Deseret News | Free markets don't always do the right thing regarding health care

Reader comments
My view: Free markets don't always do the right thing regarding health care

Wow | 12:32 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

I'm stunned to see such a common sense article from the typically right-wing Deseret News. Bravo, DN, Bravo!

Please re think | 4:34 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

In your opinion you state that the free market does not work in healthcare. You then inform us that the insurance industry has a mandate to price collude. To me their seems a big error in your analysis. The market is not free if the insurance companies are allowed to collude.

I would argue that the government intervention is the largest cause of spiraling costs in our system. The government intervention since the 1960s directly corresponds to the increasing cost of care. (More directly that the relationship of carbon dioxide to rising global temperature.)

The principles of an efficient system must include personal responsibility. That has been systematically excluded by government intrusion into the marketplace.

Ultra Bobb | 8:01 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

There is no such thing as a free market in the real world. Unscrupulous people propagandize about a “free market” to cover up their activities to prevent a “free market”.

A free market exists when there is neither any individual or group on either side of the supply/demand equation with the ability to set the price with any thing other that the total supply or total demand.

For consumers a free market is when the government regulates the suppliers to prevent improper control of supply and price.

For businessmen a free market is when the government stands aside and does nothing to prevent the business to improperly control the supply and price.

It is normal for the two different groups to try to influence the government. It’s just that the businessmen seem to have more money and money is the best way to influence the government.

Comments continue below

Himself | 8:31 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

"Price-elasticity of demand" Wow. Is this also known as "My child is in pain and I'll pay anything to make it stop"? Economists would have wheat grow without seed, because the Market will demand it.

JMT | 8:45 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

Yada, yada, yada.

The author talks about "free markets" then beats them up, all the while pointing out how we do not have free markets.

The "lobbyists" prevent things? The moment government prevents businesses and people from doing things you have an absence of free market. Why can I not buy insurance from Wyoming? Is that a free market? No, it is not. Why can I not buy a policy that only fits my needs? I do not need almost two dozen mandatory coverages. Is that free market? No, it is not.

Bottom line WE DO NOT HAVE A FREE MARKET SYSTEM! Can I scream this any louder?!

We do not. This is just like Wall Street. We claim that it is free market, completely ignoring massive government intervention in the Housing Market, etc. It is NOT free markets.

So we do not have free markets, it fails (as government intervention consistently does) then we whine about free markets and insist on more government intervention.

Holy cow, you can't make this stuff up!

And no, forcing companies to pay for pre-exhisting conditions is NOT another example of "free markets" at work. This op-ed is fundamentally flawed.

CJ3 | 8:45 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

Amen.

darin | 9:33 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

Please re think | 4:34 a.m.

Did the diabetic boy in the illustration abandon his "personal responsibility"? Is that why he has diabetes?

The current system is unfair - and life is unfair when it comes to health. There is no doubt that more responsible people will always pay for less responsible people. But those of us who enjoy the good fortune of having good health cannot say our good health is purely the result of behaving responsibly, and because we're so good, we're not paying for anyone else.

Lemonaide | 9:59 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

You left out the other consequence, no one will continue to open lemonaide stands and in fact, most of the kids in the lemonaid business will go home and find another use of their time.

Amir Soltani | 10:04 a.m. Nov. 15, 2009

If only the rest of our policymakers would focus on the pricing mechanisms for delivering healthcare rather than on ideology. Access and affordability do come to who sets, who charges and who profits from the price of health care. Bravo for focusing the debate on the basics...an excellent and timely piece.

Another Option | 12:24 p.m. Nov. 15, 2009

The letter fails to mention that under a free market you don't have to buy medical insurance. Insurance is nothing more than a tool for risk management - insurers do not deliver medical care. If you wish you can pay for your medical expenses out of your own pocket. The current health care bill under consideration will mandate that you purchase insurance, making the market less free.

Free Market? | 12:27 p.m. Nov. 15, 2009

This op ed is so flawed the mind boggles. Any restrictions, mandates or regulations that come between my perosnal responsibility to seek medical attention to help me live my best life from the medical professional of my choosing negates the free market principle. The medical professional has trained to provide the service of sharing his expertise with the patient who seeks that expertise to make personal decisions regarding their health and life PERIOD. Anything that distorts this realtionship negates free market principles and drives increased costs and restrictions on services rendered.

