So are Republicans now openly terrorists?

by Simon 369 Replies latest social current

• 

  DogGone

  To add to Sir82's excellent point and in response to this question:

  MeanMrMustard: What exactly is it about the healthcare market that makes it a unique market?

  Something called "inelastic demand" puts it in a class of markets that are unique and are not subject to standard supply demand forces. What the law of demand states is that as the cost increases the demand (in quantity) decreases. For inelastic demands, like say, water and healthcare, the demand does not decrease no matter what the quantity or price. I'm dying of thirst, what would I pay for a glass of water to keep me alive? Answer, everything I have.

  There is no countervailing force to keep prices low because demand is inflexible to price. I need cancer treatment, what would I pay to keep alive? Answer, everything I have. Demand will not drop as prices rise.

  (Not exactly everything I have. I wouldn't leave my family in a bad state. I would rather die. Still, you get the point, I'm sure.)

  So, for things like water, utilities, and healthcare we tend to rely on heavy government control. Insurance is, of course, a form of collectivism. If health insurance is only provided to those who have no preexisting conditions and come from low risk groups then, yes, those people will pay relatively little. However, if you must insure the population as a whole, you have to smooth out the peaks and valleys. Normally, additional charges are on those who make poor lifestyle choices (eg.. smoking). But, the price is blindly fixed for the group. The idea is what coverage should a theoretical child have for life not knowing what conditions, social group, education, employment, race, or locale he or she will be born into.

  I don't argue with anyone's criticism of the ACA. After following this thread, I'm not informed enough to say it is the answer for my American cousins. However, although I'm free enterprise in many ways, I'll argue till I'm blue for universal healthcare (single payer, private delivery, public delivery, insurance exchanges, and single insurer... whatever gets it done).
• 

  sir82

  And yet, so is food. Should we socialize that industry too? Perhaps housing as well?

  Both are, to a certain extent, at least for the poorest elements of society.

  I venture to say that a life dependent on food stamps and section 8 housing is quite unpleasant. There are plenty of incentives to try to better one's life, if one is in that position.

  Health care is unique in that even the most basic services are prohibitively expensive for the poor, if one is not insured.

  I think that, just as there is a social safety net for the most indigent for food and shelter, there should be one for health care as well. "Show up at the emergency room and let someone else pay the multi-thousand dollar bill" is not a fair or sustainable model.

  As noted, the ACA is poor solution, but it is at least a step in the right direction. Socialized health care can work well - some models ar better than others. It works pretty well in Germany, for example.
• 

  DogGone

  Food demand is not inelastic as there are several competing sources of nourishment. Food DOES normally conform to law of demand. When there were fewer tomatoes one year due to a shortage the prices went up and the demand for tomatoes went down (fast food removed them from burgers, for example). However, when the entire food supply fails to match demand we call that a famine and then we DO expect the government to come in and ration. We do expect a socialized response. In a famine situation demand is inelastic. In a famine, what do you think the government should do? Nothing? Let those who have the money pay for it and get it? In answering this question I'd appreciate knowing how this differs from healthcare.
• 

  jgnat

  I don't get to pick my diagnosis. If I've got cancer, I've got cancer. Just because there is a discount on hip replacements this year does not mean, as a consumer, I'll get a hip replacement instead.

  Inelastic demand, beautiful, thanks.
• 

  DogGone

  Housing is a different kettle. Housing prices are driven, by and large, by competitive consumption. New houses (or housing) can be built, of course, and frequently are. The demand is not inelastic unless, for a reason I cannot think of, development is frozen when people are forced to move. In other places perfectly good houses are being torn down due to population movements. Workforces are mobile and I'm a big big fan of encouraging mobility. Don't pay people to live in impoverished areas when they can move to North Dakoda and work in the oil patch. I'm sorry you grew up in Detroit. Get over it and move. Your ancestories didn't stay where they were. That is how Detroit came into existence.

  Property ownership is an absolute essential component of a free liberal society (classical liberalism, I know how that word has been hijacked).

  Now, we do provide homes for the "homeless". We do this as charitable/compassionate activity for a select few (as with food and clothing). But, let us not confuse helping the poor with structures for delivering the essentials of life to the entire citizenry.
• 

  DogGone

  Nonjwspouce,

  You are 100% correct. Canadians flock to the US for hip replacements. It is painful stuff to wait for a replacement, as my good friend did for 4 months. Of course, he admits he waited three years too long to ask as he didn't want to admit he was old enough to need one!

