7 ms·

Libertarians would also allow more doctors to be educated. We don't have enough doctors now because the AMA acts as a cartel to limit supply of doctors. Liber

Libertarians would also allow more doctors to be educated. We don't have enough doctors now because the AMA acts as a cartel to limit supply of doctors. Libertarians don't like that either.

aj7 6y ago
I doubt this. To me, libertarianism is simply “might makes right,” with the liberty part being everyone has the opportunity to grow into a bully. I’ve never seen a SINGLE libertarian policy that couldn’t be interpreted this way, and I’m quite open to being corrected.
- GurnBlandston 6y ago
  What? Libertarianism basically sees two possible crimes: force and fraud. Totally incompatible with "might makes right".
  - aj7 6y ago
    So libertarians support laws making legal subtle force and fraud, ca. carried interest, private prisons, private ownership of everything, with no commons.
    - vidarh 6y ago
      Libertarianism started on the far left, explicitly opposed to private property, largely overlapping with anarchism. Modern US-style right-wing libertarianism basically cribbed most of it but added a property right fetish. (Dejaque, the founder of libertarianism called Proudhon, the founder of anarchism, a "moderate anarchist, liberal, but not libertarian")
- satyrnein 6y ago
  Here's a handful of typical libertarian positions (though certainly there's some variance): pro-choice, anti-war, pro-civil rights, pro-immigration, anti-drug-war. They don't seem to match your description of "might makes right".
  - aj7 6y ago
    I respect your position. But these to me are window dressing positions cribbed from the Left.
    - satyrnein 6y ago
      With respect, this feels like moving the goal posts. The position has to disagree with the Left to count? How about Kelo vs New London? This was the Supreme Court case establishing that the government could use eminent domain to seize people's homes and hand the property to private developers, in the interest of raising tax revenue for the city. Libertarians were against it; liberals were for it. Is that "might makes right"?
mcguire 6y ago
The last time this came up, several people responded that they would be happy to go to a 'doctor' educated on YouTube. Which is lovely and all, until those doctors tell you vaccines are worthless and dangerous, and to slather a mixture of beef tallow, garlic, leek, and honey on your injuries.
- lostapathy 6y ago
  I'm not sure how you made the jump from the AMA limiting med school enrollments to "youtube doctors". We could split the difference and expand existing med schools or start new ones with similar standards.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
    The issue is how you, as a (potential) patient, is going to interpret the fact that Doctor X graduated from a given med school. As a reader of libertarian stuff for 30 years, the usual answers are some combination of: 1) independent rating agency for med schools 2) independent rating agency for doctors (i.e. med school was irrelevant) 3) patient reviews for doctors 25 years of amzn have helped established serious questions about (3) (1) and (2) have the usual "who watches the watchers?" problems, which are fairly isomorphous to the problems with (3). And even without those issues, who wants to have do this level of research? Yeah, I know, libertarian nerds (meant with all possible respect). But almost nobody else. Part of the point (not all of it, to be sure) of things like the AMA, the FDA and other governmental regulation is to make people's lives simpler. Stop worrying about whether the doctor you're going to see has even met a basic level of medical qualification, and focus on whether you like their personality and approach, for example.
    - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
      > (1) and (2) have the usual "who watches the watchers?" problems, Since we already deal with “who watches the watchers” problems in our current system, I see no problem here. > And even without those issues, who wants to have do this level of research? Yeah, I know, libertarian nerds (meant with all possible respect). But almost nobody else. Anyone who wants a good physician. > Part of the point (not all of it, to be sure) of things like the AMA, the FDA and other governmental regulation is to make people's lives simpler. Stop worrying about whether the doctor you're going to see has even met a basic level of medical qualification, and focus on whether you like their personality and approach, for example. If those things worked, this would be a point. Currently people can’t even afford to go to medical school, or afford to see a doctor, and when they get past the gatekeepers they are so desparate to get treatment that they can’t really even fathom rejecting a doctor because of a poor bedside manner.
paulmd 6y ago
The free market has decided that they don't want more doctors educated though. Guilds are very free market, do you not believe in freedom of association? I guess the true libertarian answer is that we don't really need certification at all, or that anyone should be able to start their own certification board. Like Rand Paul and his fake ophthalmology board he started to give himself credentials. Nothing is ever libertarian enough until we've removed all the regulations and let quacks practice medicine, is it?
- lostapathy 6y ago
  What about this is the free market? https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/thanks-to-doctors-there-arent-enough-doctors https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/thanks-to-doctors-there-a...
- zepto 6y ago
  In a free market we’d be able choose a non-guild doctor.
  - paulmd 6y ago
    Which is exactly the “libertarians want to be able to make up fake credentials like Rand Paul’s fake ophthalmology board he made up for himself” I mentioned.
- Jweb_Guru 6y ago
  Essentially, yes. People refuse to understand that it is impossible for there to be a "health care market" in the usual sense because (1) like cable, running a hospital or clinic is expensive enough that many people have only one option, whether or not it is regulated, and (2) unlike cable, many people cannot choose whether or not to participate.

