2 ms·
"And now to quote the original article... 'It is a bedrock economic principle that if we can find a way to do something more efficiently, it’s possible for ever
by bradleyjg 9y ago
"And now to quote the original article... 'It is a bedrock economic principle that if we can find a way to do something more efficiently, it’s possible for everyone to come out ahead.'"
That's a really important "possible" though. It is a near certainty that if were to transition to single payer healthcare we would not do the transfers to hold everyone profiting from the current system harmless (e.g. health insurance employees). In any realistic scenario there would be winners and losers which is why you see fierce lobbying on both sides of the issue.
It's the difference between Pareto and Kaldor-Hicks (See this prior comment for the definitions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14605477 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14605477 )
- galeaspablo 9y agoThat's a matter of policy. You can set a cap of how much tax someone pays for healthcare, such that rich people don't get screwed. The question here is what's more efficient... And the numbers are there. Single payer + Healthcare transparency = Efficiency. (see sources and explanation in original comment)
- ryandrake 9y agoWhy do rich people need a cap in order to not "get screwed?"
- galeaspablo 9y agoLike I said, that's a matter of policy. I.e. should rich people pay more tax? But I'm not here to answer that question.