2 ms·
> But it’s not because it would hurt revenue since price transparency benefits buyers, and price obfuscation benefits sellers by allowing them to price discrim
by ianleeclark 6y ago
> But it’s not because it would hurt revenue since price transparency benefits buyers, and price obfuscation benefits sellers by allowing them to price discriminate and charge each seller the most each seller is able to pay.
Are you against a monopsony in healthcare? If you care about having a fair-shake for every consumer, then that's the most consistent way of wielding power against would-be price gougers.
- lotsofpulp 6y agoThere’s a balance to be had, a marketplace functions best when there are many buyers and many sellers. Obviously, health issues aren’t a perfect marketplace due to buyers not being able to shop around many times, and due to buyers not having sufficient knowledge about what they are buying due to the complexity inherent in medicine. In all cases though, I think price transparency is always good as that is what helps to properly allocate resources in the long run. And I think that published healthcare prices coupled with high deductible health insurance is a good idea as it would allow proper information about pricing to be transmitted, at least for minor issues such as covid tests or broken bones or routine visits and procedures. For more complex cases, I would have to defer to those with expertise on how to ration resources.