Topic: Health Care
a forgotten merit of socialized medicine We generally think of those who want universal health care as left wing flunkies and poor people, and the irresponsible, but that isn't true.by Carter Brown
(Libertarian)
Friday, April 4, 2008
There is much to say about the merits of the free market, and by and large western society endorses the concept, however there are certain shortfalls. One of the greatest shortfalls can come in the form of market health care.
The free market is fantastic because it gives us choice, it is efficient in its ability to allocate resources. In general, government bureaucracy is the opposite. This is especially correct when talking about things like building roads and educating the young, or waging war, and even providing health care.
The thing about health care is that it is a collective good. Even if all of the roads were toll roads, and all of the schools were private (or paid for by charity), i wouldn't really care if my neighbor wanted to homeschool his children, or find some loophole around paying tolls, but when my neighbor opts out of health insurance and doesn't get proper medical treatment, it effects me.
If someone gets sick and i have to work more shifts because of it, it effects me. if my kid is in daycare and some other child comes in to school sick, and infects my kid- that effects me, and if it happened because their parents couldn't afford a doctor... well...
It is in my best interest to have insurance, but it is in your interest that i have insurance too. It is collective.
Im a canadian, universal health care was started in this country because the poor couldn't afford it. What i want everyone at least to consider is that if the poor can't afford it, it could be in everyone else's interest to pay it for them.
So although it is not efficient, it is better because it includes everyone, and therefore it is better off for everyone.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 3 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Carter Brown only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Carter Brown is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
However, there is a difference between 'we all should pay' and 'we are all forced to pay'. If your neighbor is sick and cannot afford to pay, then you can be a good neighbor and friend and start a collection around the neighborhood or churches and even negotiate price reductions with the greedy physicians. In that case, then we all should pay but we should not be forced to pay. But since the government 'takes care of it' then most people would not pay. Most people would say we should not pay because the government pays and we are already forced to pay so they would pay no more.
"Most people would not pay" - you don't seem to understand the kind of universal health care that i am referring to, where everyone pay the same thing. It is "taxed" by the government. roughly $50 per month per person (except children)
Those who can't afford it are given assistance (based on income)
-thats all that is paid- there is no incentive to pay more. period
yes there are issues, some people don't believe in medicine, some people don't adhere to the concept of having to pay for something they don't want to pay for, but really, there isn't anyone who complains about it up here. there are generally two camps of people. One group wants the choice to pay more (they are rich and are unsatisfied with the are they get), and one group wants the government to pay more (they are unsatisfied with the care we get collectively).
Posted By: patrick henry
Date: 2008-04-04 11:01:55
The problem with health care in America is the heavy regulation and torts placed upon it. When you regulate something it is not FREE. Our healthcare system is not based upon a free market but a government regulated market, hence the natural flow of free economics is stunted and susbidized.
In the US we are forced to follow what is deemed best practice medicine. These are certain test that HAVE to be done when presented with certain symptoms. For example if you present to and ER with a headache, best practice medicine dictates the Dr. order a CT scan even thought the Dr of 50 years recognizes it as a sinus headache. The insurance industry drives this not the collective wisdom, knowledge and experience of the physician you chose. But you might not have chosen that Dr. b/c your insurance company wont pay his group. Your insurance co tells you which Dr or Drs you can go see, where the price of his/her services has been predetermined. So why would a Dr. charge you $50 a visit when he knows the market price has been fixed at $100? Free Markets work. The problem is the health care industry on our country is not Free it is regulated.
Plus would anyone in the US want to go to FEMA for them to treat their heart attack?
Making me pay for someone else's poor health is as tyrannical as they get. You mean to tell me you as a healthy, well exercised, non smoking person who doesnt require health care because of my personal responsibility to keep myself healthy have to pay for someone who is 400 lbs, smoke, have self inflicted diabetes, need a knee and hip replacement because they cant push away from the food and have developed COPD from a 3 pack a day cigarette habit over 20 years? Really? Whats my reward for personal responsibility but to be burdened by the irresponsible. As far as the poor. You are as poor as you allow yourself to be. I was thrust into the world with $53 to my name, I now own two houses, 3 cars, have some savings and support my wife an 4 kids, so bring it! No excuses here I took responsibility to to educate myself, work hard to not be poor.
Catastrophic injury/illness insurance is just like car insurance.
