i have often heard the contention that our high medical costs could be reduced by taking advantage of free market economics. But I do not see how this would work in the real world If I have a heart attack, should I call around to find the least expensive ambulance service... then call around to check the prices for the least expensive hospital, then try to find an inexpensive surgeon, and price compare the various different drugs And how do I figure out whether I would actually be better off with maybe a different choice that only seems to be more expensive? Maybe the less expensive ambulance service will take longer to arrive... or be staffed by less skilled personnel. Should I go with a generic drug, or a newer drug that has no generic version? Should I choose a hospital based only on price, or should I choose a hospital where my doctor has admitting privileges? And do we really expect everyone to do this research? plumbers, senior citizens, Walmart clerks, kids just out of high school... we anticipate everyone is going to expertly evaluate all these factors? This idea does not make sense to me. What am I missing?
well, we all do much of our shopping long before we buy. You know a Rolls Royce is a better more expensive more polluting car for example than a Prius. In a free market prices would be published long before you got sick and companies would be working hard to build their reputations long before you needed them so when you did need them you would select them. It would be sweet justice indeed to see these businesses who have been charging us 3-4 times more than they should all of the sudden be competing for our business on basis of price and quality. Best guess is that prices would come down 80% and quality would skyrocket
And of course, the poor would remain untreated, or badly treated. Sounds awesome, for about 20% of us.
why?? they would get same vouchers as everyone else until free market competition would enable them to purchase their own health care!!!
There is NO SUCH THING as freemarket healthcare.. Never has been , never will be. Even physicians don't treat themselves.
Seems to be a priorities conversation. Luckily, you have the time, and money to spend time on this forum.
Free market: an economic market or system in which prices are based on competition among private businesses and not controlled by a government (Websters) Not sure what your definition of free market is, but yes there could be and there was at one time. Also not sure what physicians treating themselves have to do with free market.
Its not applicable to healthcare.. Private delivery is NOT freemarket. When you are admitted to the hospital YOU are not the customer. Your attending physician is the customer. You don't order from a list of tests, procedures or medications.. You don't interpret tests, xrays etc.
Which businesses? Healthcare providers, allied services, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies?
It's not private delivery it's choice amount private individuals or companies. Example in my city. There are several hospitals and 1 or 2 are considered better than the rest. Free Market says I can go to the one I like best, NOT free market says I have to go where my doctor/insurance says. Another example: There's a heart doctor in my city that is world renowned. Free market says I can go to him is I can afford him, NOT free market says I can't go to him unless he's in my network. See how free market works. It really is the definition, still not sure what your definition is though.
That has NOTHING to do with freemarket healthcare. You are talking about insurance companies and cost shifting.
Please explain how it does not pertain to free market? Cost-shifting: is either an economic situation where one individual, group, or government underpays for a service, resulting another individual, group or government overpaying for a service To a degree I'm talking about insurance companies and no I'm not talking about cost shifting. I'm not not wanting to underpay anyone. I want a doctor/hospital to provide a service at a price. If I agree with that price and can afford it, I pay that price for the services of the doctor/hospital.
You are not missing anything. Thst said of course when the medical need is not urgent a free market could help assuming that there is total price transparency and the actual performance records of the doctor and hospital are readily available and comparable. And even at yhat ofyen medical procedures incur complications which make cost comparisons moot. Very much like the contractor who suddenly starts billing outrageous amounts for any " extras" That said if you want to use the free market in medicine suggest comparing prices between having things done in the US and going overseas. You can save a pile of mobey by going to other countries and in some cases insurance companies will pay for it and eliminate any deductables since the prices are so favorable.
Prior to Insurance companies when Doctors came door to door, you could choose which doctor you wanted. It was not mandated which doctor you had to see.
Would it be sufficient to be free to choose insurance company (or not and seek healthcare directly from providers willing to work on that basis, which they'd be free not to or to do so for higher prices of course)? Part of how the current system works there is arrangements between insurers and providers to effectively "bulk-buy" services. The kind of individual flexibility you're talking about risks loosing the benefit of that, ultimately increasing prices. In general terms, healthcare isn't a "normal" market so simply saying "lets just have a free market" creates unique complications and difficulties that need to be understood and addressed.
I've posted on this several times. The only way cash only medical care works is if it's backed up by a high deductible catastrophic care policy.
govt could make health care capitalist and reduce prices 80% by requiring published prices and temporarily giving people voucher( convertible to cash a year end) for 5-$20,000.
simple!! published prices, people shopping with their own money, national or international competition. try to imagine that versus the socialist system we have today.
Unfortunatly, buying a medical procedure is not quite as simple as buying a can of soup. You obviously have never been in a hospital or had a major medical problem or you would know this very simple fact. Just as a simple example you are in the hospital for chest pains. Who do you think orders the tests. Who do you think calls in the heart specialists. Who orders the heart catheritization. Who orders the transfusions. Hint- it ain't you and you ain't going to put it out for competitive bids. The one thing moronic simple solutions to complex problems have in common other than being moronic is that they don't work.
My insurance comes through my work so choice of insurance is not an option. Yes I could choose another job with insurance that let's me go to that hospital, but the stable job is more important than the insurance. If the providers in a free market wanted to charge more that would be there option, but there would likely be someone that will be just as good, but cheaper.
Actually it is as easy as a can of soup.....almost. https://surgerycenterok.com/ I've heard this argument about patient not being able to choose test and stuff before and I've never understood the point. Going to a doctor and tell them you have chest pains, isn't any different than calling the plumber and telling them you have a leak under the house. Both will order a bunch of tests. In the end both the Doctor and the Plumber will tell you the results of the tests and you can decide what you want to do. You are not made to have the surgery nor fix the leak if you want, or even have the tests. Choosing not to fix either would not be a smart choice, but it is the persons choice.
