Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not all leftist hate free market. I love the fact that Lasik and cosmetic procedure have gone down in prices due to the free market. I love the fact that LCD tv's are about a 500 to a grand now where as when they first came out, it was about 15k. That is awesome. But what many on the right don't seem to understand is how inelastic plasticity in many sections of healthcare don't fall under free market principles and they will continue to ignore this aspect and shout out "FREE MARKET IS THE CURE FOR HEALTHCARE COSTS" when inelastic plasticity can not and will not ever be subject to free market principles.
About that Lasik. I heard Rand Paul mention that prices came down and researched it, as it was $2,500 per eye when I looked at it in 2003. It is not much different now. The new better technology costs the same as it did then. Also the good doctors still charge that much. What is cheaper is the old technology and "discount doctors" as more doctors take lessons in performing the surgery. Don't know if I would go with a discount when it comes to eyesight.
There has never been a "free marketplace" of health insurance for women, anyone over a certain age or anyone who has ever been sick. Many types of insurance do not seem subject to the rules of a free market. There has not been a free marketplace for homeowners' insurance in Florida since 2005. You pretty much take whatever lousy coverage you can get and it is not cheap and there is not competitive pricing--just keeps going up.
About that Lasik. I heard Rand Paul mention that prices came down and researched it, as it was $2,500 per eye when I looked at it in 2003. It is not much different now. The new better technology costs the same as it did then. Also the good doctors still charge that much. What is cheaper is the old technology and "discount doctors" as more doctors take lessons in performing the surgery. Don't know if I would go with a discount when it comes to eyesight.
There has never been a "free marketplace" of health insurance for women, anyone over a certain age or anyone who has ever been sick. Many types of insurance do not seem subject to the rules of a free market. There has not been a free marketplace for homeowners' insurance in Florida since 2005. You pretty much take whatever lousy coverage you can get and it is not cheap and there is not competitive pricing--just keeps going up.
I have had personal anecdotal evidence showing reduction in lasik from where it was. Still, free market usually lowers prices when inelastic supply and demand doesn't exist for a certain product or service.
Because the insurance company allows that extra cost because it is a for-profit system. Seriously, that is it, no magic to it, that is the root of the problem. Healthcare should not be a for-profit system. Don't know how else to say it for you so that you get it.
Non-profit doesn't mean doctors work for free or minimum wage. You know that, right?
Also, housing and food are a part of for-profit markets, but I am not sure where you are going with that strawman statement.
I know that. But I think you are misguided about the profit in healthcare.
In another active thread somebody posted that housing and food and healthcare are basic rights. I'm just curious why healthcare is always singled out as the right that should be "non-profit".
However if a system existed that can empirically verify that catastropic insurance coverage and more involvement at the patient level would lower costs across the board...I'd be for it.
You doubt that consumer involvement in the market will cause cost reductions? What are you smoking? This is elementary reality 001.
But you believe government can jump into a system and make it less expensive. This has NEVER happened, EVER.
The belief in in fallible government is just a religion with you, isn't it? There is NO evidence anywhere on the globe that supports what you take as gospel truth... And a universe of it that proves what you doubt.
Quote:
I don't care who manages it...as long as it's more affordable. Singapore's system is interesting to me....the government does play a large role but the role is in increasing patient autonomy. From what I understand basically everyone is obligated to have an HSA with mandatory contribution amounts set at the federal level and the only insurance available is catastrophic coverage which is very inexpensive.
Why don't you learn what "insurance" is. Go read the definition, and then figure out why pre-paid services via an insurance company is monumentally stupid.
Quote:
With these HSA's...everyone pays out of pocket for ALL medical procedures and ALL medical procedures cost something. This encourages competition which has done a lot of good for their healthcare system and basically the only thing a claim is filed for is something like an open-heart surgery, chemo, or something very expensive. From what I understand healthcare is very inexpensive in Singapore and of high quality. Now...I don't know how the very poor are assisted which is a concern of mine but aside from that it seems like the Singaporean system is effective and has done a good job of increasing accessibility.
You know, capitalism and free markets work. They are the ONLY things that work. Period.
I have a great alternative. It's quite simple really. I buy my insurance. If you want, you can even buy yours. Perfect.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.