4 ms·

I agree with your position. There is a trend on HN and other platforms that anything with a profit motive is bad. Capitalism is bad, profits are bad... Yet it

I agree with your position. There is a trend on HN and other platforms that anything with a profit motive is bad. Capitalism is bad, profits are bad... Yet it is all complaining on the problems without a actual real solution. I thought HN was better, focus on the actual problems and not let every discussion turn into a profit/capitalism = bad debate.

tfourb 3y ago
The "actual real solution" with the regard to the topic in this thread is demonstrated well by a number of countries around the globe: force everyone in a country to be part of a public health insurance system, financed mostly by deductions on income and tightly regulate price setting for drugs and medical services administered under that system. If that sounds too much like socialism for your taste, give rich people the option to buy additional services or restrict the public system to basic medical services and drugs and require private insurance on top for cutting-edge stuff. Profit is a great thing, but it is not an end to itself. The point of liberal democratic societies is to guarantee basic rights for everyone, while constantly improving the welfare (which is not the same as wealth) of as many people as possible. Capitalism has made great contributions towards that goal, but it also contradicts it in several critical places and thus needs to be regulated where necessary.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  >tightly regulate price setting for drugs and medical services administered under that system. One think I think worth mentioning is that there is a significant difference between price controls and purchasing controls. purchasing controls is simply refusing to buy if the price is too high, while price controls is mandating a miniumum or maximum price for X. nearly every successful medical system uses purchasing controls, not price controls. IMO, one of the main reasons costs are out of control is a lack of purchasing controls.

tfourb 3y ago

The "actual real solution" with the regard to the topic in this thread is demonstrated well by a number of countries around the globe: force everyone in a country to be part of a public health insurance system, financed mostly by deductions on income and tightly regulate price setting for drugs and medical services administered under that system. If that sounds too much like socialism for your taste, give rich people the option to buy additional services or restrict the public system to basic medical services and drugs and require private insurance on top for cutting-edge stuff. Profit is a great thing, but it is not an end to itself. The point of liberal democratic societies is to guarantee basic rights for everyone, while constantly improving the welfare (which is not the same as wealth) of as many people as possible. Capitalism has made great contributions towards that goal, but it also contradicts it in several critical places and thus needs to be regulated where necessary.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
>tightly regulate price setting for drugs and medical services administered under that system. One think I think worth mentioning is that there is a significant difference between price controls and purchasing controls. purchasing controls is simply refusing to buy if the price is too high, while price controls is mandating a miniumum or maximum price for X. nearly every successful medical system uses purchasing controls, not price controls. IMO, one of the main reasons costs are out of control is a lack of purchasing controls.