4 ms·

Because healthcare as a service does not come even close to satisfy the conditions required for perfect competition. Without going too much in detail, the "cus

Because healthcare as a service does not come even close to satisfy the conditions required for perfect competition. Without going too much in detail, the "customers" cannot have perfect information regarding the treatment or course of action that's most convenient for them at a given moment, and they cannot freely decide when (or often whether) to make use of the service or not—"It's probably best I get appendicitis now that I can afford it rather than wait until next year".

WalterBright 4y ago
The free market does not require perfect competition nor perfect information at all. Imperfect information, for example, is called "risk", and risk is factored into every price. Besides, why would you think socialist medicine would provide perfect information?
- Mordisquitos 4y ago
  > Besides, why would you think socialist medicine would provide perfect information? Where have I come even close to suggesting it would? Perfect information, to the extent it can be possible, is a requirement for a market to be efficient. What you call "socialist medicine" is by definition not a market, so perfect information is a moot point. What universal healthcare can provide is the adequate incentives for providing early diagnosis, promoting preventative medicine, and giving safe and effective treatment. Where are the incentives for early diagnosis and prevention in free market healthcare? Furthermore, pure free market healthcare provides an intrinsic incentive to extract abusive profit from a customer whose life or wellbeing are on the line, and who does not have the knowledge to decide whether they really need this expensive procedure they are being offered. This already happens to an extent under the current U.S. model. There's no reason to assume it wouldn't be even worse under a completely free market.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    > Perfect information, to the extent it can be possible, is a requirement for a market to be efficient This is simply not true, as I said, risk factors into every price. > Where are the incentives for early diagnosis and prevention in free market healthcare? Don't you feel any incentive to take care of yourself with early diagnosis and prevention? > pure free market healthcare provides an intrinsic incentive to extract abusive profit from a customer whose life or wellbeing are on the line Just like if you're hungry. But food in a free market is cheap and plentiful. > who does not have the knowledge to decide whether they really need this expensive procedure they are being offered. The beauty of the free market is the consumer gets to decide who to trust. > There's no reason to assume it wouldn't be even worse under a completely free market. The US had a free market in health care up to the 1960s, and there's no evidence of the dark predictions you make for it.

WalterBright 4y ago

The free market does not require perfect competition nor perfect information at all. Imperfect information, for example, is called "risk", and risk is factored into every price. Besides, why would you think socialist medicine would provide perfect information?

Mordisquitos 4y ago
> Besides, why would you think socialist medicine would provide perfect information? Where have I come even close to suggesting it would? Perfect information, to the extent it can be possible, is a requirement for a market to be efficient. What you call "socialist medicine" is by definition not a market, so perfect information is a moot point. What universal healthcare can provide is the adequate incentives for providing early diagnosis, promoting preventative medicine, and giving safe and effective treatment. Where are the incentives for early diagnosis and prevention in free market healthcare? Furthermore, pure free market healthcare provides an intrinsic incentive to extract abusive profit from a customer whose life or wellbeing are on the line, and who does not have the knowledge to decide whether they really need this expensive procedure they are being offered. This already happens to an extent under the current U.S. model. There's no reason to assume it wouldn't be even worse under a completely free market.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  > Perfect information, to the extent it can be possible, is a requirement for a market to be efficient This is simply not true, as I said, risk factors into every price. > Where are the incentives for early diagnosis and prevention in free market healthcare? Don't you feel any incentive to take care of yourself with early diagnosis and prevention? > pure free market healthcare provides an intrinsic incentive to extract abusive profit from a customer whose life or wellbeing are on the line Just like if you're hungry. But food in a free market is cheap and plentiful. > who does not have the knowledge to decide whether they really need this expensive procedure they are being offered. The beauty of the free market is the consumer gets to decide who to trust. > There's no reason to assume it wouldn't be even worse under a completely free market. The US had a free market in health care up to the 1960s, and there's no evidence of the dark predictions you make for it.