Big Hospitals, Bigger Bills
show comments
  • bpuharic

    This is one of the reasons the ‘free market’ system advocated by the right in healthcare is impossible

    Regional medical organizations are able to set their own prices via monopoly control of healthcare practitioners. Deregulation leads, as Adam Smith pointed out, to businessmen conspiring against public interest, but the right insists that deregulation is the way to go

    And this is not unique. Many industries across the US are oligopolies with 3 or 4 large companies in control. As Nobel prize winners Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz have pointed out, the conditions under which a ‘free market’ happen are virtually impossible to achieve. It’s a theoretical construct which does not exist.

    But the right insists that evidence be ignored. No matter how many monopolies or oligopolies we have, we can’t regulate businesses because that’s ‘socialist’

    Adam Smith would have disagreed..

    • free_agent

      Why don’t we apply the antitrust laws vigorously?

  • Anthony

    Avik Roy: “the bottom line is not reassuring; it’s that there are no simple solutions to this very serious problem which is why we need to pay far more attention to it than we do.” (see Flow of Increased Health Costs)

    • Andrew Allison

      Actually, there are two simple solutions. One is to force patients to recognize the price being paid for healthcare by making low-deductible insurance more costly; the other, as Prof. Mead points out, is single-payer insurance with optional private insurance for those who want, and can afford better care.

      • ljgude

        What you describe Andrew is very close to what we have in Australia. Everyone pays a Medicare levy in Australia and gets government healthcare. Because it is a separate levy every taxpayer know exactly how much they are paying. People can and do buy private insurance too which gives choice of Doctor, access to private hospitals, and freedom from the waiting lists in the public system. To show one way these two systems complement each other, when waiting lists get longer more people sign up for private health insurance. When private insurance premiums rise, people drop their insurance and rely on the public system. Private hospitals and doctors are incentivised to control costs. There are actually functioning medical systems outside the US that have a lot of this figured out. Australia does this for under 10% of GDP, the Swiss do it differently with private health insurance a lot closer to the US system under the ACA for 11% of GDP. The US does it for 16% -theoretically capped by the ACA at 17.5% of GDP by 2017. Some sources put it at 17.5% already. There is your pachyderm in the operating theater. The US system costs twice as much as it should and has slightly worse health outcomes than the best mixed systems like Australia.

        • bpuharic

          The key phrase here is ‘alot of other people have figured this out’

          The American right thinks that we have NOTHING to learn from others. Our way of doing things is perfect. Everybody else is socialist so they’re a failure

          As you show, lots of things work well when they’re invented by others. Amazing.

  • Fat_Man

    Thank you WRM. The Roy article is excellent.

  • free_agent

    Har! Even at the time, it was admitted by many that the *purpose* of the merger was to create a monopoly in name-brand hospital care.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.