APP - Should we bring market driven economics into healthcare

If we don't bring market driven economics into our healthcare systems, they will become prohibitively expensive and innovation will suffer.
 
Yes.

And there should be a govt-run option. I believe that is basically referred to as single payer? I would like to see the market control (ha, kind of laughable) and restrain ins. company profits and single payer wont be much more of a black hole than Medicaid/Medicare are now. Except that we all know that profit is the ins. companies bottom line (as is logical with any business) and the govt plan would be run by normal bureaucratic incompetence.

In my fantasy, we actually get a handle on that incompetence and it serves the proper segment of the population.

Please also note that I responded despite your 'thread ban list.'
 
Yes.

And there should be a govt-run option. I believe that is basically referred to as single payer? I would like to see the market control (ha, kind of laughable) and restrain ins. company profits and single payer wont be much more of a black hole than Medicaid/Medicare are now. Except that we all know that profit is the ins. companies bottom line (as is logical with any business) and the govt plan would be run by normal bureaucratic incompetence.

In my fantasy, we actually get a handle on that incompetence and it serves the proper segment of the population.

Please also note that I responded despite your 'thread ban list.'

Single payor would result in reduced quality and reduced choices. The free market has delivered more prosperity and improved the lives of more people than any other system devised in all of human history.

There is nothing wrong with profit, not in the insurance industry, not in oil. That is how companies survive and thrive.

The problem as I see it is that the government and business have become indistinguishable. Now some folks claim that it is business bribing the gobblement and I wouldn't disagree, but I also think there is a component of the gobblement shaking down business sort of like the mob does "Hey, it would be a terrible thing if that regulation shut down your business"

What I have never understood is how people can think that those who work for corporations are inherently evil and have ill intentions, but also think that those who work for the gobblement are somehow noble and altruistic without any human failings.

Personally, I believe whether you work in gobblement or the private sector you are capable of bad behavior. The ultimate difference is that I can choose to do business with a private entity but I don't have that choice with the gobblement
 
Single payor would result in reduced quality and reduced choices. The free market has delivered more prosperity and improved the lives of more people than any other system devised in all of human history.

There is nothing wrong with profit, not in the insurance industry, not in oil. That is how companies survive and thrive.

THis is what I thought at first too. But then I actually looked into the health care people were receiving thru many different health plans (provided by ins. companies). The level of care often sucked. The companies denied coverage for procedures and treatments that drs recommended but the companies didnt want to cover, they refused coverage for so long that people died or got sicker (kept rejecting legitimate claims until people gave up or got lawyers...this is an industry strategy.), made them use cheaper meds and products that didnt work as well, all kinds of strategies to help maintain their bottom lines. That wont change under Obamacare. Profit will still motivate their decisions.

So I just think the govt cant do a worse job. At least profit wouldnt be a factor. And it would just be an option. People could still use a plan thru an ins. company if they wanted to.


As you said, you could still choose the do business with a private company.
 
THis is what I thought at first too. But then I actually looked into the health care people were receiving thru many different health plans (provided by ins. companies). The level of care often sucked. The companies denied coverage for procedures and treatments that drs recommended but the companies didnt want to cover, they refused coverage for so long that people died or got sicker (kept rejecting legitimate claims until people gave up or got lawyers...this is an industry strategy.), made them use cheaper meds and products that didnt work as well, all kinds of strategies to help maintain their bottom lines. That wont change under Obamacare. Profit will still motivate their decisions.

So I just think the govt cant do a worse job. At least profit wouldnt be a factor. And it would just be an option. People could still use a plan thru an ins. company if they wanted to.


As you said, you could still choose the do business with a private company.

Fair points, but allow me to clarify my position even further. For the record, I am no fan of the system as it was constructed prior to Obamacare. It was a system that was distorted by various government interventions into the free market.

The major problem with healthcare as it is delivered in our country is that the ultimate consumer (the patient) is completely divorced from the economic ramifications of their healthcare choices. The biggest problem is that medical insurance has been tied to employment and therefore the decisions of the employer. It has been convenient over the years to use the insurance companies as a foil for everyones complaints about our healthcare system. If a claim gets denied the insurance company gets blamed. In fact, what is covered and not covered is 100% determined by the employer. I have heard of employers that actually paid for Lasik through their insurance. Sounds crazy, but it is true.

As such when people are paying $10 copays for $150 medications, they are completely divorced from reality.

