6 ms·

Free market-based US healthcare system? Which US are we talking about?

globular-toast 2y ago
"Free market" is one of the best examples of a technical term people use with complete confidence despite not knowing what it really means. Furthermore, even if you do know what it means you probably remember it as something you learnt on day 1 of economics class before learning all the reasons they never really exist and what governments try to do about that.
- valval 2y ago
  I’ve studied economics for years and I’m still of the opinion that the only government intervention to the market should be breaking monopolies and cartels. I’m waiting for a piece of literature that would convince me otherwise, maybe you could provide one?
  - globular-toast 2y ago
    I can't, but I'm curious how you think problems like externalities would sort themselves out. Also what about natural monopolies like utilities and infrastructure that can't really be broken up?
    - valval 2y ago
      I think humans are excellent survivors. I don’t lose sleep over externalities because of that alone. What I mean by that is that once people realise their daily lives are being affected by a negative externality, they start making decisions that alleviate that hardship. I do recognise though that it’s an unsolved problem, and will lead to some form of regulation as our understanding is lacking. I think only harmful monopolies should be broken up by force, since they’re a legitimate market force. I’m conceding some ground on that because I’m not prepared to claim that monopolies aren’t always harmless.
grecy 2y ago
Australians (and other outsiders) use that term when talking about aspects of the US because that is the Hollywood picture of how the US functions. That is the lie that is sold, and people outside have no way to know it’s not true. Even today there are hundreds of millions of Americans who say they live in a free market and that it’s the best thing ever.
- defrost 2y ago
  > Australians .. use that term when talking about aspects of the US because Australians have a weird sense of humour - it's clear from here that most aspects of US economics are decidedly not free markets but so many US citizens never shut up about "free markets" and have such a bicameral Capitalist v. Communist view of the world that it makes sense to just deadpan nod along. Maybe reread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41856242 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41856242 and ask yourself if the article really thinks the US health system is a proper Adam Smith free market .. or just a "US free market" with extra heavy air quotes.
bratbag 2y ago
The us system is what a free market approach inevitably degrades into when consumers don't have a real option to say no to a service.
- jazz9k 2y ago
  So the free market approach degrades to heavily regulated and government controlled?
  - jandrese 2y ago
    No, it degrades into monopolists with a captive audience. Insurance companies are modern day water barons.

"Free market" is one of the best examples of a technical term people use with complete confidence despite not knowing what it really means. Furthermore, even if you do know what it means you probably remember it as something you learnt on day 1 of economics class before learning all the reasons they never really exist and what governments try to do about that.

valval 2y ago
I’ve studied economics for years and I’m still of the opinion that the only government intervention to the market should be breaking monopolies and cartels. I’m waiting for a piece of literature that would convince me otherwise, maybe you could provide one?
- globular-toast 2y ago
  I can't, but I'm curious how you think problems like externalities would sort themselves out. Also what about natural monopolies like utilities and infrastructure that can't really be broken up?
  - valval 2y ago
    I think humans are excellent survivors. I don’t lose sleep over externalities because of that alone. What I mean by that is that once people realise their daily lives are being affected by a negative externality, they start making decisions that alleviate that hardship. I do recognise though that it’s an unsolved problem, and will lead to some form of regulation as our understanding is lacking. I think only harmful monopolies should be broken up by force, since they’re a legitimate market force. I’m conceding some ground on that because I’m not prepared to claim that monopolies aren’t always harmless.

grecy 2y ago

Australians (and other outsiders) use that term when talking about aspects of the US because that is the Hollywood picture of how the US functions. That is the lie that is sold, and people outside have no way to know it’s not true. Even today there are hundreds of millions of Americans who say they live in a free market and that it’s the best thing ever.

defrost 2y ago
> Australians .. use that term when talking about aspects of the US because Australians have a weird sense of humour - it's clear from here that most aspects of US economics are decidedly not free markets but so many US citizens never shut up about "free markets" and have such a bicameral Capitalist v. Communist view of the world that it makes sense to just deadpan nod along. Maybe reread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41856242 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41856242 and ask yourself if the article really thinks the US health system is a proper Adam Smith free market .. or just a "US free market" with extra heavy air quotes.

bratbag 2y ago

The us system is what a free market approach inevitably degrades into when consumers don't have a real option to say no to a service.

jazz9k 2y ago
So the free market approach degrades to heavily regulated and government controlled?
- jandrese 2y ago
  No, it degrades into monopolists with a captive audience. Insurance companies are modern day water barons.