap or shampoo or body wash do you shower with?

Get rid of the artificial dyes and perfumes whatever you are putting on your skin already and your problems will likely go away on their own without the steroids. Don’t rush to the pharmacy to buy some magic cream.

Are you related to danielpalos ?

 

[justinacolmena]

Are you related to @danielpalos ?

Northwestern Medicine

Northwestern Medicine is a leader in quality healthcare and service, bringing together faculty, physicians and researchers to support and advance that care through leading-edge treatments and breakthrough discoveries.

www.paloshealth.com

 

[dblack]

Are you related to @danielpalos ?

Northwestern Medicine

Northwestern Medicine is a leader in quality healthcare and service, bringing together faculty, physicians and researchers to support and advance that care through leading-edge treatments and breakthrough discoveries.

www.paloshealth.com

I'll take that as a "yes".

 

[justinacolmena]

I'll take that as a "yes".

It's possible, but I wouldn't know how.

 

[Brain357]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

Of course you did not. You offered no market force that will lower the cost of emergency care. Please repeat it if you did. If I need life saving emergency care and they say the cost is one million dollars I'm going to say yes whether I can afford it or not. It's pay or die. That's not a free market.

Again you think that if people know exactly what they are paying that costs will go down. You just think all the companies involved will give up those dollars? Really? If you cut out insurance on routine care the cost of catastrophic care will go up drastically.

 

[Flash]

We already have a government run health care system. It is the VA. It is better than any foreign socialized medicine system but falls far short of private health care in the US.

I could get health care free if I used the system but I don't want to put up with the bueracracy and inefficiencies.

Health care is too important to an individual to put in the hands of the non caring government.

Somebody would have to be an idiot to support any kind of government managed national heath care system.

 

[dblack]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

Of course you did not. You offered no market force that will lower the cost of emergency care. Please repeat it if you did.

Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs.

 

[Brain357]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

Of course you did not. You offered no market force that will lower the cost of emergency care. Please repeat it if you did.

Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs.

That's all you have? Seriously? People can and do make cost-based decision during an emergency? You are joking? So the guy who is unconscious from a car accident and needs life saving care makes a lot of cost-based decisions? That is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

 

[dblack]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

Of course you did not. You offered no market force that will lower the cost of emergency care. Please repeat it if you did.

Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs.

That's all you have? Seriously? People can and do make cost-based decision during an emergency? You are joking?

Not a bit. As I said, I've been there.

So the guy who is unconscious from a car accident and needs life saving care makes a lot of cost-based decisions? That is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

His family makes those decisions, or he has legal documentation specifying his preferences. Why is that funny?

 

[Brain357]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

Of course you did not. You offered no market force that will lower the cost of emergency care. Please repeat it if you did.

Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs.

That's all you have? Seriously? People can and do make cost-based decision during an emergency? You are joking?

Not a bit. As I said, I've been there.

So the guy who is unconscious from a car accident and needs life saving care makes a lot of cost-based decisions? That is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

His family makes those decisions, or he has legal documentation specifying his preferences. Why is that funny?

And you think his family is making sound decisions while worried about the life of a loved one? You really have no clue of the real world. What do you think happens if somebody goes to the emergency room with a kidney stone in massive pain. You think they are going to negotiate and be willing to go somewhere else when they are in massive pain? They are gonna pay whatever to make the pain go away. You really live in fantasy land.

 

[Brain357]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

Of course you did not. You offered no market force that will lower the cost of emergency care. Please repeat it if you did.

Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs.

That's all you have? Seriously? People can and do make cost-based decision during an emergency? You are joking?

Not a bit. As I said, I've been there.

So the guy who is unconscious from a car accident and needs life saving care makes a lot of cost-based decisions? That is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

His family makes those decisions, or he has legal documentation specifying his preferences. Why is that funny?

I find your idea of a legal document humorous also. You think lawyers work real cheap? Sounds like you would be adding lots of legal costs to the system. You better try again.

 

[dblack]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

Of course you did not. You offered no market force that will lower the cost of emergency care. Please repeat it if you did.

Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs.

That's all you have? Seriously? People can and do make cost-based decision during an emergency? You are joking?