The true free market solution that would solve our challenges would be returning insurance to what it really should be and that is protection against catastrophic events such as cancer, or something that could bankrupt you. Very similar to how we insure automobiles and homes (and yes it is the same thing). Everything else you pay out of pocket cash for. You will see prices come down immediately as market forces would kick in and people would make more rational healthcare choices.

Both sides are completely dishonest in the debate. The right always squawks about "rationing care" and the left gives the impression that healthcare is somehow special and as such the normal laws of economics and supply and demand don't apply

Now, make no mistake, I have no illusion that what I suggest could even come close to happening. Too many people have been raised to believe that their healthcare should be paid by someone else. That attitude doesn't change overnight. But, my way would work.
 
Fair points, but allow me to clarify my position even further. For the record, I am no fan of the system as it was constructed prior to Obamacare. It was a system that was distorted by various government interventions into the free market.

The major problem with healthcare as it is delivered in our country is that the ultimate consumer (the patient) is completely divorced from the economic ramifications of their healthcare choices. The biggest problem is that medical insurance has been tied to employment and therefore the decisions of the employer. It has been convenient over the years to use the insurance companies as a foil for everyones complaints about our healthcare system. If a claim gets denied the insurance company gets blamed. In fact, what is covered and not covered is 100% determined by the employer. I have heard of employers that actually paid for Lasik through their insurance. Sounds crazy, but it is true.

As such when people are paying $10 copays for $150 medications, they are completely divorced from reality.


The true free market solution that would solve our challenges would be returning insurance to what it really should be and that is protection against catastrophic events such as cancer, or something that could bankrupt you. Very similar to how we insure automobiles and homes (and yes it is the same thing). Everything else you pay out of pocket cash for. You will see prices come down immediately as market forces would kick in and people would make more rational healthcare choices.

Both sides are completely dishonest in the debate. The right always squawks about "rationing care" and the left gives the impression that healthcare is somehow special and as such the normal laws of economics and supply and demand don't apply

Now, make no mistake, I have no illusion that what I suggest could even come close to happening. Too many people have been raised to believe that their healthcare should be paid by someone else. That attitude doesn't change overnight. But, my way would work.

See the bold: Yes, that is how it seems. Exactly how did it work then? Where did the $$ to pay the actual costs come from? In my case, my employer broke it out and said, you are not making the top salaries in the industry, but you are getting this: (health plans) and this is what it is costing US. And it was thousands. So my (large corporate) employer was treating health insurance as an *actual benefit* that they used to remain competetive.
 
Last edited:
If we don't bring market driven economics into our healthcare systems, they will become prohibitively expensive and innovation will suffer.
I mean you two can't possibly be this stupid. The ACA is predominantly composed of Republican ideas that are pretty much market driven. The only part of the ACA that is not market driven are the subsidies for health insurance for the poor. Have you not been paying attention?

The universal mandate was originated by Richard Nixon's administration. It was later supported by Gerald Ford, Senate Minority Leader and Presidential nominee Bob Dole and Former Speaker of the house Newt Gringrich. Republicans adamantly opposed Democrats idea of a single payer system, essentially an expansion of medicare, that would have been far simpler to implement, far more cost affective and far more efficient at lowering costs and improving outcomes.

So who are Republicans trying to bullshit? Their main opposition to the ACA isn't because it's not market driven. The facts are it that it is almost completely market driven and you have to be a moron of stupendous magnitude not to see that. Their main opposition to the ACA is two fold. There are Republicans, particularly southern ones, who will oppose anything the Obama administration does on the basis of that in their eyes he's a niger. The other reason that they oppose it is because it was implemented by Democrats who some would say, stupidly bargained away the superior single payer system method and compromised with Republicans to have a MARKET DRIVEN UNIVERSAL FUCKING MANDATE!!!

As for the health care systems failing under a single payer system. What the hell do you think has been happening to our system under the market system? It is the market that has driven costs up. It is the relentless pursuits of short term profits over the public good. Not only that it is immoral as hell to charge what the market will bear to the sick, injured and dying cause it can and will charge them everything they have and they will have no choice to pay if they want to live. The reason our systems costs have spiraled out of control is that the market system has failed. Actually it hasn't failed from a profit stand point. The health care industry has made staggering growth in profits, all on the back of the sick, injured and dying, while simultaneously denying more and more people access to basic care reducing health care outcomes in our nation to third world levels....all in pursuit of the mighty profit. Our health care system costs have spiraled out of control as a direct result of market failures to contain costs. If the market approach had not failed to badly in managing our nations health care we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Not that it matters to two people like you who apparently aren't capable of critical thinking skills.