Give Freedom a Try! | 1:12 p.m. Nov. 15, 2009

Private healthcare is not free market, government even less.

Give Freedom a Try; that would be a novelty.

The day I see ads in the newspaper and Yellow Pages where competing doctors advertise their prices and have letters of commendation etc I will think I eventually discovered a free market in health care.

The day I can take out insurance, if I WANT TO, and can check out a hundred competing companies, and can cross state lines and still be insured by a private company then I will think there is freedom.

The day surgeons advertise their operations, give prices, and guarantee their work, I will see the correlation between free market and medical practice.

When I know how much an office visit costs and choose what is discussed and do not have to go through office staff, sign legal forms wherein medical practitioners cannot be held accountable. When I do not have to wait, half naked and have some medical aid weigh me and measure my height while waiting to talk to a doctor about a corn on my big toe, I will feel as though this is an honest business and not a money making circus.

@Free Market? | 1:21 p.m. Nov. 15, 2009

" Any restrictions, mandates or regulations that come between my perosnal responsibility to seek medical attention to help me live my best life from the medical professional of my choosing negates the free market principle."

Your personal responsibility to seek medical attention? Are you serious?! Talk about flawed.

Since the beginning of time creatures with any ounce of intelligence come to each other's aid when a disaster happens to one of their own.

If lightning struck a tree you were walking under and a limb fell on you, knocking you to the ground, and leaving you near death, do you want folks to go, "Huh. Dude has insurance. Not my responsibility" and walk away?

Idiotic. | 1:46 p.m. Nov. 15, 2009

The simple-mindedness demonstrated in this explanation of 'free markets' is horrendous. Who let this moron write a full-length op-ed on this topic? When there is competition within a market, as a free market should, the ability of a lemonade stand to offer a higher price, even to a diabetic, disappears. The same is true of drug companies or hospitals-competition eliminates the possibility of 'gouging'.
However if the writer understood economics he would explain how the current health care market is the farthest thing from an actual free market due to the third-party payer system that evolved from government wage controls in the Truman administration and subsequent tax policies by the government. On top of this Medicaid and Medicare have created huge distortions. Whoever hired this guy as an analyst on economics needs to fire him.

Brilliant! | 2:54 p.m. Nov. 15, 2009

What a superb op ed piece. As for the 'take personal responsibility' zealots who have responded in this forum, what exactly do you mean? If someone is unfortunate enough to become seriously ill, how exactly are they supposed to pay for treatment?
I became very seriously ill six months ago; if I hadn't had insurance, my out of pocket expenses would have bankrupted my family. My recovery has been jeopardized by niggling insurance rules: some needed meds are covered, others are not, some therapies are covered, others are not, all arbitrarily decided by some insurance company bureaucrat. And I will never be able to change jobs, ever, because I am, for the rest of my life, uninsurable. Man, if I could switch to Medicare, I'd do it in a second.
Markets are fundamentally amoral. A market-based health-care system would allocate resources entirely based on ability to pay. Poor people who get sick would be expected to die. Preferably quickly, silently, invisibly. You may be comfortable with that: the God I worship demands more of me than that.

Well said | 10:31 p.m. Nov. 15, 2009

The tide is turning and reform will take place. This is not big government, but freedom from mega corporations that do not respond to the free market except to kick someone down the road.

Free Market - humbug | 2:01 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

HealthCare and the Insurance guard dogs they lobby is a crime against humanity.

Using peoples health [the commodity or service] in exchange for money is wrong.

It's not like I'm in the market buying a DVD player.
It's not like a constrution job or auto repair when you
get a written diagnosis,
a written quote,
a list of items,
and shop around to get the best bang for the buck,
and can sue in the event there is a breach to that quote or,
warranteed or,
guaranteed for your full-money back.

Until then,
NO - the healthcare industry is far from a Free Market industry.

JMT | 2:50 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

Yes, take responsibility for ones self. We have an entire generation of deadbeats who do absolutely nothing to care for themselves. I'm sick and tired of seeing morbidly obese people riding around on little Rascals, knowing Medicaide paid for them. Attached is a 64oz soft drink. All the while complaining about how they are suffering.

