|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 5:14 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| kinerry wrote: |
Incorrect, by definition health care does not qualify for the free market because of the mis-matched end goals. Consumers want to stay healthy and debt free, health-care providers want to turn a profit.
Health care providers make more money when you are denied service, and you can't exactly change providers because any of them that don't do the same thing can't compete. I can't get insurance at all in the US because I have a pre-existing condition. |
Nonsense. The state created the insurance system in the US. A market based system existed before WW2 and functioned just fine. What you should have said is that the concept of insurance and modern medicine are mis-matched. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kinerry
Joined: 01 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| kinerry wrote: |
Incorrect, by definition health care does not qualify for the free market because of the mis-matched end goals. Consumers want to stay healthy and debt free, health-care providers want to turn a profit.
Health care providers make more money when you are denied service, and you can't exactly change providers because any of them that don't do the same thing can't compete. I can't get insurance at all in the US because I have a pre-existing condition. |
Nonsense. The state created the insurance system in the US. A market based system existed before WW2 and functioned just fine. What you should have said is that the concept of insurance and modern medicine are mis-matched. |
Health care providers = health care insurers, you get the point.
They literally give their people bonuses for denying coverage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kinerry wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| No_hite_pls wrote: |
Canadian's on average live 3 and half years longer than Americans with there socailized Medicine.
I know three people in the states that were sold unnessary surgeries. One of these people died (my aunt). In the states doctors are medical salesman that if you have good insurance will sell you medical services that you may or maynot need. In Canada medicine is need based. Need based is the smartest way to go. |
No it isn't. Supply and demand is far better. In a free market (which the US doesn't have), the quality of care would be higher and the price cheaper. Everyone would be able to afford care and there would be no shortage of doctors (no permits necessary). If anyone sells you a fraudulent product (or a botched surgery) then they would be legally liable to damages and/or criminal charges. Would it be perfect? No, but far better than socialized health care. |
Incorrect, by definition health care does not qualify for the free market because of the mis-matched end goals. Consumers want to stay healthy and debt free, health-care providers want to turn a profit.
Health care providers make more money when you are denied service, and you can't exactly change providers because any of them that don't do the same thing can't compete. I can't get insurance at all in the US because I have a pre-existing condition.
As for rationing...what in life isn't? That's a pretty lousy meme.
Did you even spend 10 seconds thinking about what you said?
Health care is more of a public good; like the highway system, or the legal system, or the military (which clearly aren't being rationed). |
Sorry but you're the one who needs to put more than 10 seconds of thought into your posts...
From top to bottom all of the obstacles preventing people from getting care in the US (starting with the parasitic insurance industry) have come from government interference (including regulation and subsidies that encourage the formation of cartels). In a true free market, doctors would simply provide care for whatever price people are willing to pay. There would be no need for permits or insurance coverage. Supply and demand. Doctors who charged too much would get undercut by cheaper competition, the same as anything else. Your point about doctors not wanting to treat patients so they can get more money is completely nonsensical in the context of free market economics. In a free market doctors get paid for treating people. The better job they do the better their reputation, and the more work that would come their way. Good doctors could charge more, and even the poor could receive good treatment for a cheap price (as it used to be before government regulation took over our society).
And it goes without saying that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Some doctors are willing to treat the poor as charity, but one way or another health care has to be paid for. Taxes is the least efficient way to do it (as well as being coercive and antithetical to the American way ie. liberty). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kinerry
Joined: 01 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| kinerry wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| No_hite_pls wrote: |
Canadian's on average live 3 and half years longer than Americans with there socailized Medicine.
I know three people in the states that were sold unnessary surgeries. One of these people died (my aunt). In the states doctors are medical salesman that if you have good insurance will sell you medical services that you may or maynot need. In Canada medicine is need based. Need based is the smartest way to go. |
No it isn't. Supply and demand is far better. In a free market (which the US doesn't have), the quality of care would be higher and the price cheaper. Everyone would be able to afford care and there would be no shortage of doctors (no permits necessary). If anyone sells you a fraudulent product (or a botched surgery) then they would be legally liable to damages and/or criminal charges. Would it be perfect? No, but far better than socialized health care. |
Incorrect, by definition health care does not qualify for the free market because of the mis-matched end goals. Consumers want to stay healthy and debt free, health-care providers want to turn a profit.
Health care providers make more money when you are denied service, and you can't exactly change providers because any of them that don't do the same thing can't compete. I can't get insurance at all in the US because I have a pre-existing condition.
As for rationing...what in life isn't? That's a pretty lousy meme.
Did you even spend 10 seconds thinking about what you said?
Health care is more of a public good; like the highway system, or the legal system, or the military (which clearly aren't being rationed). |
Sorry but you're the one who needs to put more than 10 seconds of thought into your posts...