So, to put it bluntly, you two are either full of shit or profoundly ignorant on health care reform.
 
Last edited:
I mean you two can't possibly be this stupid.

This coming from the defender of what is stupid; we call this irony.

The ACA is predominantly composed of Republican ideas that are pretty much market driven.

This is a lie and common leftist talking point. The fact that not one Republican voted for the ACA or had any input into this train wreck suggests that you are a liar. But then, you are a leftist Obama apologist, of course you would be a liar.

The only part of the ACA that is not market driven are the subsidies for health insurance for the poor. Have you not been paying attention?

What part is FORCING every American to buy something market driven? No one can be this incredibly dense.

`The universal mandate was originated by Richard Nixon's administration. It was later supported by Gerald Ford, Senate Minority Leader and Presidential nominee Bob Dole and Former Speaker of the house Newt Gringrich. Republicans adamantly opposed Democrats idea of a single payer system, essentially an expansion of medicare, that would have been far simpler to implement, far more cost affective and far more efficient at lowering costs and improving outcomes.

So let me understand this argument in support; because Republicans may have supported something not remotely similar to ACA, that makes ACA okay? Hell, a third grader could build a more coherent argument than this.

It constantly amuses me when leftist Liberals who spend every waking moment impugning Republicans for hyper partisan purposes then use Republicans to justify their ideological stupidity. It really is an amazing thing to witness.

I cannot remember ever using an argument as stupid and simple as; well he did it so it’s okay.

So who are Republicans trying to bullshit? Their main opposition to the ACA isn't because it's not market driven.

You’re right it has nothing to do with market driven; it is an abomination and unconstitutional.

The facts are it that it is almost completely market driven and you have to be a moron of stupendous magnitude not to see that. Their main opposition to the ACA is two fold.

Wrong; but then this is consistent with all of your arguments. Perhaps you come from planet wrong where down is up, right is wrong and left is right?

There are Republicans, particularly southern ones, who will oppose anything the Obama administration does on the basis of that in their eyes he's a niger.

Another repugnant and ignorant claim; but it was only a matter of time before you brought up the brain dead meme of racism.

It’s a nice crutch to use whenever your arguments are lies, distortions and cannot be supported by any facts; just call your opponents racists.

The other reason that they oppose it is because it was implemented by Democrats who some would say, stupidly bargained away the superior single payer system method and compromised with Republicans to have a MARKET DRIVEN UNIVERSAL FUCKING MANDATE!!!

How stupid are you? Please show me where Republicans had ANY input towards the ACA or voted for it.

I don’t oppose ACA because Democrats, who actually argued that they did not know what was in the bill until it become law and was implemented (that in itself is a testimony to ignorance), but because the law really is a train wreck.

The first clue was when the leaders of the Democrat effort claimed they didn’t know what was in the bill they voted for. But alas, you are a defender of hyper partisan talking points and find truth, facts and reality repugnant.

As for the health care systems failing under a single payer system. What the hell do you think has been happening to our system under the market system? It is the market that has driven costs up. It is the relentless pursuits of short term profits over the public good. Not only that it is immoral as hell to charge what the market will bear to the sick, injured and dying cause it can and will charge them everything they have and they will have no choice to pay if they want to live. The reason our systems costs have spiraled out of control is that the market system has failed. Actually it hasn't failed from a profit stand point. The health care industry has made staggering growth in profits, all on the back of the sick, injured and dying, while simultaneously denying more and more people access to basic care reducing health care outcomes in our nation to third world levels....all in pursuit of the mighty profit. Our health care system costs have spiraled out of control as a direct result of market failures to contain costs. If the market approach had not failed to badly in managing our nations health care we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Not that it matters to two people like you who apparently aren't capable of critical thinking skills.

Wrong again; but then wrong is your forte’. The market system was working fine except for States that limited competition and tried to control every facet of health insurance providers.

The abomination called ACA will not reduce costs but rather, increase them as the evidence is now showing. What will happen to this hapless law no one read before they voted for it when young people refuse to sign up and pay the extremely large premiums they will be forced to pay to subsidize everyone else?

The answer is obvious; unfortunately for you, the obvious is an insurmountable goal.

So, to put it bluntly, you two are either full of shit or profoundly ignorant on health care reform.

Wrong; that would be you. But alas, you are a non-thinking leftist devoted to parroting brain dead leftist talking points like a trained little circus monkey.

I am surprised you didn’t bring up the other lame leftist talking point in your uninformed tirade above; the equally moronic claim that we will all be healthier because of the ACA.
 
