> "health care system" that doesn't readily seem to do what it sets out to do -- we spend 10x what some developing countries do per year per person with no better outcomes.
It's a for-profit healthcare system. It does exactly what it sets out to do. Spending 10x more without having to deliver better outcomes is a success. If it could get 20x more cost for half as good outcomes that would be even more of a success.
Healthcare can never really be a consumer market without an acceptable, nearly-free-at-point-of-use baseline alternative or very heavy government intervention in its operation.
(The NHS is arguably at the other end of the scale, since it manages demand with triage and queuing. If your condition is merely uncomfortable and not life-threatening you'll have a long wait. It is, however, very cheap.)
Healthcare could easily get costs controlled precisely by being a consumer market. If we wrote the checks for our health care ourselves, and if there weren't laws against publishing prices for procedures, and insurance companies could operate in all states, then there would be tremendous lowering of costs in a very short time.
It's a for-profit healthcare system. It does exactly what it sets out to do. Spending 10x more without having to deliver better outcomes is a success. If it could get 20x more cost for half as good outcomes that would be even more of a success.
Healthcare can never really be a consumer market without an acceptable, nearly-free-at-point-of-use baseline alternative or very heavy government intervention in its operation.
(The NHS is arguably at the other end of the scale, since it manages demand with triage and queuing. If your condition is merely uncomfortable and not life-threatening you'll have a long wait. It is, however, very cheap.)