Tuesday, March 14, 2017

What Free Market Health Care Would Look Like

Murray Sabrin explains all in a letter to the editor of NewJersey.com:

To The Editor,

Regarding “Republican hard-liners' Obamacare incoherence” (Other Views, March 10):
Columnist Avik Roy criticizes Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. and Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich., for not getting on board and supporting the American Health Care Act.  Roy's complaint boils down to the assertion that conservative legislators should embrace the House Republicans’ Obamacare replacement because it moves us closer toward a free-market health care system.
In a free-market health care system,  the federal government, or any level of government, would not interfere with the practice of medicine, namely the doctor-patient relationship, nor subsidize anyone's medical insurance.  And the government would not issue mandates to insurance companies on how to run their business.
Instead, individuals would purchase the medical insurance they and their families need and could afford. Individuals and families who cannot afford medical insurance would get treatment at non-profit health care centers. In addition, hospitals as part of the mission to serve the community, would provide health care to poor and low-income families.
Who would pay for all these charitable activities?  In a free society, one in which taxes are minuscule, people’s charitable actions will speak volumes about their concern for their fellow citizens.
 Murray Sabrin
Fort Lee, March 10


  1. The problem is that statists/socialists operate under the notion that people are too greedy and selfish to create *enough* non-profit clinics or organizations that can cover everybody. And I emphasize the word 'enough' because statists and socialists are good at moving the goalposts. For them, nothing the Market creates is ever enough. They crave top-down planning and control like vampires crave human blood.

  2. I've been assembling a list of government interventions creating problems in health care to help my friends understand that government is the problem. This could make an interesting article:
    1. 1940s price and wage controls caused companies to offer health care benefits to employees in lieu of wage increases. This creates the problem where health insurance is tied to your job, which compounds the problem of pre-existing conditions. If individuals bought health care, and held it across jobs, the pre-existing condition would be a much lesser issue.
    2. Tax law allows companies to deduct health care insurance for employees, but does not allow individuals to deduct health care insurance costs. Therefore, employers paying have a substantial economic advantage vs. individuals paying. This creates and reinforces the same problem as #1.
    3. Medicare/Medicaid created a pay for fee model. This stopped doctor/hospital charity to the poor.
    4. Licensing restricts the supply of medical schools, doctors, and hospitals. This drives costs higher.
    5. FDA restricts the development of drugs and other medical products. This hinders innovation and increases costs. We should instead rely on private organizations to provide consumer information e.g. consumer reports (for medicine).
    6. Insurance is often not allowed to be provided across state or national lines. This reduces competition/supply and increases costs.
    7. Insurance products are heavily regulated and controlled by government. This reduces choices and drives up costs as consumers have to pay for features they don’t want.
    I'm sure there are many more that I haven't thought of...