Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

Is there a market price that could exist that, in your mind, would justify free market health care? To use a very hyperbolic example, let's say that radical advances in medical technology allow the market price of basic health insurance to fall to somewhere between the equivalents of $10-$20 per person per month. If this were the case, would private health insurance be justified?

If there is a price below which it is justified, what is it, or by what criteria could we judge it to be so?

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

isn't one of the main arguments against the free market that unhealthy people would end up paying prohibitively high premiums, which is unfair from certain perspectives? If that's the main counterargument, then at the point where the price for a reasonably sick person is so high that it goes against the conscience to allow it.

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

sure, with the caveat that one could predict with relative certainty that prices would remain reasonably stable. (i.e. similar certainty to that with which canadians know they'll be covered next month or next year).

and if the free market could provide me sexy wood nymphs in crotchless leiderhosen i'd buy those too

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

[ QUOTE ]
and if the free market could provide me sexy wood nymphs in crotchless leiderhosen i'd buy those too

[/ QUOTE ]

I cant get this vision out of my head. Absolutely priceless!

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

[ QUOTE ]

and if the free market could provide me sexy wood nymphs in crotchless leiderhosen i'd buy those too

[/ QUOTE ]

SOLD!

http://news.softpedia.com/images/new...Warcraft-2.jpg

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

Please define, "free market health care." The current US system, IMHO, is anything but free market.

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

I don't know the answer to HMK's question. The primary reason is that if private insurance could deliver health care at that cost, the government could as well. It would come down to seeing whether adverse selection or extreme poverty would still prevent people who needed health care from getting it.

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

[ QUOTE ]
The primary reason is that if private insurance could deliver health care at that cost, the government could as well

[/ QUOTE ]

What? Government does not have the selection mechanisms nessecary to provide efficiency on the same level as the free market.

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

But they have efficiency of scale and you can skip costs like advertising if you have a monopoly. Advanced technology isn't the only reason the US has the highest health care costs in the world.

Re: Question for Social Health Care Advocates
 

[ QUOTE ]
isn't one of the main arguments against the free market that unhealthy people would end up paying prohibitively high premiums, which is unfair from certain perspectives?

[/ QUOTE ]

Healthy people paying the same premiums as unhealthy people is unfair IMO.

Would you expect someone with 4 speeding tickets and 3 accidents to pay the same car insurance as someone with a perfect driving record? Of course not. Why should this be any different?