It's semantics, but they're important when you're talking about economics. You're describing inelasticity of demand, which is to say that I need the good irresp

It's semantics, but they're important when you're talking about economics. You're describing inelasticity of demand, which is to say that I need the good irrespective of the price (and it may mean irrespective of the geographic inefficiency). In a free market, I can open a hospital across the street from your hospital and charge whatever I want for similar (or completely different) services. Presumably, our hospitals would also have a brand reputation: I know lots of folks who say "I'll never go to X HMO again, it's so much better at Y public hospital" and would gladly drive an extra mile or two with their broken arm kid if it means they're fairly certain they'll save a few grand (or more). A similar example is that I'm halfway down a 200 mile highway, and I need gasoline. There could be one gas station, there could be five, but the fact that I'm allowed to open a gas station next to the sole one that exists means it's a free market. If the government says "there shall be one [or two, or ten]" gas stations here, or that "all gas stations here shall charge this rate", then it's less of a free market. You may be trying to describe the concept of perfect competition[1]. If so, I'd agree with you that health care can almost never achieve perfect competition because perfect information becomes harder to obtain as situations become more expedient or dire. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition