tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post4921629977419157446..comments2023-12-24T16:36:39.633-05:00Comments on V = I·R: Free market for medicine?Anarchist Chossidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-72697362378281218932012-02-22T14:12:46.542-05:002012-02-22T14:12:46.542-05:00> However, there are certain factors that incre...> However, there are certain factors that increase the need for governement regulation.<br /><br />Also, it is really unclear to me why all these factors (whether uniquely applying to medicine or not) increase the need for <b>government</b> regulation. Why is it a job for a monopoly with lots of guns to step in and correct them? Why can't we have many for-profit private organizations doing it?<br /><br />Insert examples of OU, OK, Star-K, etc., vs. FDA.Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-62640227073267740722012-02-21T23:49:39.980-05:002012-02-21T23:49:39.980-05:00(Sorry for a string of comments.)
Look, do you th...(Sorry for a string of comments.)<br /><br />Look, do you think the Rebbe would say that we should pray for the welfare of the Nazi government? That Russian communists were an extension of the people and therefore need to be respected and adored? Obviously not.<br /><br />In an ideal world, the government is beneficial to the people and the people don't abuse the system. This is not the reality we live in.<br /><br />If I wanted to make a similar argument in the realm of Zionism, in an ideal world, Jews promised not to rebel against the nations and not to return to E"Y by force, and the nations promised not to oppress the Jews. After the Holocaust, this argument has become academic. (I don't know how much this argument makes sense in terms of Halacha, etc.)Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-89777704868013747212012-02-21T23:46:31.716-05:002012-02-21T23:46:31.716-05:00Re: tzedaka: I am not against tzedaka at all, chv&...Re: tzedaka: I am not against tzedaka at all, chv"sh. I am against society-run tzedaka.<br /><br />1. There is no reason that tzedaka cannot be a private business. Obviously, it is already one. The same problems that the government-run car or TV industry has, the government-run tzedaka has.<br /><br />2. Yes, there is a moral component. I have an obligation to provide first for my mother. Then, for the poor people of my town. Etc. I do not have an obligation to send poor black kids from Bronx into terrible schools that make them into uneducated criminals. Nor do I have an obligation to send poor people of New Mexico to state-run hospitals. I certainly <i>can</i> do that, but that should be my choice.<br /><br /><i> In Jewish societies in the middle ages, there was free public charity, paid for by forced charity "confiscated" from the wealthier members of the community. This charity paid for education, food and shelter for the poor.<br />And, the poor respected the society that was caring for them enough not to do what all the libertarians are sure would happen in socialized medicine. <br />So, perhaps Halacha would ask the wealthy to give forced charity, and the poor to respect their own society enough not break the system.</i><br /><br />First of all, these charities were mandated by Halacha, a positivist law coming from Hashem. That trumps any utilitarian arguments or rights-morality.<br /><br />Second, I am sure there were Jewish doctors who did blood-letting. And doesn't Rambam himself say to ignore medical advise found in Gemara, because nature (or knowledge) changed? The same argument can go for economics and economic tools for healthcare and charity. To figure out the best "system" of charity and healthcare, we need to look to modern economic knowledge (and I don't mean Paul Krugman), not to the practices of the past.<br /><br />(In fact, I assume child labor was also an ok thing in those communities. As was spanking children and depriving wives who were "rebellious" of food.)<br /><br />Third, I am sure these charities operated just like private charities of the 19th century. As I said, the situation has moved on.Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-45558666573678075852012-02-21T23:37:51.436-05:002012-02-21T23:37:51.436-05:00Re: second comment: the problem that you're ig...Re: second comment: the problem that you're ignoring is that if there are only fifty apples on an island that has one hundred people, there is no way to make everyone have an apple.<br /><br />1. Under free market, fifty wealthiest people on the island get the apples. The apple-producers get paid at the highest possible price they can charge due to the supply/demand curve, invest much of their profit as the capital, and plant more trees. Next year, sixty people will be able to afford the apples. And so on.<br /><br />We see this with any industry — as times goes by, things become more affordable because of the capital investment.<br /><br />2. Under socialist price control, there are still only fifty apples per one hundred people. So, instead of the richest people getting them, the luckiest people (or people with connections, or people who rise early in the morning) get them. This is no less arbitrary than the first case (in fact, the fifty wealthy people got wealthy by providing others with goods and services; the fifty lucky people are in no way special). But — in this case, the apple growers get much less capital (if any); they don't get to expand their industry, and the apple market stagnates, with apple shortages continuing forever.Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-82928292743006699402012-02-21T23:29:30.579-05:002012-02-21T23:29:30.579-05:00The reason why I "blindly" believe in th...The reason why I "blindly" believe in the "free market is always better than the government" motto is because of the "calculation problem" argument raised by Ludwig von Mises. The government has no way of calculating which way to allocate the capital most efficiently, unless it has some neviim on board. This applies to managing the whole economy as much as micro-managing specific economic aspects such as interest rates or micro-managing specific industries.