Libertarians would also allow more doctors to be educated. We don't have enough doctors now because the AMA acts as a cartel to limit supply of doctors. Libertarians don't like that either.

aj7 6y ago

I doubt this. To me, libertarianism is simply “might makes right,” with the liberty part being everyone has the opportunity to grow into a bully. I’ve never seen a SINGLE libertarian policy that couldn’t be interpreted this way, and I’m quite open to being corrected.

GurnBlandston 6y ago
What? Libertarianism basically sees two possible crimes: force and fraud. Totally incompatible with "might makes right".
- aj7 6y ago
  So libertarians support laws making legal subtle force and fraud, ca. carried interest, private prisons, private ownership of everything, with no commons.
  - vidarh 6y ago
    Libertarianism started on the far left, explicitly opposed to private property, largely overlapping with anarchism. Modern US-style right-wing libertarianism basically cribbed most of it but added a property right fetish. (Dejaque, the founder of libertarianism called Proudhon, the founder of anarchism, a "moderate anarchist, liberal, but not libertarian")
satyrnein 6y ago
Here's a handful of typical libertarian positions (though certainly there's some variance): pro-choice, anti-war, pro-civil rights, pro-immigration, anti-drug-war. They don't seem to match your description of "might makes right".
- aj7 6y ago
  I respect your position. But these to me are window dressing positions cribbed from the Left.
  - satyrnein 6y ago
    With respect, this feels like moving the goal posts. The position has to disagree with the Left to count? How about Kelo vs New London? This was the Supreme Court case establishing that the government could use eminent domain to seize people's homes and hand the property to private developers, in the interest of raising tax revenue for the city. Libertarians were against it; liberals were for it. Is that "might makes right"?

mcguire 6y ago

The last time this came up, several people responded that they would be happy to go to a 'doctor' educated on YouTube. Which is lovely and all, until those doctors tell you vaccines are worthless and dangerous, and to slather a mixture of beef tallow, garlic, leek, and honey on your injuries.

lostapathy 6y ago
I'm not sure how you made the jump from the AMA limiting med school enrollments to "youtube doctors". We could split the difference and expand existing med schools or start new ones with similar standards.
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
  The issue is how you, as a (potential) patient, is going to interpret the fact that Doctor X graduated from a given med school. As a reader of libertarian stuff for 30 years, the usual answers are some combination of: 1) independent rating agency for med schools 2) independent rating agency for doctors (i.e. med school was irrelevant) 3) patient reviews for doctors 25 years of amzn have helped established serious questions about (3) (1) and (2) have the usual "who watches the watchers?" problems, which are fairly isomorphous to the problems with (3). And even without those issues, who wants to have do this level of research? Yeah, I know, libertarian nerds (meant with all possible respect). But almost nobody else. Part of the point (not all of it, to be sure) of things like the AMA, the FDA and other governmental regulation is to make people's lives simpler. Stop worrying about whether the doctor you're going to see has even met a basic level of medical qualification, and focus on whether you like their personality and approach, for example.
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    > (1) and (2) have the usual "who watches the watchers?" problems, Since we already deal with “who watches the watchers” problems in our current system, I see no problem here. > And even without those issues, who wants to have do this level of research? Yeah, I know, libertarian nerds (meant with all possible respect). But almost nobody else. Anyone who wants a good physician. > Part of the point (not all of it, to be sure) of things like the AMA, the FDA and other governmental regulation is to make people's lives simpler. Stop worrying about whether the doctor you're going to see has even met a basic level of medical qualification, and focus on whether you like their personality and approach, for example. If those things worked, this would be a point. Currently people can’t even afford to go to medical school, or afford to see a doctor, and when they get past the gatekeepers they are so desparate to get treatment that they can’t really even fathom rejecting a doctor because of a poor bedside manner.

paulmd 6y ago

The free market has decided that they don't want more doctors educated though. Guilds are very free market, do you not believe in freedom of association? I guess the true libertarian answer is that we don't really need certification at all, or that anyone should be able to start their own certification board. Like Rand Paul and his fake ophthalmology board he started to give himself credentials. Nothing is ever libertarian enough until we've removed all the regulations and let quacks practice medicine, is it?

lostapathy 6y ago
What about this is the free market? https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/thanks-to-doctors-there-arent-enough-doctors https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/thanks-to-doctors-there-a...
zepto 6y ago
In a free market we’d be able choose a non-guild doctor.
- paulmd 6y ago
  Which is exactly the “libertarians want to be able to make up fake credentials like Rand Paul’s fake ophthalmology board he made up for himself” I mentioned.
Jweb_Guru 6y ago
Essentially, yes. People refuse to understand that it is impossible for there to be a "health care market" in the usual sense because (1) like cable, running a hospital or clinic is expensive enough that many people have only one option, whether or not it is regulated, and (2) unlike cable, many people cannot choose whether or not to participate.