From top to bottom all of the obstacles preventing people from getting care in the US (starting with the parasitic insurance industry) have come from government interference (including regulation and subsidies that encourage the formation of cartels). In a true free market, doctors would simply provide care for whatever price people are willing to pay. There would be no need for permits or insurance coverage. Supply and demand. Doctors who charged too much would get undercut by cheaper competition, the same as anything else. Your point about doctors not wanting to treat patients so they can get more money is completely nonsensical in the context of free market economics. In a free market doctors get paid for treating people. The better job they do the better their reputation, and the more work that would come their way. Good doctors could charge more, and even the poor could receive good treatment for a cheap price (as it used to be before government regulation took over our society).
And it goes without saying that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Some doctors are willing to treat the poor as charity, but one way or another health care has to be paid for. Taxes is the least efficient way to do it (as well as being coercive and antithetical to the American way ie. liberty). |
You are making 0 sense whatsoever. I never mentioned a damned thing about doctors denying treatment, I said insurance companies refuse to cover treatment to save money.
Also, cartels are illegal in the US, thanks to REGULATION.
As for taxes, do you not know anything about economics? There is a point of equilibrium where taxation is optimal; that is it doesn't effect the elasticity of demand much while obtaining a maximum amount of tax income.
Taxes are not antithetical, being taxed without representation is. The price you pay for a functioning society is taxes, and like I said, there is an optimal taxation point. In fact, this is a key aspect of "reaganomics" that was discovered with the "yacht tax".
Please read what I say, as you seem to be reading half of it before hopping on your Jump to Conclusions(tm) mat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kinerry wrote: |
| You are making 0 sense whatsoever. I never mentioned a damned thing about doctors denying treatment, I said insurance companies refuse to cover treatment to save money. |
Perhaps I'm not making sense to you because you're one of those liberal types that thinks the secrets of the universe are all contained in a 2 hour Michael Moore flick and that you already have all the answers?
Look, it's quite simple: big greedy insurance companies are irrelevant in a free market economy (which we don't have in the US btw). While some doctors are greedy and happy to play along, above all it's government regulation and subsidies (which can be traced all the way down the line to the existence of our central bank) that keeps the insurance companies in business. Neither doctors nor patients need insurance companies.
| Quote: |
| Also, cartels are illegal in the US, thanks to REGULATION. |
IS THAT SO?  And to think you accuse me of posting before thinking...
Here's a few of the most obvious cartels in America that owe their existence directly to government regulation:
1) The Federal Reserve central bank (and all the private commercial banks that own it). This ties into the insurance industry cartel.
2) The FDA (and all the rotten pharmaceutical companies it empowers and subsidizes).
3) Big oil (pretty obvious).
4) The military industrial complex (enough said).
| Quote: |
| As for taxes, do you not know anything about economics? There is a point of equilibrium where taxation is optimal; that is it doesn't effect the elasticity of demand much while obtaining a maximum amount of tax income. |
Judging by your posts so far, I'm fairly certain I know more about economics than you (and there are others on here who are more knowledgeable than myself who would no doubt agree with my points). The optimum taxation is the bare minimum required to keep our servant government in operation so it can uphold the constitution. No more than that is necessary (and anything more just encourages the expansion of government to the detriment of everyone else). The market looks after everything else on its own.
| Quote: |
| Taxes are not antithetical, being taxed without representation is. The price you pay for a functioning society is taxes, and like I said, there is an optimal taxation point. In fact, this is a key aspect of "reaganomics" that was discovered with the "yacht tax". |
See above. Taxes are required to pay for a functioning government that will uphold the constitution and keep law and order. That's all. This is a very small amount. Everything else, including the production of all goods and services, operates better outside the control of government. If you want to debate this, bring it on (you will lose the debate, I assure you)...
| Quote: |
| Please read what I say, as you seem to be reading half of it before hopping on your Jump to Conclusions(tm) mat. |
Please think a little harder before you reply. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Healthcare like a highway. Strange logic. I like to be able to pick and choose. Study my choices. I dont like the idea of government taking my choices away. to put so much faith in government is really just too big a step toward an all powerful state. Living free means taking chances and having to do difficult things to survive. Just life. It doesnt take a degree in economics to see that a state run healthcare system can only survive in a small population. The U.S system is socialized in many ways more than Canada's and that has become a problem. There is a safety net for the poor and elderly , that system got devastated by immigration and particuraly illegal immigration. That is the crux of the issue a state run system isnt flexible or adaptive enough in a large fragmented population. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
| I dont like the idea of government taking my choices away. |
Racist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| rollo wrote: |
| I dont like the idea of government taking my choices away. |
Racist. |
Elaborate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| .38 Special wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| rollo wrote: |
| I dont like the idea of government taking my choices away. |
Racist. |
Elaborate. |
No deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| .38 Special wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| rollo wrote: |
| I dont like the idea of government taking my choices away. |
Racist. |
Elaborate. |
He's spoofing the common reaction to the Tea Partiers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| .38 Special wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| rollo wrote: |
| I dont like the idea of government taking my choices away. |
Racist. |
Elaborate. |
He's spoofing the common reaction to the Tea Partiers. |
...........
O okay then  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