<br /><br /><i>However, there are certain factors that increase the need for governement regulation. <br />Those factors are: <br />1) Informational assymetry.<br />2) Degree of consequence for a wrong choice.<br />3) The vulnerability of the chooser.<br />4) The amount of time that the chooser will have to make his choice.</i><br /><br />1) Please explain what you mean.<br />2) Why is that worse for medicine than, say, for food safety? Would you argue that we need FDA? I hope not as a daily user of the multiple private (inter-) national hashgacha services. (Btw, there is significantly fewer proportion of food poisoning cases from OU– vs. FDA–checked food.)<br />3)Please explain.<br />4)Again, please explain.<br /><br />Not only am I asking you to explain what you mean, but I am also asking to explain why medicine is any different from the rest of industries, and why the government needs to be involved in it.<br /><br />Btw, what price control? The government involvement drives the prices up. If you price-control any industry, it will lead to shortage of services. It's no different from shortage of bananas, soap, toothpaste, and other items for which there was deficit in the USSR.<br /><br />I was going to quote the last few paragraphs from this article, but you can just read them yourself: http://mises.org/daily/3586/Socialized-Healthcare-vs-The-Laws-of-Economics<br /><br />'[T]hanks to nationalization, price controls, and government rationing of healthcare [in Canada and UK] — thousands of people die needlessly every year because of shortages of kidney dialysis machines, pediatric intensive care units, pacemakers, and even x-ray machines. This is America's future, if "ObamaCare" becomes a reality.'Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-22958682451293447542012-02-21T22:58:33.536-05:002012-02-21T22:58:33.536-05:00Finally, in your previous post, you talked about t...Finally, in your previous post, you talked about there being no difference between health care, and say, cell phones with regard to whether socialism was the way to go. <br />Here is the problem:<br />As science gets better, it becomes possible to spend more and more money on health care. 100 years ago, the health care solution to the vast majority of cases was "Yisgadal V'Yiskadash..."<br />Today, medical innovation has made it possible to save many of those lives, at very high cost. So, this gives rise to a dilemma. <br />If poor members of our society can't afford the latest cell phone technology, they will be deprived of good call quality.<br />If poor people can't afford the laest health care inovations, they will die (sometimes).<br />So, as a society, we have to ask ourselves: Are we OK with letting people die because they can't afford treatments that we, as a society, have available. <br />Or, should we, as a society, take money from some members and use it to provide life saving care to people that otherwise could not afford it? <br />It seems reasonable to me to say that Halacha would hold that the second option is the moral and correct one.<br />Although the crazy libertarian that you have become will start fuming about the "immorality" of taking from one person to give to another, and the "slippery slope" that once you start giving a good away for free, demand skyrockets and the only way to control costs is to impose shortages for everyone. <br />Halacha would answer in two ways: 1) The whole concept of taxes being immoral is a silly, juvenile idea.<br />2) In Jewish societies in the middle ages, there was free public charity, paid for by forced charity "confiscated" from the wealthier members of the community. This charity paid for education, food and shelter for the poor.<br />And, the poor respected the society that was caring for them enough not to do what all the libertarians are sure would happen in socialized medicine. <br />So, perhaps Halacha would ask the wealthy to give forced charity, and the poor to respect their own society enough not break the system.Michaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-57839870555153047902012-02-21T22:41:04.613-05:002012-02-21T22:41:04.613-05:00Let me be clear: In general, I am against governme...Let me be clear: In general, I am against government over-regulation, I recognize that when government gets involved in something it leads to overspending, ridiculous inefficiencies, etc.<br />This is certainly true in the arena of healthcare as well. <br />However, it is neccessary for a clear-minded person not be an extremist and to recognize that you can't just rely on simple principles in all cases. Otherwise, you are no different front the sheep bleating four legs good, two legs bad.<br />So, you can't just always say things like "the free market always rules, government has no role."<br />To be sure, most government regulation and licensing is there to cartelize the industries, and make sure that incumbents continue to earn their share of the profits. And, for the most part, there is nothing wrong with the government saying that people can choose their own sources of goods and services and only intervene when fraud or mischief occurs. <br />However, there are certain factors that increase the need for governement regulation. <br />Those factors are: <br />1) Informational assymetry.<br />2) Degree of consequence for a wrong choice.<br />3) The vulnerability of the chooser.<br />4) The amount of time that the chooser will have to make his choice.<br />When it comes to health care choices, all four of these factors are skewed in the direction of government regulation and price control being needed.Michaelnoreply@blogger.com