Active Users:414 Time:29/06/2024 04:35:57 PM
The problem with cost reduction is that you need to consider the system. Artsapat Send a noteboard - 04/04/2012 09:45:24 PM
In a private system, all these considerations are micro-economic, as insurees might leave before the insurer gets to benefit from it. So in that case you get much more short term cost reductions: not accepting new insurees because of "pre-excisting conditions", denying coverage, etc. If you have a public system, the cost reductions are more macro-economic: (long term) disease prevention, cost-effective use of drugs, steering of policy and resources at a system level, top down co-ordination of improvement of health care (instead of doctors improving health care only if it improves or does not decrease their income, insurers improving the system if it improves or does not decrease their income, etc). In my opinion, this will lead to higher societal wealth, compared to a private system.

Buying "health" is not the same as buying a car. Indeed, the "need" to buy "health" is fundamentally different from the "need" to buy a car. You can't therefore leave it all to an open market.
There are the matters of rationality assumptions in normal markets (uncertainty - assymetric information/moral hazard), externalities (i.e. contagious diseases), the need for (partly) social insurance (everybody should be able to consume at least ‘sufficient’ care, hence it should not be entirely related to ability to pay), equity and ethical considerations (i.e. solidarity between rich/poor, healthy/sick, old/young), presence of risk-bearing third parties (consumers are not payers).

Mind you, the public system is not without flaws. By far. As economists call it: "government failure" as opposed to "market failure". For example, government often has to rely on information from those who are regulated and who have interest in distorting this information (agency problem). Politicians often are not accountable for long-term effects of policy measures and there are limited incentives for civil servants for technical efficiency (bureaucracy or ‘red tape’) (motivation problem)



Thus ends my lecture on health economics. You can see me do this for three hours on end somewhere in August is you want.
The mystery deepens... I think. *MySmiley*
Reply to message
Health care reform - 04/04/2012 07:38:50 PM 549 Views
While I think a movement towards public health care in the long run would be good... - 04/04/2012 09:11:50 PM 237 Views
The problem with cost reduction is that you need to consider the system. - 04/04/2012 09:45:24 PM 318 Views
I'm not talking about that level even. Just basic stuff - 04/04/2012 11:18:36 PM 242 Views
Re: Health care reform - 05/04/2012 12:45:37 AM 316 Views
Ever hear of cost-shifting? *NM* - 05/04/2012 03:34:09 AM 76 Views
Re: Health care reform - 05/04/2012 10:33:59 AM 320 Views
Ideas - including Tort reform, lawyers are bloodsuckers..... - 05/04/2012 04:25:19 PM 223 Views
Huge problem with your "payment based on solutions" idea - 05/04/2012 06:51:57 PM 354 Views
Re: Ideas - including Tort reform, lawyers are bloodsuckers..... - 05/04/2012 08:48:17 PM 232 Views
I think Tom covered it pretty well, actually. - 05/04/2012 04:44:43 PM 312 Views
Well, I can give some thoughts on the matter (Disclaimer: Long post) - 05/04/2012 07:18:19 PM 320 Views
As if you should ever need a disclaimer like that *NM* - 05/04/2012 09:13:38 PM 100 Views
Yeah, I suppose that is a bit redundant *NM* - 05/04/2012 09:48:14 PM 76 Views

Reply to Message