What I want to know is how people think that adding in a third (and 4th) party will decrease costs. Buying direct from the manufacturer is cheeper than buying from the retail store.
Apply that to health care, and if you were to pay the doctor directly, it would be cheepest. Insert an insurrance company, and prices go up (extra services, extra cost, insurrance company employees to pay). Insert government, and now your paying bureaucrats on top of the doctor and the insurer.
The only way these systems appear to work is because everone is "forced" into them. Even then, they only appear to work for a time (look at Social Security).
I think the author doesn't understand what he is talking about - and may even be a socialist troll. Give him an article or two and he'll be arguing that communism is good because poor people are bad for society the same way sick people are bad for society. Talk about a wolf in sheeps clothing - appealing to our sence of pity to promote socialist propaganda.
Oh please, you "I pulled myself up by my bootstraps" types are so deluded. There is nothing you enjoy today that isn't a result of shared cooperation between citizens, government and business.. The government brought you the Louisiana Purchase for instance which gave us "all" the benefits of the Mississippi River and the prosperity and commerce it allows. Only the shared resources of a nation of people allowed that to happen. It's because of market forces that alternate political ideologies exist. As regards health care if it weren't for the government many would still be getting polio or small pox. Somethings are beyond the power and scope of any one individual. National heath may just be one of them. Epidemics, pandemics, wake up. I'm not endorsing Universal Health Care but to reject out of hand that there are vulnerable citizens who simply can't fend for themselves is quite frankly, immature and selfish.
The free market is an illusion. All of you who believe in it like to say "there is no such thing as something for free" and that includes the market. There is a steep price to pay by the most vulnerable inhabitants by allowing trade and commerce to go unchecked. Now there are valid disagreement about who and how much it should be checked by. But everyday that passes brings on a new economic, medical or environmental disaster that is a result of hands off deregulation of business.
Posted By: patrick henry
Date: 2008-04-04 13:42:55
Oh I forgot that taking your own responsibility is politically incorrect now a days. It has nothing to do with shared cooperation. I got a job, I went to school, I studied hard, I passed the test, I got a job. You are in the situation you are in because that is the way you want it. If you want to be poor it is because you choose to. If you choose to have a job that offers no healthcare, that is because you choose to. So if you choose to sit on your collective as and/or not improve yourself, that is your choose. You made that bed, you lie in it.
The fact that no should have to pull them up by their bootstraps and have the rest of us pull them along is repulsive, childish, selfish, immature, irresponsible, hell its communist. Wake up, you are born to parents who raise you then let you go, why anyone would gladly have the governement fill that void is beyond me. Grow up! Take RESPONSIBILITY for your own life and leave me to mine
Polio and smallpox was overcome thru FREE MARKETS jackass not the government.
And there is something for FREE, its called FREEDOM. I was born with it, the problem is people like you continually try and steal it from me under the guise of helping the poor disenfranchised LAZY masses.
The "environmental mess" comes from the fact that our governement cares not about property rights. Civil penalties placed upon polluters of property forces the polluter to change or business becomes to expensive. Free Marketers will either change their ways or their niche.
The economic disaster is due to the inflationary practices of the Fed and all the entitlements we pay to the lazy.
The Louisianna Purchase had nothing to do with the collective. It had to do with Jefferson bending the Constitution to Purchase land for the infant country. He caught so much shit for this from the masses it was almost his undoing. Dont throw history around unless you understand the background of the history you intend to use.
Taking care of yourself is beyond the power and scope of the individual? Are you for real? April fools day was days ago.
You're entire world view is based on "mine, mine, all mine". You're so scared that somebody isn't working as hard as you. Get over yourself.
It's possible the doctor who someday saves the life of somebody you love went to school on a government grant or loan. Will it really be a big deal whose tax dollars paid for his/her education. Yeah, yeah, right he/she would have been able to pay for it themselves if the government wasn't taking all the money in taxes. Blah, blah. It's never been that way and it never will. Quit living in the pretend world where no one ever needs a helping hand. Bear Stearns, JP Morgan, 30 billion tax dollars...there's your precious free market...it's always been that way and it always will. Stop carrying the water for those who can afford to pay some one to carry it for them and lend a hand to those who can't.
