When I was 5 or 6, my dad got a job at Ratheon and I remember that new found wealth came with a card he kept in his wallet. It was a Blue Cross Blue Shield. I can remember once or twice the effect that card had. When asked by the admin at the doctors office if he had insurance, he whipped out that card with a sense of confidence and pride. My point could end there. I could tell you we should all have that sense of confidence when visiting the doctor that my dad had back in 1970's. And for many it does end there. Especially for our current president and his fellow progressives.
What I didn't realize then was the damage that special confidence has and what was missing because of that Blue Cross Blue Shield card. What was missing was the need for my dad to worry about the cost of that doctors visit. Sound crazy?
It sounds crazy because of the emotion that comes with the subject of health care. There is not one of us that does not have an emotional story that involves health care in some way. That emotion brings many of us (including myself at one time) to abandon logic in favor of emotion.
If my dad and most others were not worried about the cost of this visit, who was? Was the doctor then worried about how much he was charging? Of course not. I am an adamant supporter of the free market and absolute liberty. I believe that the free market will always come up with the best solution. Health insurance is really the one mistake it has produced that it is difficult to debate. See, after WW2 when businesses were competing for labour, raising pay during a time of very high inflation was not attracting employees. So business used health insurance as a way to make an attractive compensation package. Of course as usual, the free market was not at the core of the problem, government was. Had it not been for the inflating dollar, higher wages would have accomplished what was needed. But when the dollars is becoming more worthless from Fed printing, people always want the things money can buy and not money itself. Hence the insurance industry took hold. Through government cohesion with private companies, Blue Cross came out on top and became the primary benefit for most large companies. The rest is history.
Now government wants to solve the problem they helped create. Of course if you are a logical fellow, you understand that the only way to fix this problem is to figure out how to use the free market and remove insurance from the picture. People must SHOP for their health care in order for doctors to worry about what they are charging. There is no other possible way for the health care industry to become more efficient. There are other road blocks as well. Namely the AMA.
Please take a moment to read this article from the Mises Institute.
http://mises.org/daily/5066/The-Myth-of-FreeMarket-Healthcare
I hope I have explained how to fix the demand side of the health care problem. If not, I will spell it out. There are a few different ways to remove insurance from the picture. It will have to be done in steps. The best idea I have heard is for business to take the $14,000 per person average they spend on insurance (between what you and the company spend) and take $3,000 and spend it on catastrophic insurance (say you get cancer, etc...), Now you are covered only for the really serious health care issues (this is the actual purpose of insurance, not to buy your normal expenses), then take the other $11,000 and put it in an account for you. You use this $11,000 to buy all your normal health care expenses for the year. If there is money left over, its yours! If you spend more than the $11,000, guess what? Its yours! This will drive down costs. If will force you to think every time you purchase health care. The only argument opponents will have is that now people will curb much needed health care. That arguement means you dont know whats best for you, money or health care. If you want to buy into the argement, that fine. Just dont tell me I dont know whats best for me, because I do. (thats called Liberty, get it?)
The other aspect that needs to be fixed is the supply side of the issue. This is where the removal of the AMA's power comes in. Also the removal of government regulation in the health care industry. If a 5 year med school drop out wants to start a practice but charge 2/3 less money, so what. Get over the emotion of the debate. Is having unaffordable health care that the poor cant buy at all really better than having unregulated doctors in action? This is this idea that one must be an exact doctor by the states definition or he cant be anything. Imagine if we applied that logic in all sectors. You would have to be a master mechanic in order to change a tire. You must be a graduate cheif in order to flip burgers. You get the picture. We do allow this with small pieces of the health care industry, such as in the example of chiropratics (and dont think the AMA didnt fight that tooth and nail!), but it could be applied on a much broader scale if we could get the government out of the picture. This would massivlely expand the supply side of health care.
As a Libertarian, I believe that we should not even need a prescription (except in the case of anti-biotics, becuase you have the power to hurt someone else), but in all other cases, I believe you should have liberty to do as you see fit. its not the governments job to protect you from yourself. But this last paragraph is a debate for another day.
No comments:
Post a Comment