For some reason people either don't understand or don't want to understand that healthcare like any other good or service responds to market forces no differently than buying an iPhone. The laws of supply and demand are immutable. They don't change because someone thinks "healthcare is a right"

To ignore these basic tenets is unwise and will cause more people to needlessly suffer.
 
Single payor would result in reduced quality and reduced choices. The free market has delivered more prosperity and improved the lives of more people than any other system devised in all of human history.


The list of the most healthy countries in the world crossreferenced with the list of countries with single-payer systems pretty much strictly disagrees with you.

Norway -- 18th healthiest in the world -- single payer.
Spain -- 14th healthiest -- single payer.
Sweden -- 9th healthiest -- single payer.
Japan -- 5th healthiest -- single payer.
Italy -- 2nd healthiest -- single payer.


The USA, for the record, is 38th. Not even anywhere near this list. It's also the only one of the 33 'developed' countries that doesn't feature SOME form of universal health care -- at least for the next two months. Note that 38 is larger than 33, so there are 6 countries that don't count as 'developed' that are doing better than we are.
 
Last edited:
The list of the most healthy countries in the world crossreferenced with the list of countries with single-payer systems pretty much strictly disagrees with you.

Norway -- 18th healthiest in the world -- single payer.
Spain -- 14th healthiest -- single payer.
Sweden -- 9th healthiest -- single payer.
Japan -- 5th healthiest -- single payer.
Italy -- 2nd healthiest -- single payer.


The USA, for the record, is 38th. Not even anywhere near this list. It's also the only one of the 33 'developed' countries that doesn't feature SOME form of universal health care -- at least for the next two months. Note that 38 is larger than 33, so there are 6 countries that don't count as 'developed' that are doing better than we are.

Source please...
 
The list of the most healthy countries in the world crossreferenced with the list of countries with single-payer systems pretty much strictly disagrees with you.

Norway -- 18th healthiest in the world -- single payer.
Spain -- 14th healthiest -- single payer.
Sweden -- 9th healthiest -- single payer.
Japan -- 5th healthiest -- single payer.
Italy -- 2nd healthiest -- single payer.


The USA, for the record, is 38th. Not even anywhere near this list. It's also the only one of the 33 'developed' countries that doesn't feature SOME form of universal health care -- at least for the next two months. Note that 38 is larger than 33, so there are 6 countries that don't count as 'developed' that are doing better than we are.

Care to show what they measured?

If it is infant mortality I am not interested as it has been proven to be manipulated data

Now when you look at one aspect of healthcare that is 100% related to the quality of care delivered we win. And that is cancer survival rates. We have the highest in the world. The rest of the comparisons WHO uses are bogus
 
http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2012-08-13/world-s-healthiest-countries.html

http://truecostblog.com/2009/08/09/countries-with-universal-healthcare-by-date/


Could this be a sign of TD's interest in some sort of actual debate? Or is he just looking for the nearest available reason to call the facts 'stupid' and move on?

TD is always interested in "honest" debate not the partisan bullshit that erupts from your keyboard.

I asked for your source to be able to respond. The WHO is an agenda driven organization that is imbedded in a Socialist belief that Governments can manage something as complex as healthcare.

This is the great lie gullible dimwits are willing to swallow in their foolish belief that subverting their liberties for equal outcomes is a good thing.

These rankings are subjective and seldom, if ever, deal with the socio aspects of the underlying statistics. Most of the nations on that list above the US are fairly homogeneous small population societies. Nothing close to the diversity of the US. They also ignore cultural aspects of health. In America, the poor have a tendency to prefer high calorie low content fast food that doesn't exist in many of the nations on that list.

In other words, many of the leftist criteria leading to such rankings ignore the fact that health is primarily a function of personal habits and high population diverse societies and not one of the system itself.

I'm always amused when Canadians claim they don't pay as much as we do for a system that entails greater wait times. Yet they drive hundreds of miles south to our border to get cheaper goods. They don't equate their high taxes and longer wait times for care as failures. Ask them and they always make the same brain washed talking point when asked about waiting three months to see a doctor about acid reflux, or waiting over a year for a hip replacement; someone else probably needed the care more than they did.

That is the fascinating thing about Socialist claims; they require a lot of deflecting, fabricating and statistical manipulation in order to arrive at the conclusions they desire.

The bigger question for the world and WHO is, if the US devolves to the same failed socialist systems they are under, where will they then go for subsidized drugs and specialization? After all, it is our innovation and R&D under the profitized private system that arrives at most of the drug and technology breakthroughs in that industry.
 
Back
Top