Government brings the nations attention to certain crisis and problems that need national attention. Like Polio for instance. FDR's efforts played a major part in finding a cure when he established the National Foundation of Infantile Paralysis. And world health organizations working with governments have nearly eradicated it with the vaccines that evolved from that initiative. This was something that you sitting in your doublewide with your shotgun pointed at the door to keep out the screaming hoards would never be able to do on your own. Polio is contagious. You're loved ones could get it. But I guess you would feel it was their fault. They could have chosen not to get it. Right?
I suppose as a matter of principal you will stop being the beneficiary of all the unconstitutional acts performed by our government. After all if it weren't for our governments declared Indian Wars you're glorious paycheck wouldn't even exist.
You got a job. Bid deal. Quit patting yourself on the back. You are taking self reliance beyond what is realistic for everyone who isn't as big and strong and brave and wonderful as you.
Some are born or find themselves in circumstances where they need help. And it's precisely because of people with your "let them eat cake" attitude that government safety net programs exist to begin with.
Furthermore, you are in for a rude awakening in the next decade. You're going to need your neighbors more than ever.
I forgot to mention another over-regulation that increases prices which is screwed up about the health care industry. In addition to the comments made about insurance and extra regulations when practicing medicine, there is also the over-regulation before even attempting to practice medicine. It limits the supply of physicians into the health care market and as a result raises the cost.
All the extra steps required to become a physician strangles the supply of doctors that go to practice medicine into the market. That is: regulations on schools of medicine that limits the supply of schools of medicine. Then the amount of people that can compete to obtain a physician's degree is limited. Also a physician has to do a useless bachelor's degree before even applying for the actual school of medicine. Why not go directly into the school of medicine? Then you have the board exam which even though you could have gone through 8 years of study you are still not considered a doctor because the government controlled state examinations say so. Then you have the ridiculous residencies that put all of us at jeopardy because it pushes the physicians to go beyond the extremes of the human body for long hours. These are the same physicians that recommended that labor worker can not go more than X amount of hours per day or his judgment will be off.
In summary it is an uphill battle even before practicing medicine. The fewer physicians in the market, the more they can charge.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-04-04 20:15:04
Jim Hines and patrick henry, please stop calling each other names and contribute to a civilized debate. we are all patriots here, eh?
Dear Carter Brown,
I gave you a thumbs up since this is a interesting viewpoint, and I especially value it since you are from a country that has socialized medicine. As far as the cost of $54pp/MO, I am curious as to what other funding is provided by the Canadian gov't or corporations? It sounds too good to be true - I pay a lot more than this amount, and my corporation pays even more than this!
I tend to gravitate towards patrick henry's viewpoint. Why should the government mandate me to be give up even more of my possessions to them, taxing me to provide care for other's poor habits? Why not make the plan optional if its so good? Personally, Ron Paul's plan is not too shabby http://action.downsizedc.org/wyc.php?cid=90.
One viewpoint I would encourage you to take a look at is this article from John Armstrong, watch out for satire though! http://www.nolanchart.com/article2770.html. If health care would apply to all of us, and is a "right" then We the People better try adding it to the Constitution first.
Last, a closing statement from Tom Paine from the post-Revolutionary War world of 1782. He was referring to the European powers of his day but, sadly, I believe his comments apply to our America:
"[The purpose] of other nations are, in general, little more than the history of their quarrels. They are marked by no important character in the annals of events; mixed in the mass of general matters, they occupy but a common page; and while the chief of the successful partisans stepped into power, the plundered multitude sat down and sorrowed. Triumph on one side and misery on the other were the only events. Pains, punishments, torture, and death were made the business of mankind, until compassion, the fairest associate of the heart, was driven from its place, and the eye, accustomed to continual cruelty, could behold it without offence.
But as the principles of the present Revolution differed from those which preceded it, so likewise did the conduct of America both in government and war. Neither the foul finger of disgrace has hitherto put a blot upon her fame. War, so much the trade of the world, has here only been the business of necessity; and when the necessity shall cease, her very enemies must confess, that as she drew the sword in her just defence, she used it without cruelty, and sheathed it without revenge."
I would include US health care in Paine's "general matters," and Obama-Clinton may well be the next 'chief of the successful partisans.' I think our two highest priorities should be bringing our troops back and saving the dollar from destruction.
