Healthcare industry a monopoly

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

I was just reading a study where the AMA considers health care to be a near monopoly.

[k-onmmunist]

Well, I'm not surprised. Personally, I think I'd find a completely private system far more agreeable if it was backed by rigorous anti-trust laws. Small business is the lifeblood of capitalism.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Well, I'm not surprised. Personally, I think I'd find a completely private system far more agreeable if it was backed by rigorous anti-trust laws. Small business is the lifeblood of capitalism.

The problem with healthcare is that demand for it is inelastic and thus under any conditions a just price could never exist.

[ag]

Well, I'm not surprised. Personally, I think I'd find a completely private system far more agreeable if it was backed by rigorous anti-trust laws. Small business is the lifeblood of capitalism.

The problem with healthcare is that demand for it is inelastic and thus under any conditions a just price could never exist.

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

2. What is this "just price"? This is the first time I hear of smthg like that.

The problem w/ healthcare is asymmetric information. That's the true problem.

[Sbane]

Well, I'm not surprised. Personally, I think I'd find a completely private system far more agreeable if it was backed by rigorous anti-trust laws. Small business is the lifeblood of capitalism.

The problem with healthcare is that demand for it is inelastic and thus under any conditions a just price could never exist.

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

I would think it depends on what type of health service you are talking about. If you need an angioplasty or chemotherapy, your demand isn't going to be very elastic now is it?

Going to see a doctor for the nth time due to a fever is very different of course. This is why HSA's should become a larger part of the healthcare system.

[opebo]

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

Yes, but that very frequently involves the death of the person who is providing the elasticity.

[Sbane]

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

Yes, but that very frequently involves the death of the person who is providing the elasticity.

Ag: When there is elasticity for necessary procedures, it is usually due to this. Whether you think that is moral, especially in the richest country on earth, is up to you.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Well, I'm not surprised. Personally, I think I'd find a completely private system far more agreeable if it was backed by rigorous anti-trust laws. Small business is the lifeblood of capitalism.

The problem with healthcare is that demand for it is inelastic and thus under any conditions a just price could never exist.

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

2. What is this "just price"? This is the first time I hear of smthg like that.

The problem w/ healthcare is asymmetric information. That's the true problem.

1. When you make a counter claim you should provide some supporting details, and sources.

[k-onmmunist]

Well, if you bring in a multi-payer system, the government could set a fair price anyway.

[Vepres]

Of course it is, but the Senate is being, well, the Senate, and not passing that house bill with overwhelming bipartisan support removing anti-trust exemptions for health insurers.

[ag]

Well, I'm not surprised. Personally, I think I'd find a completely private system far more agreeable if it was backed by rigorous anti-trust laws. Small business is the lifeblood of capitalism.

The problem with healthcare is that demand for it is inelastic and thus under any conditions a just price could never exist.

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

2. What is this "just price"? This is the first time I hear of smthg like that.

The problem w/ healthcare is asymmetric information. That's the true problem.

1. When you make a counter claim you should provide some supporting details, and sources.

Go to scholar.google.com and google elasticity demand health services. You will find as many papers as you'd like that that estimate this elasticity as statistically distinct from zero. Not that it matters: elasticity of demand is not the major issue here, unless, of course, there is truly a monopoly in health services provision (in wich case the problem is the monopoly, not the elasticity). Asymmetric information, though, is THE problem.

[ag]

Well, if you bring in a multi-payer system, the government could set a fair price anyway.

No, it couldn't. Because there is no such thing Pricing at marginal cost is not intrinsically fair - it may be efficient, but it is no more "fair" than anything else.

[ag]

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

Yes, but that very frequently involves the death of the person who is providing the elasticity.

Every human decision without exception leads to death - in the end we all will be up there. But the bulk of healthcare choices are not about immediately life-threatening situations. And even if the issue is life and death, there may be other considerations involved. Especially given the intrinsic asymmetric information between the patient and the doctor: the patient has no way of knowing, whether the procedure is being recommended because it is truly necessary or because, though it is no better than the cheaper alternative, it would result in a higher income for the medical provider. So, even there, the demand might be quite elastic.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Well, I'm not surprised. Personally, I think I'd find a completely private system far more agreeable if it was backed by rigorous anti-trust laws. Small business is the lifeblood of capitalism.

The problem with healthcare is that demand for it is inelastic and thus under any conditions a just price could never exist.

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

2. What is this "just price"? This is the first time I hear of smthg like that.

The problem w/ healthcare is asymmetric information. That's the true problem.

