Comments by "Ōkami-san" (@mweibleii) on "Why we need Medicare For All..." video.
-
2
-
Rick's Channel Yes, that's correct. Let me phrase your question a different way: Do you think less regulatory-capture and less rent-seeking on the part of the current market participants and an increase in competition would bring in value and provide better healthcare goods and services? Or do you think using regulatory capture to limit healthcare goods and services to rent-seek and monopolize the healthcare market, with no need to provide fair price or value is going to provide better goods and services?
Further, suppose this: You can still obtain all of the current 'regulated' goods and services BUT allow for unregulated market participants to, within common law and contract law, also offer goods and services under the strict legal signage stating clearly "Unregulated". Then you can let people choose which they would like.
Do you currently have an fMRI scan done yearly? Probably not, as time on a machine is expensive. I know MDs who have scans once every 6 months (for free) because they simply say, make room for me. Would you like that option? Would you like an fMRI scan by an unlicensed unregulated professionally trained fMRI tech who could tell you if there were any abnormalities on your scan? Say you pay out of pocket $100.
Or, would you rather just take your chances with no scan. Will you give those of us who would, the opportunity to do so? I mean, it has nothing to do with you.
The fact is, regulations are there to ensure lion's share of the profit go to the current market participants. It has nothing at all to do with making things safer. It's actually making medicine less safe. I'm sure you would be quite shocked to learn how poor the quality currently is in terms of training. It's really low. I mean, shockingly low. I expect we'll see healthcare deaths due to negligence increase to a million a year by 2025. The only thing I see, that may change this, is some high level of technology that puts healthcare into hands of the tech companies. Other than that, expect quality to go down and price to go up. All thanks to over-regulation and rent-seeking through licencing.
2
-
Rick's Channel
In Australia, all Australians have the right to free healthcare. Yet, there's a thriving private healthcare market. As a matter of fact, when given the choice, no one in their right mind would want to have surgery performed at a free public hospital.
Why do you suppose, when given the chance at 'free' state of the art healthcare, so many Australians would rather pay those 'greedy corporations' instead? Why choose to pay for something, when you can get it for free? Why pay those greedy healthcare corporations who only care about making money and couldn't care at all about you or your health when there's "free" government provided healthcare right next door?
In Australia, the government spends a lot of tax money on primary education. Yet, at the same time has a thriving private education industry. Private tuition for high-school in Australia is $25,000 per year (base funding, then you have to pay for uniforms, books, activities, etc...). So, why is it, do you think, that so many Australians pay? Many private schools have a $1000 retainer fee you must pay per year, for 10 years prior to having your application reviewed at grade 9. Why is that? Why not just get the 'free' education? Why pay those 'greedy corporate' private schools who only want to make as much money as they can and couldn't give two craps about kids education" when there's free government schools right next door?
1
-
Rick's Channel How is it, do you think, the poor are able to afford supercomputers that fit in their pocket and have access to nearly all information in the world? The free-market. See, the free-market [which is to say you and I agreeing to trade without using force against one another (aka: free people)] is the most efficient means of bringing prosperity to the poor.
Most poor attend Government schools and 1 in 5 will graduate as a functional illiterate. With little skills needed to secure a good job in today's markets.
Ever hear the phrase "Good enough for Government work"? Which is to say, over priced and half-arsed.
If you really cared about the poor, then you'd choose less government and more free-markets. A 1910 census found the Black Americans living in Chicago had an 85% literacy rate (this is without Government schooling). In 2010 this same neighbourhood had a literacy rate around 50%. This is what 'Good enough for Government work' is. Twice the cost, half the quality.
Medicine and Finance are HYPER-regulated by the Government. These Government-regulated markets are a total mess. Medicine continues to drop in quality year after year. Finance is more a scam than anything else.
Imagine if next year you paid twice as much for a computer only instead of 16 GB of RAM you got 2 GB of RAM. And it crashed all the time. That's Government regulated medicine. We pay more year after year, and the quality goes down year after year. The same holds for Government schooling, the never ending Wars, Finance, and etc....
1