Carter, keep writing! You may contact me at forchrissakesbreakthematrix@gmail.com if you wish. My articles/blogs at the chart are mostly anti-war, I would be interested in your thoughts as well. I don't often go back to others' articles to follow the threads. Take care!
"I was born with it, the problem is people like you continually try and steal it from me under the guise of helping the poor disenfranchised LAZY masses."
Folks, there you have it. Anyone who is poor is lazy. Anyone who isn't successful is just sitting on their asses.
This is why Libertarians have lost, will lose, will always lose, and will cease to exist in the next two centuries. Statists sneer at the Mob and toss it bread and they follow us. Libertarians praise the People and let them run themselves and they run themselves right back -- to the Statists.
If you're blind enough to follow that sort of track record, you're more naive than Jefferson was to think you can get away with talking out of both sides of your mouth like he did with the Louisana Purchase. Liberty isn't *free* and neither is freedom, it's paid for by the success of the rich, the determined, the lucky and the majority by riding roughshod over the worker, the lesser, the inferior. Originally this country was managed and controlled by the intelligent, educated, semi-wealth white landowning male -- and they came up with a pretty good vision.
I would not have been able to vote in such a nation. But this is the group that created the Constitution. The mold we have today is people only concerned about themselves and people who want to feel better by "helping" everyone else.
At least the Statists are honest, as I've said before, of their opinion of the People. Libertarians will say one moment that the People are the highest power, and the next that anyone who isn't successful is a lazy slob not fit to lick boots.
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule. — H.L. MENCKEN
Not everyone who 'works hard' all their lives will end up with 2 houses and three cars. That is simple fact. In fact, who says everyone should, or should want to. If we are 'free' then we are free to be bums, as long as we don't stick a gun in someone else's face and force them to pay for it.
Mix a little truth in with a big lie and the sheeple will believe it.
But it's also simple fact that if the "Liberal" freaks, like the one who wrote the column, have their way, the poor and the rich both will lose their homes, cars, property, in the name of 'helping' us all.
Until you Libertarian types learn that your enemies are consummate liars, in fact that description fails, if they couldn't lie they wouldn't need oxygen, then this circle jerk that is drifting toward total tyranny will continue. They are servants of the father of the lie, and like him, they will not cease in their efforts until forced, at the point of a gun, to do so.
The Founders had to kill and run the king lovers out of the country. We will have to do the same. Can’t handle that? Remember, they will readily elect someone to hire someone to kill you for not going along with their evil. As the real Patrick Henry said, the war has already begun.
The biggest problem with this country and possibly the world is the bible, along with all the other ancient, religious, fantasy literature. What a load. You're going to kill the people who want some penicillin because you're hearing voices from reading your bible too much?
You never took a biology course? Are you under the impression that every action you take exists in a vacuum? You're just a lone rider on the plain? You reject the notion that society, economies and ecosystems are all precariously dependent on each others harmonious, healthy continuance?
There is no part of anyone's business that doesn't rely on or impinge upon someone or something else. It's not a matter of saving humanity for altruist purposes. It's a matter of self preservation. You don't have to like the truth for it to be the truth.
Unless you own a farm you are dependent on someone else. You gonna kill that guy if he gets too sick to grow food?
Sure it all starts with self reliance. That is and should be foremost. But there are aspects of a country populated by 300 million people that demand a cooperative effort. It's "POSSIBLE" that the good health of a nation is as much an issue of national security as any other. And it's possible that without all the resistance to alternate ideas something even greater than the illusion of a free market could make us all more free and allow us more time to spend with our loved ones. But then you may have to at times, temporarily suspend the obsessive compulsive urge to exercise your god given right to race your suv down to wendys for yet another baconator.
None of you guys would have liked living in the 1700's. Why do you keep quoting people who lived 100 years or more ago? It's like you think the world will just stop spinning. It will be christmas day forever. It's called growing up. The only thing that is constant is change. And almost all of the most important changes you don't even get to choose.
How about instead of rulers and the ruled we aspire to something in the middle?
I didn't write any of that. You need to learn to think for yourself.
The Founders were classicly educated men who had studied human history and nature, which had been in existence for thousands of years before us and them.
you need to start here:
http://www.willowtown.com/promo/quotes.htm
http://tinyurl.com/2vp6rm
And "Liberals" are and serve and force their evil down our throats regardless of whether there's a satan or not. And the beauty of it is they always make it sound so nice. "We're gonna bring you 'change' and 'hope' at the point of a govt. gun and we'll let you call it a 'donation.'"
