4 ms·

> Somehow, weirdly, we use the term 'benefit', without with I may more easily and quickly die or languish in pain. Some benefit ;) Not dying or languishing in

> Somehow, weirdly, we use the term 'benefit', without with I may more easily and quickly die or languish in pain. Some benefit ;) Not dying or languishing in pain sounds like a pretty awesome benefit. And indeed, that’s the problem with health care: when one needs it, one will pay almost anything to the provider. Prices are a communication: they signal customers how to ration goods, and producers how to produce them. The higher the price, the fewer the customers but the more the producers; the lower the prices, the more the customers but the fewer the producers. In a free economy, it is possible to say that the work output of one FAANG engineer is economically worth that of 5 New York City garbagemen or 10 Podunk, Idaho janitors or 35 burger-flippers. How many rolls of toilet paper is one vial of insulin worth? Infinitely more, to someone who doesn’t need insulin. Some fraction, for someone who does. Some really small fraction, for someone who needs it right now. It doesn’t make any sense for all three of those people to pay the same price, for either the toilet paper or the insulin. In a single-payer system, how much does the single payer pay? How much do the producers of health care (e.g., physicians, surgeons, nurses, medical researchers, pharmaceutical factories) get paid? It ends up being based on the whims of the people setting those prices (a wage is just a labour price), not on any fundamental voice of the market — and thus it is either too high, or too low, and there is no feedback mechanism to constrain it. And that means society will produce either too little or too much health care, which means it will produce too much or too little of other things.

mgkimsal 2y ago
Oh yeah, re benefit. I should have put it in "quotes" or something more to indicate the sarcasm. Gee.. what a great benefit the company provides me - thank you so much(!). > not on any fundamental voice of the market ... > And that means society will produce either too little or too much health care Are we producing 'too little' or 'too much' in the US right now? How would one tell? > It doesn’t make any sense for all three of those people to pay the same price, It doesn't many ANY sense at all? I produce an item and can make ... say, a 20% profit on it by selling at a standard price with my customer base. I could possibly make more with some form of dynamic pricing, but... to say my current approach doesn't make ANY sense seems a bit much, no?
- eadmund 2y ago
  I know that you put ‘benefit’ in quotes to indicate sarcasm. My earnest point is that you shouldn’t be sarcastic: not dying or being a pain is a real and genuine benefit. You should seriously be thankful for that benefit! > Are we producing 'too little' or 'too much' in the US right now? How would one tell? Probably both, in different circumstances. Not being able to tell is the key thing: without the constant negotiation of prices, there is no way to tell how much is too much or too little. That’s why command economies fail so badly: they do things like multiply the average monthly usage of toilet paper by the population, and then issue it uniformly to everyone monthly, not realising that some people have digestive issues and use more than average, while others live remotely and need to get a season’s supply at once. > It doesn't many ANY sense at all? I produce an item and can make ... say, a 20% profit on it by selling at a standard price with my customer base. I don’t think so. The value of a thing to a customer, or across all customers, is not determined by its production cost. Prices have to increase as demand goes up, and have to decrease as demand goes down. That’s what keeps the guy who doesn’t need insulin from stockpiling ‘too much’ of it just in case (because the price is higher than the marginal utility he would have for it), and ensures that there is some insulin available in some store for the guy who will die without it (because the price there is high enough that some remains unsold; he may not like that high price but he is glad to have the insulin).
  - mgkimsal 2y ago
    One more followup. I don't think we should be organizing our society in such a way that "staying alive" is considered a "benefit" that is largely at the whim of employers who can revoke that "benefit" at any point. The corporate world has bugged me for years with the "get a good job with good benefits!" then people somehow thinking they "deserve" those "benefits" from an employer. The employer relationship has amplified the brokenness of the insurance systems in place (however useful they may have originally been). I've got a similar bugbear with the word "scholarship" as a shorthand for "money" when... there's usually nothing "scholarly" about it. Yes, it's typically used for attending a university with nominally scholastic aspects to it, but "getting a scholarship" because... you hit a baseball X number of times, or what not... the language bugs me more than anything (as with "benefits").

mgkimsal 2y ago

Oh yeah, re benefit. I should have put it in "quotes" or something more to indicate the sarcasm. Gee.. what a great benefit the company provides me - thank you so much(!). > not on any fundamental voice of the market ... > And that means society will produce either too little or too much health care Are we producing 'too little' or 'too much' in the US right now? How would one tell? > It doesn’t make any sense for all three of those people to pay the same price, It doesn't many ANY sense at all? I produce an item and can make ... say, a 20% profit on it by selling at a standard price with my customer base. I could possibly make more with some form of dynamic pricing, but... to say my current approach doesn't make ANY sense seems a bit much, no?

eadmund 2y ago
I know that you put ‘benefit’ in quotes to indicate sarcasm. My earnest point is that you shouldn’t be sarcastic: not dying or being a pain is a real and genuine benefit. You should seriously be thankful for that benefit! > Are we producing 'too little' or 'too much' in the US right now? How would one tell? Probably both, in different circumstances. Not being able to tell is the key thing: without the constant negotiation of prices, there is no way to tell how much is too much or too little. That’s why command economies fail so badly: they do things like multiply the average monthly usage of toilet paper by the population, and then issue it uniformly to everyone monthly, not realising that some people have digestive issues and use more than average, while others live remotely and need to get a season’s supply at once. > It doesn't many ANY sense at all? I produce an item and can make ... say, a 20% profit on it by selling at a standard price with my customer base. I don’t think so. The value of a thing to a customer, or across all customers, is not determined by its production cost. Prices have to increase as demand goes up, and have to decrease as demand goes down. That’s what keeps the guy who doesn’t need insulin from stockpiling ‘too much’ of it just in case (because the price is higher than the marginal utility he would have for it), and ensures that there is some insulin available in some store for the guy who will die without it (because the price there is high enough that some remains unsold; he may not like that high price but he is glad to have the insulin).
- mgkimsal 2y ago
  One more followup. I don't think we should be organizing our society in such a way that "staying alive" is considered a "benefit" that is largely at the whim of employers who can revoke that "benefit" at any point. The corporate world has bugged me for years with the "get a good job with good benefits!" then people somehow thinking they "deserve" those "benefits" from an employer. The employer relationship has amplified the brokenness of the insurance systems in place (however useful they may have originally been). I've got a similar bugbear with the word "scholarship" as a shorthand for "money" when... there's usually nothing "scholarly" about it. Yes, it's typically used for attending a university with nominally scholastic aspects to it, but "getting a scholarship" because... you hit a baseball X number of times, or what not... the language bugs me more than anything (as with "benefits").