1. When you make a counter claim you should provide some supporting details, and sources.

Go to scholar.google.com and google elasticity demand health services. You will find as many papers as you'd like that that estimate this elasticity as statistically distinct from zero. Not that it matters: elasticity of demand is not the major issue here, unless, of course, there is truly a monopoly in health services provision (in wich case the problem is the monopoly, not the elasticity). Asymmetric information, though, is THE problem.

Yes.. if we were just all fed your opinion on healthcare, we'd have no problems!

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

No.  It's an oligopoly.

In fact (and I'm not using this as THE authoritative source, but it backs up my point), look at the sectin about oligopolies in the U.S. in the Wikipedia article about oligopolies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly#United_States):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[ag]

Well, I'm not surprised. Personally, I think I'd find a completely private system far more agreeable if it was backed by rigorous anti-trust laws. Small business is the lifeblood of capitalism.

The problem with healthcare is that demand for it is inelastic and thus under any conditions a just price could never exist.

1. Actually, demand for health services is quite elastic.

2. What is this "just price"? This is the first time I hear of smthg like that.

The problem w/ healthcare is asymmetric information. That's the true problem.

1. When you make a counter claim you should provide some supporting details, and sources.

Go to scholar.google.com and google elasticity demand health services. You will find as many papers as you'd like that that estimate this elasticity as statistically distinct from zero. Not that it matters: elasticity of demand is not the major issue here, unless, of course, there is truly a monopoly in health services provision (in wich case the problem is the monopoly, not the elasticity). Asymmetric information, though, is THE problem.

Yes.. if we were just all fed your opinion on healthcare, we'd have no problems!

Please, read what I say. There are humongous problems w/ healthcare. They are just not the problems that people have been mentioning here. Asymmetric information - not mentioning it in the context of healthcare means not talking about healthcare, period. It's the big fat elephant smack in the middle of your living room. The rest is minor.

[k-onmmunist]

Either way, with stuff like this, my ideal system would be co-operatives and small health business with public health insurance for those who are basically uninsurable.

[The Age Wave]

Either way, with stuff like this, my ideal system would be co-operatives and small health business with public health insurance for those who are basically uninsurable.

I agree. But no individual mandates, especially without proper cost controls.

[Sbane]

Either way, with stuff like this, my ideal system would be co-operatives and small health business with public health insurance for those who are basically uninsurable.

I agree. But no individual mandates, especially without proper cost controls.

Yeah, the individual mandate has to go along with the public option. Or else we are just leaving people at the mercy of the insurance companies.

[opebo]

Either way, with stuff like this, my ideal system would be co-operatives and small health business with public health insurance for those who are basically uninsurable.

Haha, you mean sick people?

[k-onmmunist]

Either way, with stuff like this, my ideal system would be co-operatives and small health business with public health insurance for those who are basically uninsurable.

Haha, you mean sick people?

Sick people, pensioners.... etc.

[opebo]

Either way, with stuff like this, my ideal system would be co-operatives and small health business with public health insurance for those who are basically uninsurable.

Haha, you mean sick people?

Sick people, pensioners.... etc.

So why allow a private insurance industry if its just there to soak up the profits and leave all the expense to the government?

[k-onmmunist]

Either way, with stuff like this, my ideal system would be co-operatives and small health business with public health insurance for those who are basically uninsurable.

Haha, you mean sick people?

Sick people, pensioners.... etc.

So why allow a private insurance industry if its just there to soak up the profits and leave all the expense to the government?

It's not there for profits. It's there to insure those who can be insured. Those who can't... who else is meant to take care of them?

[opebo]

Either way, with stuff like this, my ideal system would be co-operatives and small health business with public health insurance for those who are basically uninsurable.

Haha, you mean sick people?

Sick people, pensioners.... etc.

So why allow a private insurance industry if its just there to soak up the profits and leave all the expense to the government?

It's not there for profits. It's there to insure those who can be insured. Those who can't... who else is meant to take care of them?

The point is that there is no good reason to allow a private insurance industry.  Just cover everyone equally by the State.

[Beet]

Asymmetric information is the main justification for mandates, as well as for Medicare. These arguments have been hashed out already many times. The patient knows more about their health than the insurance company. In a voluntary insurance market, the pool of participants will be disproportionately unhealthy. This will raise health insurance costs compared to what they would otherwise be. In extreme cases, higher costs in turn will lead more people, again the relatively healthy, to drop out. And so on and so on, until only the "lemons" (the sickest) are left. Then the insurance companies go bankrupt.

This is referred to as the Lemon problem, first articulated by George Akerlof in 1970, and it is Business 101.