Not a bit. As I said, I've been there.

So the guy who is unconscious from a car accident and needs life saving care makes a lot of cost-based decisions? That is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

His family makes those decisions, or he has legal documentation specifying his preferences. Why is that funny?

I find your idea of a legal document humorous also. You think lawyers work real cheap? Sounds like you would be adding lots of legal costs to the system. You better try again.

Nah. I've made my case. You're approval is not required.

 

[Concerned American]

You'll often see conservatives argue that any social program is socialism and then in the next breath they'll say the Scandinavian countries are capitalist and not socialist when people point to how well they do over there. Well they have universal healthcare and very expansive social safety nets. Are those things socialism or not in your world view? You hypocrites can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the Scandinavian countries are socialist in your view or things like universal healthcare are not actually socialism. There are no Democrats arguing for the government to completely take over the private sector. They want universal healthcare and government funded universities like in the Scandinavian nations. At least get your shit straight and make a consistent argument.

Your entire argument is predicated on conservatives not recognizing that Scandanavian countries are socialist. So we'll lay that to rest first. Scandanavia and Canada are socialist. That being said, conservatives believe in working hard, earning a living and enjoying the fruits of their labor. They donate to the charitable causes they believe in--that is a social safety net. They do not like to be FORCED to pay for lazy people who feel the world owes them a living. Also, if these socialist countries are so good, why do Canadian nurses come to the US in droves? Also, 27 years ago when I had by-pass surgery I was fortunate to have two of those extremely qualified nurses attending. I asked them if it was true that my surgery would be free in Canada to which they replied in the affirmative. They quickly added that instead of the five days that it took to get my surgery done, it would have been three months or longer in Canada. Socialism sucks. Get off of your lazy backside and earn a living.

so your whole argument relies on 2 canadian chicks...

and you didnt even care to question in your simple mind what might have caused the shortage of nurses in the country to begin with...

because it was simpler and comfier for you to dream a fantasy about canadians getting tired of their socialist regime and running away...

you dont even realize you are paying a premium as a result of failed education policies which you assume are saving you money...

you are that stupid...


and then you go on about "earning a living"...


the only good thing about this pandemic was to show what a bunch of liars and hypocrites some people are...

in your simple mind, if one falls, thats because he/she is a "lazy slacker" who is not trying hard enough...

nobody deserves a safety net just because in your comfortable lifetime you didnt need one...

so the richest nation in the universe shouldnt spend any dime nor time trying to create one...


so how does it feel like living in a country of "lazy slackers" now then...


look into the eyes of millions who lost their jobs as a result of an ignorant fool ignoring a deadly and fast spreading virus up until it was too late and had to shutdown the whole economy, and tell them they are just bunch of "lazy slackers" for not trying hard enough...

see how your fellow countrymen judge your deplorable ideas then...

what would have been a failed state that relies on your petty charities to support a whole nation if this was anything close to your fantasies, turned out to be not that bad, thanks to the smart people with conscience and love for their people that created some safety nets you are bitching about to take care of each other...

because thats the meaning of being a "country"...
which you clearly lack the understanding of...

You are rambling and assuming things that are not present. Are you a product of the Canadian public school system?

 

[Brain357]

Markets don't work for health care - MarketWatch

>>> In fact, totally free markets are abysmally bad at delivering health care. That's why every advanced economy, to one degree or another, has given government a large role in providing health care to its citizens.​

>>> We've tried the market approach to health care and the result has always been the same: Poor health and poor people.​

>>> Poverty and disease go together, and the causation goes both ways. Show me a country that keeps the government out of health care and I'll show you a country that spends too much on death and not enough on life.​

>>> I'm not arguing that everything government does is good, or that everything the private sector does is bad. It's clear that government actions can have their own failures that make health care more expensive or less effective. All I'm arguing here is that relying on markets exclusively leaves us poorer and sicker.​

Straight from the spokesman of a Communist Party politburo.

If it's some kind of pill or medication, free markets are amazingly efficient at delivering it. If it's something to be forced on patients against their will, then of course there’s always a market for extortion, forced drugging, and involuntary hospitalization under the explicit blessing and protection of government.

