Hacker News Reader

Comment by ttcbj | Hacker News Reader

For the record, this is exactly how I feel. They did it to themselves. I really believe in free markets, and I really see the downsides of gov't intervention, but my direct experience with this particular market says we'd be better off with the gov't.

View on HN

You can still have aspects of a free market..

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Medicare-for-All is just public insurance. It's not a state take over of all private hospitals.

But instead of negotiating a price with you, the hospital will be negotiating with the state. Hospitals can still compete on prices and likely the state will grant contracts for non-urgent services to the cheapest provider..

Modulo, whatever level of free choice is left and what capacity is available, etc..

It’s effectively a state takeover, as providers can negotiate with the Health and Human Services department in the same way that my child can negotiate their allowance with me.

Disclaimer: In full support of single payer/government managed healthcare

Not really, you could very well imagine private hospitals bidding against each other to win a contract on providing ER services. With penalties if capacity or quality suffers by objective standards. (Isn't this how most government contracts work)

It's not like there is any competition right now? You can't even get a price quote for elective surgery.

Also I wouldn't be so sure that your children don't have significant leverage over you, hehe :) (They probably don't realize how much leverage they have)

Your current experience is of a highly regulated system with dwindling options and a lot of unintended consequences that weren’t thought through with the existing regulation - it is more similar to socialized care than the free market.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com