Aha. So the two Baby Bell descendants own virtually all of the last mile land lines in the US, and who were cheaply sold by the government cell phone wavelength which they also both mostly control - this duopoly which spends an inordinant amount of money on lobbying at the state and federally for regulatory capture is part of the unregulated market. The government regulating exclusive spectrum use for this as part as that lack of regulation.
Your "by comparison" and "most involved" qualifiers are doing a lot of heavy lifting. Corporate America is heavily involved in desiring bailouts, regulatory capture etc. Just witness the corporate talking heads demanding more Reddit Wall Street Bets Gamestop regulation. And these were people long, not short.
The notion that "free market enterprise" wants free markets, a lack of regulatory capture etc. is a fantastic notion. And you will be hard-pressed to find Fortune 500 companies not tightly intertwined with the government, which is something they obviously desire to be by their actions.
> The notion that "free market enterprise" wants free markets, a lack of regulatory capture etc. is a fantastic notion.
I didn't say that.
Enterprises are gonna enterprise, they will suck out to the last penny if you let them. That is why it is so important to keep the market fair, it's the only real chance at even a semblance of meritocracy, if it even exists. That is the job of government, or it should be, but as you've said the disparities are increasing because surprise! the 'people's government' sold everyone out. It is about time those clamoring for more and more government intervention realize that sad, yet true, reality.
Why is the opposite of "bad government" always "no government" and not sometimes just "better government"?
But, it is a hell of a lot better than something not even in the chart like the undefined and catch it all concept of 'productivity', as anyone who saw an operating room in the 70s, or an ICU and has seen one now can attest to the enormous real growth in core productivity driven by the same factor as all the other sectors of the economy: technology.
Single payer doesn't really matter. There are countries which do great without it (Switzerland for example). If you want cheaper stuff you need to focus on getting rid of cartels and anti competitive practices. Train more doctors, some through shorter track so they can provide simple checkups/treatments. Force everyone to list prices in clear way. Change the law so you don't go bankrupt when something goes wrong and that you don't need several million investment to provide something as easy as MRI scans. There are tons of obvious things to do. Single payer will not solve those problems.
Full blood panel with all hormones, cholesterol, mineral levels costs like 80$ here and I can get it done any day, any time by just walking into a lab and telling them what I want to get done. No doctor consultation, nothing. The results are available online the same day (with the exception of things like free testosterone that takes several days as they ship it to outside lab). This is done without any coverage, insurance or anything. Just paying out of pocket. Think about why it's possible in a poor Central European country and not in US. Hint: it's not what progressive politicians tell you.
The US has a market for private healthcare, but healthcare will never be a free market. It's the antithesis of a free market. Intrinsic inequality of bargaining power and information asymmetry are the biggest reasons for this.
This point is usually brought up in regards to healthcare emergencies. But emergencies only make up a small fraction of healthcare spending[1].
Maybe people have less bargaining power because of agreements with providers/insurers. That's a barrier to an effective market with price sensitivity, but it's a contingent one, not a mathematically inevitable one. For much of our healthcare spending the balance of bargaining power could look like it does for food.
1: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2013/oct/28/nick-gille...
> How do you explain nations with more government involvement in healthcare who have lower healthcare costs?
They made other tradeoffs and inverted the graph. For example cellphones are way more expensive on some countries, cars are taxed up to 100% on others.
The other big inflator is rent - the cost of land and buildings. At this point the Georgists would like a word about land value taxes.
You can't import a haircut because it really is technically and practically impossible or because bureaucracy has made it impossible for outsiders to enter the haircutting business? Let me remind you all that in the US you need a license to cut hair. Let me repeat that, in the US you cannot cut hair without the government giving you permission.
I think it is perfectly within our abilities to build lets say some kind of smart-helmet that cuts hair and can be imported from the same countries that build smartphones, drones, watches, shoes, etc. I'm open to other ideas.
You can technically automate hair cuts (badly, but it is technically possible, most wouldn’t want to pay for it yet).
You can buy an electric hair trimmers and give yourself a standard length.
But there are no robots for remote-controlled hair cutting. Until there are, you can’t import them.
This is why haircuts are expensive even outside of the USA, and why they vary in rough accordance with the local cost of living.