Why do I get to work 60-70 hours a week, haven't had a vacation in three years? I guess I'm the sucker around here. I work, work and work somemore. I am getting pay raise though but turns out it bumps me up into the next pay level so my big payraise of the year is now less then $125 a freaking month! All so I can buy this morbidly obese guy a Rascal to cart himself around with his soft drink????

Margaret Thatcher said it best "Socialism will never work because eventually you run out of other peoples money."

Instead of a gold plated insurance plan I have an HSA with the savings account and then we watch what we eat and exercise.

Even if the obese guy won't take responsibility, do I still have to buy the Rascal?!?!

live and help let live | 3:07 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

This is about people's lives. Whether it is a free market or not people should be able and allowed to access the medical care they need. There are many examples of how our current system is not working. Price-collusion in the insurance system should be as illegal as it is in any other system. It is immoral that they are able to price gouge in this fashion. This writer is right on. We need the public option.

to:JMT | 2:50 p.m. | 3:42 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

I, I, I,
Me, me, me
Mine, Mine, Mine

Sad that you put money before people.

Must be Conservative.

Conspiring Men | 4:21 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

Did anyone see in the paper how Insurance and Drug Companies (in the event of loosing their stranglehold on the American consumer)
have suddenly ballooned prices,
to increase profits before the gravy train stops?

Bid Dave | 4:35 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

Sorry Taymour, people in the US DON'T want your public option - socialized health care. Check the polls.

dug | 4:44 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

medicaid and medicare are not going anywhere anytime soon. so policy makers have to deal with them in the here and now. whining about how our current free market isn't as free as it could be won't help.

so, instead of attacking the author of the op ed for working from reality-based premises, instead of your ivory tower of pure capitalism, maybe support efforts to get something done, rather than nothing.

Tat | 6:11 p.m. Nov. 16, 2009

The US has the most inefficient, wasteful and least sustainable healthcare system in the world. The private insurers HAVE PROVEN that they cannot manage it. As far as mandatory coverage, I bet everyone on this thread pays for car insurance each month, in case you end up in a catastrophic accidenent. But you also pay each month because you know that you could face fines and penalties for driving an uninsured vehicle, in other words, it's mandatory. Why aren't you all up in arms about that?

I enjoyed this piece. Thanks for your POV.

Amoo Farzad | 6:12 a.m. Nov. 17, 2009

I could not agree more. I truly hope people realize that healthcare is not a luxury or a perk, it is a must for a country like the USA.
It is amazing that so many people are taking the side of these blood sucking insurance companies that only care about bottom line at any cost.

Great job Taymour.

Douglas White | 12:28 p.m. Nov. 17, 2009

For years I have heard our state and federal politicians make the popular statement, while patting themselves on the back, ..."We are making lemonade... out of a lemon" in referring to the difficult decisions they are making for the people. Well....as far as I am concerned in regards to healthcare reform the politicians are making a "lemon out of the lemonade"...

sv | 2:14 p.m. Nov. 17, 2009

There are certain areas in which the free market system does not work. One is public education: no one is going to make money educating disabled children, but we as a society, have a duty to provide them education regardless of their ability to pay. The other, it is increasingly obvious, is health care. Like education, basic health care, especially preventive care, is something that our country, the richest in the world, should provide based not on making a profit, but on compassion and the overall benefits we get from having a healthy population. Kudos to the author.

ahoo@yahoo | 4:06 p.m. Nov. 17, 2009

When an industry gains by spending countless millions effectively lobbying Congress, and anyone scrutinizing them is labeled a Socialist, we've got to examine their motives. I don't believe they're looking out for the average Joe's best interest when it comes to his health care. However, they are using the average Joe to make certain their profits are secure. It’s not a Socialist ambition to question the fact that “the insurance industry is one of few with mandate to engage in price-collusion.” It’s our right & freedom to do so. It's time to put aside the scare tactics, and stop labeling needed reforms as “Socialism”. No one will loose benefits except the insurance companies. Start the real conversation about why we have such high numbers of uninsured Americans.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.