6 ms·

It's also a very poor fit for free markets Yeah, just look at what (nearly) free and open markets have done to things like vision correction surgery. Quality h

It's also a very poor fit for free markets Yeah, just look at what (nearly) free and open markets have done to things like vision correction surgery. Quality has gone up exponentially while prices have dropped by one to two orders of magnitude. Those free markets are awful. The problem with medicine isn't that it isn't a match for free markets, it's that there are no remotely free markets in the space.

superuser2 13y ago
This is ridiculous and you know it. If vision correction surgery is too expensive for you, you can wear glasses or contacts instead and be totally fine. There is actually market pressure to drive prices down and quality up because there'd be less money to make otherwise. Demand for treatment of a life-threatening, painful, or debilitating disease does not depend on the price or the quality. It's not free market at all because consumers have no choice but to buy at any price.
- PKop 13y ago
  > Demand for treatment of a life-threatening, painful, or debilitating disease does not depend on the price or the quality. It's not a free market at all because consumers have no choice but to buy at any price. If this were true, wouldn't this be true: Demand for [food, shelter,..other necessity..,] does not depend on the price or the quality. Markets for this good can never be free because consumers have no choice but to buy [food, shelter, etc.] at any price. Don't consumers always have a choice at least to the degree with which they have choices of whom to by from?
  - superuser2 13y ago
    Food and shelter are classic examples of necessary goods which the government provides through taxation to those who can't afford them.
    - PKop 13y ago
      Government subsidization would only put more upward pressure on prices though. And yet, food does not cost infinity dollars. I wonder why?
      - mikeash 13y ago
        Inelastic demand doesn't imply infinite price as long as there's competition among suppliers. Government subsidies on the demand side would put upward pressure on prices, but government subsidies on the supply side put downward pressure on prices, and there's a lot of supply-side subsidies.
        mistercow 13y ago
        I tend to agree, but to be fair, some of this would be mitigated if the market were truly free. For example, the lack of competition issue would be largely resolved in the absence of patents that grant long monopolies to single companies.
    - Houshalter 13y ago
      The government doesn't produce them or set the price, they merely buy them. It's still a free market.
- InclinedPlane 13y ago
  You're talking about demand, which is orthogonal to competition. There are plenty of inelastic demand industries which are still quite beneficially served by competitive markets. And that includes things in the realm of goods and services that are quite literally life saving.
- sergiosgc 13y ago
  ≥ If vision correction surgery is too expensive for you, you can wear glasses or contacts instead and be totally fine. As someone who had lasik to correct a 9 dioptre astigmatism/myopia, I can tell you there is a world of difference between prosthetic correction and native correction. It's not just in terms of comfort. I can see better than I did with the perfect prescription glasses. I have a much wider viewing angle. I don't have to worry ever again with lens angle rotation. For high corrections, glasses are anachronic, and should be considered the wrong treatment.
mikeash 13y ago
The problems that medicine has with free markets apply least to elective, cosmetic procedures like laser eye surgery, and that is naturally where market forces have had great success. There are plenty of free markets in other sorts of medicine out there, just not in the USA. They are often very good if you have money, thorough information on the provider, and enough time to take advantage of it, and atrocious otherwise. That's not the sort of system I want to have where I live.
- nickff 13y ago
  The question which follows from this is whether your idealism gives you the right to coerce others into living by your rules.

superuser2 13y ago

This is ridiculous and you know it. If vision correction surgery is too expensive for you, you can wear glasses or contacts instead and be totally fine. There is actually market pressure to drive prices down and quality up because there'd be less money to make otherwise. Demand for treatment of a life-threatening, painful, or debilitating disease does not depend on the price or the quality. It's not free market at all because consumers have no choice but to buy at any price.

PKop 13y ago
> Demand for treatment of a life-threatening, painful, or debilitating disease does not depend on the price or the quality. It's not a free market at all because consumers have no choice but to buy at any price. If this were true, wouldn't this be true: Demand for [food, shelter,..other necessity..,] does not depend on the price or the quality. Markets for this good can never be free because consumers have no choice but to buy [food, shelter, etc.] at any price. Don't consumers always have a choice at least to the degree with which they have choices of whom to by from?
- superuser2 13y ago
  Food and shelter are classic examples of necessary goods which the government provides through taxation to those who can't afford them.
  - PKop 13y ago
    Government subsidization would only put more upward pressure on prices though. And yet, food does not cost infinity dollars. I wonder why?
    - mikeash 13y ago
      Inelastic demand doesn't imply infinite price as long as there's competition among suppliers. Government subsidies on the demand side would put upward pressure on prices, but government subsidies on the supply side put downward pressure on prices, and there's a lot of supply-side subsidies.
      - mistercow 13y ago
        I tend to agree, but to be fair, some of this would be mitigated if the market were truly free. For example, the lack of competition issue would be largely resolved in the absence of patents that grant long monopolies to single companies.
  - Houshalter 13y ago
    The government doesn't produce them or set the price, they merely buy them. It's still a free market.
InclinedPlane 13y ago
You're talking about demand, which is orthogonal to competition. There are plenty of inelastic demand industries which are still quite beneficially served by competitive markets. And that includes things in the realm of goods and services that are quite literally life saving.
sergiosgc 13y ago
≥ If vision correction surgery is too expensive for you, you can wear glasses or contacts instead and be totally fine. As someone who had lasik to correct a 9 dioptre astigmatism/myopia, I can tell you there is a world of difference between prosthetic correction and native correction. It's not just in terms of comfort. I can see better than I did with the perfect prescription glasses. I have a much wider viewing angle. I don't have to worry ever again with lens angle rotation. For high corrections, glasses are anachronic, and should be considered the wrong treatment.

mikeash 13y ago

The problems that medicine has with free markets apply least to elective, cosmetic procedures like laser eye surgery, and that is naturally where market forces have had great success. There are plenty of free markets in other sorts of medicine out there, just not in the USA. They are often very good if you have money, thorough information on the provider, and enough time to take advantage of it, and atrocious otherwise. That's not the sort of system I want to have where I live.

nickff 13y ago
The question which follows from this is whether your idealism gives you the right to coerce others into living by your rules.