LogFAQs > #884085698

The Deadpool posted...

Transcendentia posted...

probably right around the time when the government partnered up with the giant pharmaceuticals and giant health insurance companies.

http://m.content.healthaffairs.org/content/25/1/45.full

Transcendentia posted...

if you really think the open market did this, how do you explain how the open market has revolutionized every other sector?

Oh my God, you really think that?

I mean, one would think private fire fighters or the current private prison problem would be dead give away.

Hell, the total failure of laissez fairer economics In the 19th century giving rise to the infamous robber barons alone should be enough to make people question the open market.

Good stuff can come out of he open market, but not everything. Health care in itself is a problem for the open market.

Capitalism is based on supply and demand. But demand for healthcare is essentially infinite. It breaks the equation and creates too many opportunities for abuse. Which we've seen over the past century.

If you agree that the demand for healthcare is essentially infinite, how do you justify the idea that all it takes to provide an infinitely demanded service...is higher taxation? Clearly that's not working out in the UK or Canada, and we'll live to see those bubbles collapse.

If it's infinitely demanded, why not make it as ubiquitous as smartphones? Why not make the technology that can provide on demand healthcare available by investing into it now? Socialized healthcare is effectively going to kill any innovation. America is, by far, leading the world in innovations in the medical and biological world. We need more of that, with an emphasis on rewarding the individuals and companies that provide the best technological breakthroughs.

You want the government to tax people more so that they can pay more doctors. I want the government to prioritize ushering in technological revolutions in healthcare so that we don't need to rely on tax cattle and doctors for healthcare. My strategy would be sustainable and it would win. And it'll have to happen eventually anyway.

Your strategy only works if taxes keep going up, if populations keep increasing, and if healthcare is treated as a sector that creates jobs. That's not sustainable because populations will decrease, tax revenue will dry up with time, and that kind of system will remove the incentive to treat the disease rather than the symptoms.

You know how pharmaceuticals are in the business of treating symptoms rather than diseases, as a means of retaining customers? Why on earth do you want to prop up an entire economy on that model of healthcare? Canada needs to hire 50% more doctors if they want to stay afloat as far as meeting demand. What happens if they succeed in making their population healthier though?

No matter which way I look at your model, it doesn't work. :/