First, I'd question your estimate of the costs. Our premiums in Ontario are even lower - I pay $300 / year - but those premiums don't come close to covering the costs of the Ministry of Health. The last I checked, it covered more than the revenue from the premiums and the entire provincial income tax combined.
Second, I don't receive all that much for the money. I visited my doctor 4 times last year. At my age, I'd probably opt out of paying health insurance at all if I could. (Which leads me to think that, while many people lump the entire 15% of Americans without health insurance as people who 'can't afford to pay', but surely some have decided to forego coverage, too.)
So (third), I'm involuntarily subsidizing a lot of other people's health care. Many of those are richer than I am. Is that fair?
Fourth, that unfairness is built in; the whole point of socialized medicine is that some people subsidize others: some pay more than they get, while others get more than what they pay for. That's OK if they agree to the scheme, but in this case they don't. How libertarian is it to force me to subsidize Conrad Black's family's health care bills?
Fifth, what about special cases of unfairness? For instance, under our system eye exams aren't funded, while abortions are. So those who need eye care may go without, because the state (province, of course) takes their money and won't give it back to them for their health needs. Meanwhile, those who think abortions are murder are forced to pay for them. As Paul would say, "What's going on here?"
Posted By: patrick henry
Date: 2008-04-07 10:18:29
Mr. Hines,
I recant the jackass, as I wrote that in a short moment of emotions. My apologies indeed, yet this topic has spawned much good articles and discussions.
As far as me, and mine. I am not affraid someone is not pulling their weight I am pissed off that people arent pulling their weight and people like me have to pay for it with MY money, Which takes away, hell it steals from MY family. I birthed MY kids hence they are MY responsibility. You give me a yeah big deal I am responsible as if it is something bad. In the same breath you advocate rewarding the irresposnible by punishing the responsible. For example, All of us are in a truck with no gas, so most of us get out of the truck and push it, but %15 of the people stay in the truck, dont push and even some have to audacity to yell "push faster". How long would you tolerate that? You work hard while others free load and demand more effort. I guess you guys are so benevolent as to say, no worries sit on your ass, hell drink some of the water of the guy beside me that is pushing while you are at it. Give me a break.
To think that I am that individualistic to throw my fellow man under the bus is laughable. I helped build my first habitat for humainty house at 17. I volunteer to coach 3 childrens soccer teams where I teach things such as hard work, team work, integrity, individual effort etc. Next weekend we are volunteering to build the kids in our community a playground. In 2006 me and my church took 3 trips to LA an MS to help rebuild peoples houses from money we collected and I helped donate to.
LIBERTARIANs understand volunteerism. Statist just feel good that some money was taken from them to help the poor. Get real if you really cared for the poor you would be out there helping them, instead you advocate that I should be robbed so others that cant or wont take care of themselves can be taken care of.
I work as a volunteer paramedic on the streets and have volunteered in Emergency Medical Services since 1988. I see generations of poor people in the projects. Most are content to live that way because it is easy, as well as they know no difference. The system clearly fails to put them on the right course to self reliance, hell it perpetuates it.
The system wants people to be dependant on it. Its whole existance relys upon. To correct the problem is self defeating of the organization created to fix it. I the people depend on the government, then the people will not revolt against that government no matter how tyrannical it becomes, because they depend upon it to live. This equates directly to the governments desire to control or rule the masses.
Surely, you all do realize that when the state becomes all powerful you will not be in the inner circle. You will be relished at best to the outer circle working in the Department of Truth or Plenty while the rest of us Proles will live our own respective lives. Have you not noticed that whenever a State takes full power over the masses the first group they go after to irradicate is the intellectuals? You better run now all you smart statist as you will go to room 101 eventually.
LP-
Why is it that people who educate themselves, work hard, bother no one, feed themselves and their families are the enemy. Why is it that we should allow people to give up their responsibility to us all of being lazy. Yes poverty equates to laziness. This is the land of opportunity. We are all born free and have to struggle throughout life to maintain it. Life is hard people, reality check, let me know when you catch up. No one in this land can say I cant. I cant is a polite way of saying I wont. I cant get a good job, I cant learn basic skills or trades, I cant get up in the morning. All bullshit, you wont!