The real healthcare market is precisely in the government intervention to enforce routine mayhem, involuntary vaccination, mass murder, and abortion-on-demand at the pleasure of street hookers for every patron of prostitutes and dead-beat dad on the block.

If healthcare is a “good” for individuals making their own decisions, then there is no reason why a free market cannot deliver it. It is when prostitutes have to be involuntarily committed for healthcare against their will and extorted and beaten for the payment of it that government must intervene.

The price of healthcare rises and rises because there is no market pressure for it to decrease.

Because of state policies that interfere with market pressure. Revoke them, and prices normalize.

Markets don't work in healthcare for obvious reasons. Counter my emergency room example if you can.

Sure, I'll "counter" it.

Your emergency room example fails to adequately account for healthcare inflation for several reasons. First, you're talking about emergencies - by definition, exceptional situations. The vast bulk of our health care spending decisions are not made in an emergency. Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs. I know, I've been there and done that. Third, your "emergency room example" only affects prices for emergency services, and that's not the real problem when it comes to healthcare costs. The real problem is that the prices for basic, routine healthcare services cost more than the average person can afford.

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

This kind of cost/benefit decision occurs much, much more often than your "emergency room example". Every single time a healthcare consumer is faced with a cost based decision, that doesn't actually cost them any money, they have an inverted incentive - they have every reason to prefer the more expensive option rather than the less expensive. That's where the market incentives break down.

You are just plain starting out wrong here, I'm giving it as one example of healthcare inflation. By no means am I claiming it's the only reason. It's simply one of several reasons why markets don't work. You are also wrong in your claim that it's not a problem. Nobody is going bankrupt from routine services. So yes emergency services are a big problem. You have not offered a real counter, you have really tried to downplay emergency service. If you attempt to cut routine services by cutting out health insurance the cost of catastrophic care will quickly increase. You have no real answer.

So, I offered a counter to your "example". I didn't expect you to accept it, or even read it, but I did the work. How's about you get off your lazy ass and do likewise. You never address my arguments, always choosing insults and quips over actual debate. Here's your chance to do better. Counter my example. Here it is again, in case you didn't bother to read it the first time:

Here's a better example of what drives healthcare inflation: Recently my doctor prescribed a skin cream for my psoriasis. It was new, so I figured it would be expensive. When I picked up my prescription, the price was $40 - for, maybe, two months worth. When I balked at the price, the pharmacist laughed. The forty dollars was my copay. The actual cost for the cream was $325 a tube. I was furious at the stupidity of such a scam, but my doctor said it was good stuff so I paid the forty dollars. My doctor was right, the cream works pretty well. But there's no way in hell I'd pay $325 dollars for a tube of it. No person in their right mind would. The only reason the drug company gets away with charging that much is because their customers have insurance that covers prescription medication.

You did not counter the cost of emergency care. You pretended they aren't important and tried to give your own example. You offered nothing market driven that would lower the cost of emergency care.

Of course I did. You just steered around it. The reason healthcare prices are inflated is because hardly anyone is paying for their own healthcare. They have no skin in the game and no reason to demand lower prices. No market could function under such a scheme.

For your example you paid $40 for the prescription. Do you really think you have a way to lower that cost?

We're talking about the price of the prescription, not the copay. And yes, I'm quite sure that if most people were paying for their own prescriptions, the price would come down.

Of course you did not. You offered no market force that will lower the cost of emergency care. Please repeat it if you did.

Second, people can and do make cost-based decisions during an emergency, if they are responsible for the costs.

That's all you have? Seriously? People can and do make cost-based decision during an emergency? You are joking?

Not a bit. As I said, I've been there.

So the guy who is unconscious from a car accident and needs life saving care makes a lot of cost-based decisions? That is funny. Thanks for the laugh.

His family makes those decisions, or he has legal documentation specifying his preferences. Why is that funny?

I find your idea of a legal document humorous also. You think lawyers work real cheap? Sounds like you would be adding lots of legal costs to the system. You better try again.

Nah. I've made my case. You're approval is not required.

I've shown how it is full of holes. We agree on much and you are a smart guy. You will come around eventually, I was once in your shoes.