Private sector or public sector: Which is more efficient?

[KrazyHorse]

Good, then a single-payer system is a reasonable solution.

You're a moron.

[KrazyHorse]

When there's no real competition in the market, why bother? As claims increase, so do rates. There's not a tremendous incentive to offer this savings unless a competitor does it. And they all know that -- so why bother making things more complicated for themselves?

You are also a moron.

[Asher]

Facts of the real-world marketplace, KH...sorry that it does not align with theory. Years of academia have destroyed your thought process, I'm afraid.

[DaShi]

I'm not really talking about the subsidy argument. It's a minor point that misses the overall problem of the US health care system. So I don't really care. Besides, you only argued around the two points I even bothered to make about it.

[Hauldren Collider]

It was a serious question, I wasn't challenging whether it was true.

[KrazyHorse]

There must also be another name for he economic fallacy where people confuse distributional arguments with efficiency arguments.

Profit maximizing monopolies are only bad because they artificially restrict supply. They are not sources of internal inefficiencies (like failing to offer subsidies for people to adopt behaviors to reduce costs).

"Oligopolies" like those of medical insurers cannot even restrict supply because the supply offered by their competitors is essentially perfectly elastic in anything but the shortest of runs.

"Lack of competition" amongst insurers is perhaps the stupidest claim for a cause of inefficiency in the US health insurance market I have ever heard, and anybody who brings it up should hang their heads in shame.

[DaShi]

Facts of the real-world marketplace, KH...sorry that it does not align with theory. Years of academia have destroyed your thought process, I'm afraid.

I think it's more about who ever fills his coffers at the moment. It's sad to see someone as smart as KH become so blinded by faith in the "market." I'm not saying that the market is bad or always wrong, but to ignore the flaws in it is lazy.

[KrazyHorse]

Facts of the real-world marketplace, KH...sorry that it does not align with theory. Years of academia have destroyed your thought process, I'm afraid.

In other words, I've destroyed your idiotic arguments and you're simply going to continue to claim that a dark cabal of insurance companies is deliberately driving up the health claims of Americans in contravention of even the most basic logic.

[KrazyHorse]

I think it's more about who ever fills his coffers at the moment. It's sad to see someone as smart as KH become so blinded by faith in the "market." I'm not saying that the market is bad or always wrong, but to ignore the flaws in it is lazy.

Thanks, but unlike you I'm quite aware of what flaws affect various markets, and I can actually reasonably assess the scale of these distortions. I have done so in this thread.

You and Asher are essentially illiterates.

[KrazyHorse]

It was a serious question, I wasn't challenging whether it was true.

I don't care whether or not you are challenging whether it's true.

Think it through: why do licensing boards distort markets?

[DaShi]

"Lack of competition" amongst insurers is perhaps the stupidest claim for a cause of inefficiency in the US health insurance market I have ever heard, and anybody who brings it up should hang their heads in shame.

Lack of competition among insurers increases competition at the provider level, which has its own host of problems due to poor incentives in the US healthcare system, which is another argument. The biggest drivers of overall health care costs from the insurance level are the uninsured and the failure to incentivize quality care. A private monopoly will not solve either.

[KrazyHorse]

Lack of competition among insurers increases competition at the provider level, which has its own host of problems due to poor incentives in the US healthcare system. The biggest cost drivers at the insurance level are the uninsured and the failure to incentivize quality care. A private monopoly will not solve either.

Did you obtain this through some sort of random thesis generator?

[DaShi]

No, I just like making arguments that you can't counter.

[Hauldren Collider]

No, I just like making arguments that you can't counter.

It's hard to counter non-sequiturs, but not because they have any elements of truth.

[Asher]

In other words, I've destroyed your idiotic arguments

You didn't destroy a thing. All you typically do is respond "Idiot" or "Moron" and pretend you destroyed something to make yourself feel better.

and you're simply going to continue to claim that a dark cabal of insurance companies is deliberately driving up the health claims of Americans in contravention of even the most basic logic.

Saying they are deliberately driving up the health claims is not the same as saying they've no incentive to reduce their claims when:
(1) They all just raise rates if their expenses increase
(2) Adding a system to track the GP visits, in addition to hiring additional GPs, adds complexity I'm sure they'd rather not deal with
(3) This is another avenue for potential fraud

To be clear, I'm not saying they're trying to increase everyone's rates. They're just not exactly going out of their way to ensure the rates are as low as they could be. And why should they? If everyone charges high rates and has high expenses, everyone is in the same boat and there's no need to rock that boat.

I think what we're seeing here is the disconnect in people who understand theoretical finance, and people who understand business. And make no mistake -- they are not the same thing.