4 ms·

Sure, and universal health care helps even more but it doesn't fill the pockets of the members of the medical associations the way private health care does. Re

Sure, and universal health care helps even more but it doesn't fill the pockets of the members of the medical associations the way private health care does. Regulatory capture in its rawest form.

pgsimp 6y ago
Wait, what - you say it is "regulation" that there is no universal health care? How so? It seems to me "universal health care" would be the regulation. What is stopping people from getting together and forming their own "universal health care" group? There must be millions who are in favor of it? Get 100 million people together, and offer health care to each other. What's stopping you?
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  > What is stopping people from getting together and forming their own "universal health care" group? There must be millions who are in favor of it? Get 100 million people together, and offer health care to each other. What's stopping you? Some of them would have to put a lot of money at risk. When they do that, they usually want something in return. Well this is how corporations were invented. And those are regulated.
  - landemva 6y ago
    "What's stopping you?" Typically the State medical device licensing boards will stop you. Try this: get 1000 families to chip in for an MRI and techs to run it for the benefit of the 1000 and their families. When you apply for State permit to turn it on, that board will look at competition in the area and not allow it. The rules don't allow too much competition to drive down prices, so only the mega-corps typically can play the game.
    - pgsimp 6y ago
      Then why don't the universal health care people advocate for the abolishment of such laws?
      - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
        Because they don’t care that people are prohibited from forming mutually beneficial arrangements; they just want public healthcare to be free to the consumer at the point of sale and the details of how this is achieved (and what is sacrificed in order to obtain this) are generally not interesting to them.
imtringued 6y ago
Arguably, one of the dumbest things you could do is restrict the training and employment of medical professionals while simultaneously having privatized healthcare. I disagree with private healthcare but there are ways to make it work. Here is the basic idea. People are sick and there are not enough doctors and not enough drugs. Cost of healthcare rises until more doctors can be hired. Thus there will always be enough doctors. It also rewards superior care by making superior care more profitable. However, if you artificially restrict the number of doctors then you are going against the idea of privatized health care. Similarly, if its possible to buy an existing drug to monopolize it and raise prices you are going against the idea of privatized healthcare. It's the same with student loans. You privatize education and make students pay for it. Fine. However, by guaranteeing loans you did the exact opposite. You simultaneously privatized it and nationalized it in a highly inefficient way.

Sure, and universal health care helps even more but it doesn't fill the pockets of the members of the medical associations the way private health care does. Regulatory capture in its rawest form.

pgsimp 6y ago

Wait, what - you say it is "regulation" that there is no universal health care? How so? It seems to me "universal health care" would be the regulation. What is stopping people from getting together and forming their own "universal health care" group? There must be millions who are in favor of it? Get 100 million people together, and offer health care to each other. What's stopping you?

chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> What is stopping people from getting together and forming their own "universal health care" group? There must be millions who are in favor of it? Get 100 million people together, and offer health care to each other. What's stopping you? Some of them would have to put a lot of money at risk. When they do that, they usually want something in return. Well this is how corporations were invented. And those are regulated.
- landemva 6y ago
  "What's stopping you?" Typically the State medical device licensing boards will stop you. Try this: get 1000 families to chip in for an MRI and techs to run it for the benefit of the 1000 and their families. When you apply for State permit to turn it on, that board will look at competition in the area and not allow it. The rules don't allow too much competition to drive down prices, so only the mega-corps typically can play the game.
  - pgsimp 6y ago
    Then why don't the universal health care people advocate for the abolishment of such laws?
    - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
      Because they don’t care that people are prohibited from forming mutually beneficial arrangements; they just want public healthcare to be free to the consumer at the point of sale and the details of how this is achieved (and what is sacrificed in order to obtain this) are generally not interesting to them.

imtringued 6y ago

Arguably, one of the dumbest things you could do is restrict the training and employment of medical professionals while simultaneously having privatized healthcare. I disagree with private healthcare but there are ways to make it work. Here is the basic idea. People are sick and there are not enough doctors and not enough drugs. Cost of healthcare rises until more doctors can be hired. Thus there will always be enough doctors. It also rewards superior care by making superior care more profitable. However, if you artificially restrict the number of doctors then you are going against the idea of privatized health care. Similarly, if its possible to buy an existing drug to monopolize it and raise prices you are going against the idea of privatized healthcare. It's the same with student loans. You privatize education and make students pay for it. Fine. However, by guaranteeing loans you did the exact opposite. You simultaneously privatized it and nationalized it in a highly inefficient way.