You are right that statist take their honest view of people as they are all fuckin creatons on this beautiful earth and need to be ruled like animals, sound more like model of thinking towards blacks in this country 200 years ago that you so dispise. Whites thought the same way about blacks in the 1700s and that was abhorent, yet you advocate the same view of people and tyranny for all. I agree the founders fucked up by not abolishing slavery, but realistically it would be the same as outright illegalization of all petroleum products today. Just as we have inherited a bad culture of fossil fuel dependancy so did the Republic inherit slavery. Good bad or indifferent it was and is still a massive part of the whole economy.
Why is it that you people wont think to strive for perfection in man? Why dont we strive to a higher level of civilization of LIBERTY and self governance. It seems like a quitters attitude to say "Well fuck it the people are idiots so lets take everyone elses freedom away because these creatons are a stupid, ignorant mob" LIBERTARIANS tend to lump all statists into that last category. We need to be saved from you guys not LIBERTY.
"I would rather be bothered by the events of too much LIBERTY versus too little"-Thomas Jefferson
Oh I forgot hes old school and somehow irrelevant to the topic, how about "The governement that is big and strong enough to provide you with everything you want is also strong enough to take away everything you own"- Barry Goldwater
Try LIBERTY (responsibility), its ok, its hard, it takes some work, but it is worth it in the end!
LIBERTY or DEATH
Oh I almost forgot, provision for all this crap is not in the contract (Constitution), so it is illegal.
Posted By: patrick henry
Date: 2008-04-07 13:33:56
Just a little info for ya.
Small pox vaccine was first figured out in 1000 BC through a prosess called variolation, in which small or cow pox scabs was placed in someones nose and their natural immunity then kicked in. The mortatlity rate of those innoculated through variolation was .5-2% whereas small pox itself had a mortality rate around 30%. In England in the early 18th century, small pox vaccinations were common place.
Polio was indeed conquered in this century (1976). You forgot to mention the other name of the national foundation for infantile paralysis. Its called the march of dimes and low and behold I do believe it to be a CHARITY. Also Jonas Salk worked both at the University of Pittsburg in co-operation with the University of Michigan.
Pick a better example next time or continue to make my points for me, your choice.
"...you don't seem to understand the kind of universal health care that i am referring to, where everyone pay the same thing. It is "taxed" by the government. roughly $50 per month per person (except children)."
I think your numbers are off. If you collected $50 per month from everyone in the US even including children it would amount to $180 billion per year. But the federal government currently spends over $500 billion just for Medicare and Medicaid. And that doesn't include the amount the states contribute. Those programs only cover the elderly and the poor. That's less that half the population. If you extended it to cover the entire population it would likely cost well over $1 trillion, more than 5 times the amount that would be generated by the taxes you propose.
The website you referenced shows medical insurance premiums for British Columbia. I am no expert on the Canadian health care system, but I believe the system is heavily subsidized through taxes raised by the federal government and possibly other provincial taxes. So the B.C. premiums don't cover the entire cost.
I side with those who favor a free market system. Unfortunately in the US our system is not a free market. Nearly half of every health care dollar spent in the US is already paid by government. In that respect we are halfway to a socialized health care system. But even the so-called private sector is not free market. For a free market to work, the person receiving the goods or services has to be the one paying for them. That causes them to be good shoppers and look for the deal that gives them the best value for the dollar. That doesn't happen when the insurance company pays the bill.
The free market works well that way in every other aspect of our economy. We buy our own food, our own clothes our own homes and our own cars and we don't expect government to buy those things for us. It is the free market which has caused personal computers to become better and better while getting less and less expensive.
There is one example of a health care procedure which still operates as a free market. That is vision correction surgery. That procedure is usually not covered by insurance or the government medical programs, so if people want it they have to pay out of pocket. That makes them good shoppers. They compare various providers and look for the ones that provide the service for the most reasonable price. That puts competitive pressure on the providers. The result is that the cost of vision correction surgery has fallen dramatically. Twenty years ago when the procedure was new it cost about $3000 per eye. But today it is frequently advertised for less that $1000 per eye. That's a huge drop considering that other medical procedures have risen greatly over that time period. That's the beauty of the free market. If we had a true free market system for all health care the costs would drop like a rock and medical care would become much more affordable for everyone.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
