Reps might dislike’n all, but...

[Harambe]

I didnt know that was exclusive to billionaires.

I don't see how Cy implied it was...

 

[JohnnyClutch]

It's not about billionaires being against the rest of us, it's about them being out of touch with what normal people have to deal with. Does a $5000 deductible even register as a blip to someone with that much money? They spend more on shoes in a month. They cannot understand what a burden our healthcare system is for regular people.

Agreed 100%; however, the answer isn't to make everyone pay for those high costs, but to turn the free market onto creating better solutions.

 

[One Brow]

Agreed 100%; however, the answer isn't to make everyone pay for those high costs, but to turn the free market onto creating better solutions.

The free market is not magic; it doesn't always have a better solution.

 

[LogGrad98]

Agreed 100%; however, the answer isn't to make everyone pay for those high costs, but to turn the free market onto creating better solutions.

I'm losing my belief that the free market can do this effectively in health care. Here's why. Health care is not a "normal" good or service. It is a very price inelastic product. No matter how much you raise the price, the change in demand will be very minimal, meaning that automatically if you artificially raise prices (see every pharma company in existence with skyrocketing profit margins amid high price controversies) you automatically generate higher profits. Add to that very high barriers to entry in the market and you have a recipe, without firm regulation, for the free market to drive prices higher and higher with no repercussions other than higher profits! That is why utilities are regulated and not allowed to run on a for-profit model alone, because it was recognized early on that everyone needs full access to water and sewer and gas and electricity so they had to put rules in place to control the price inelasticity of electricity to avoid issues of income dictating who had lights. But we have been very hesitant in treating medicine like a utility, largely because the stakes are so much higher, and money talks, and nothing sways a politician more than money. We are far behind every other developed nation in treating health care the same way we treat electricity. It is no less important, but the affects are less immediately seen, and the money is a lot bigger. It's a travesty really. In just the last 20 years we have fallen so far behind the developed world in this regard. And it is unconscionable we treat people's lives as commodities to be traded on. This isn't a capitalist vs socialist argument, or an academic analysis of free market theory, this is people who cannot get the care they need because we refuse to see that health care is as important to a functioning society as clean water and waste control.

 

[fishonjazz]

I'm losing my belief that the free market can do this effectively in health care. Here's why. Health care is not a "normal" good or service. It is a very price inelastic product. No matter how much you raise the price, the change in demand will be very minimal, meaning that automatically if you artificially raise prices (see every pharma company in existence with skyrocketing profit margins amid high price controversies) you automatically generate higher profits. Add to that very high barriers to entry in the market and you have a recipe, without firm regulation, for the free market to drive prices higher and higher with no repercussions other than higher profits! That is why utilities are regulated and not allowed to run on a for-profit model alone, because it was recognized early on that everyone needs full access to water and sewer and gas and electricity so they had to put rules in place to control the price inelasticity of electricity to avoid issues of income dictating who had lights. But we have been very hesitant in treating medicine like a utility, largely because the stakes are so much higher, and money talks, and nothing sways a politician more than money. We are far behind every other developed nation in treating health care the same way we treat electricity. It is no less important, but the affects are less immediately seen, and the money is a lot bigger. It's a travesty really. In just the last 20 years we have fallen so far behind the developed world in this regard. And it is unconscionable we treat people's lives as commodities to be traded on. This isn't a capitalist vs socialist argument, or an academic analysis of free market theory, this is people who cannot get the care they need because we refuse to see that health care is as important to a functioning society as clean water and waste control.

God damn that's one of the best posts I have ever seen.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[The Jazz Wonderbra]

Poor Ekpe. He finally gets a post and there are 4 comments about him in 3 pages.

Then again, maybe this is how he would like it. An open forum about "the book".

Having said that, I do miss the days of $400 health care. This $1200 per month is like a freaking mortgage.

 

[lauriandres]

I'm losing my belief that the free market can do this effectively in health care. Here's why. Health care is not a "normal" good or service. It is a very price inelastic product. No matter how much you raise the price, the change in demand will be very minimal, meaning that automatically if you artificially raise prices (see every pharma company in existence with skyrocketing profit margins amid high price controversies) you automatically generate higher profits. Add to that very high barriers to entry in the market and you have a recipe, without firm regulation, for the free market to drive prices higher and higher with no repercussions other than higher profits! That is why utilities are regulated and not allowed to run on a for-profit model alone, because it was recognized early on that everyone needs full access to water and sewer and gas and electricity so they had to put rules in place to control the price inelasticity of electricity to avoid issues of income dictating who had lights. But we have been very hesitant in treating medicine like a utility, largely because the stakes are so much higher, and money talks, and nothing sways a politician more than money. We are far behind every other developed nation in treating health care the same way we treat electricity. It is no less important, but the affects are less immediately seen, and the money is a lot bigger. It's a travesty really. In just the last 20 years we have fallen so far behind the developed world in this regard. And it is unconscionable we treat people's lives as commodities to be traded on. This isn't a capitalist vs socialist argument, or an academic analysis of free market theory, this is people who cannot get the care they need because we refuse to see that health care is as important to a functioning society as clean water and waste control.

For example, what is usual price in Utah for a box of Diclofenac 150 or Arcoxia 120? In Estonia (if you have prescription from the doctor) they cost around 8 and 13 EUR. At least Diclofenac is supplied by different manufacturers, not sure about Arcoxia.

 

[LogGrad98]

Prescription medications are significantly cheaper in other developed countries then in the US, primarily due to government regulation. However in the US prices are often hundreds of times higher because we refuse to regulate life saving medications. This means the US subsidizes the rest of the world and drives the record profits in pharma companies. With the price disparity that means that our proportion of pharma profits are way way way out of whack. And since they have the money to buy the politicians this kind of regulation isn't even a topic of conversation, let alone an outcome we can reasonably expect.