  It is also much easier to get a penis enlargement, nose job, breast augmentation, liposuction, etc in the US. Why, though? Because the law of supply IS in effect in healthcare. As prices rise, supply increases. These expensive elective surgeries attract talent to them.

  If you were to step back and redesign the system.... if you had the power of all the resouces at your fingertips, like say, a nationally run medical system, would you perhaps take a few of those breast surgeons and have them work on breast cancer? Would you be ok that the wait time for breast augmentation went way up? If you had to decide between hip replacements and stints, might you be ok with a longer wait time on one to benefit the other?

  I should also state that your example is a good case for private delivery. I'm not sure how it relates to universal insurance, however. It is my understanding the AMA is all about insurance and does not nationalize the delivery. (prepared to be corrected on this)
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  DogGone,

  All good comments. I can tell I may enjoy talking this over with you. I do have some responses to them, especially your point about inelastic demand. I can't flesh it out in great detail right now because I have a newborn in the house (just a few days old), and its tough to timeslice. But to give you a preview of what I plan on writing:

  When you say food is not inelastic because of competitors, are you saying then that I can't seek competitors for cancer treatment? Perhaps not for life/death emergencies (after all, I just need to get to the hospital now!!!) - but even then there are market forces that help reduce the cost, and these forced have been neutralized by goverment involvement. Let's be clear, and try to not obfuscate: What are we talking about when we say "healthcare"? When someone says, and rightly so, "you don't have to pay for emergency room care now", the normal response is, "well, what about non-emergency care? Well what is it? You can apply the inelastic argument to emergency care (and there are some points on this I wish to make later - hopefully tonight), but you can't on non-emergency care. For those services, people can and will discriminate on price. But that brings me back to my first point: Why is the cost so high now? If you say it is because of inelastic demand, I would say you are right only because government subsidies necessarily discourage people from the activities that would make it elastic.

  MMM
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  jgnat,

  Let me watch the video, then I'll respond.

  MMM
• 

  DogGone

  MeanMrMustard,

  Always welcome a respectful discussion! I'm not trained in economics, just an armchair thinker. I'm fully prepared to be embarrassed by anything I write! In fact, I look forward to it.

  You are absolutely correct, I erred in comparing one component of "food", the tomatoes, with the entire category of "health care". Excellent catch and appreciate your pointing it out.

  You are also correct that it is important to clarify what portion of "health care" we are talking about. For the purposes of this discussion, I suggest we start with "essential medical services" - ER, scheduled surgery, prescriptions, primary physicians, etc. That may be too broad, but do you think it is useful start?

  I'll wait for your larger reply to fully comment. To help inform your reply consider that the issue of inelastic demand is related not to the quantity and availability of choices and competitors but to the flexibility of the demand. That is, it is not about the ability to make decisions on price (name brand drug or generic drug) but on the ability to reduce the quantity of the demand (drug, less drug, no drug).

  The money spent on healthcare in America, I think, does have a positive supply side effect for profitable elective surgeries. Wouldn't it be interesting to see two hospitals side by side compete for ER patients! Now, that might produce some interesting outcomes!

  I'm very interested in having you expand on this: "Why is the cost so high now? If you say it is because of inelastic demand, I would say you are right only because government subsidies necessarily discourage people from the activities that would make it elastic." I think there may be some gread discussion behind that statement because it gets at incentives, i.e. economics, which I love talking about.

  (Take all the time you need. My wife is expecting in the spring, so I’ll be in your boat shortly, if everything goes well!)
• 

  Farkel

  Simon,

  You wrote:

  :They seem determined to undermine the US democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.

  :What a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing.

  The United States of America never was and hopefully will never be a democracy. If you do not know the differece between democracy and republic then go back to school.

  My founding Father hero who just happens to be Thomas Jefferson said we would probably need to overthrow our Government about every 50 years or so. It is long overdue, then. Over 150 years by his reckonking.

  Since the inmates have overtaken the US Government, it is time to throw out the inmates and take our Government back. Our government is BY the people and FOR the people and OF the people. We don't serve at their lesisure. They serve at ours.

  It's time for a new revolution. Think about this: in just 4 short years we can have a house of representatives where the most senior members have only "served" there for four years. The least senior members would have only served for two years! And the most junior members would have "served" for zero years!. The least amount of time to become corrupt!

  We can also eliminate the corrupt assholes in the senate in three two year increments. Such measures are long overdue, Simon. Sort of like when we kicked the Brits out of our lives when they kept being the pricks they were way back when.

  Farkel