Many Thanks

Posted, Sunday, November 29, 2009 23:48 pm

Many thanks for this excellent piece. I have posted inks to it from my website.

Diana

New

Non-competitive Pricing

Posted, Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:06 am

A good read...

While price-inelastic is a great technical term, non-competitive pricing better sums up the situation in my mind (Not to be pedantic). Consumers of health care, aside from those seeking cosmetic surgery, do not seek out medical care like they would any other service or consumable. They use it when they need it. They also rarely have a chance to "shop around" for the best deal. Nor can they choose to delay their purchase to a better time in many situations. All of the hallmarks of normal consumer free market involvement seem to be missing and yet so many wish to apply the rules of a market economy to a situation in which it simply does not fit.

Wellscent

New

The Canadian healthcare System

Posted, Monday, November 23, 2009 5:24 pm

I read with interest your article. I found it informative but not complete.

I do not follow (or wish I did not follow – happenings in the US) in detail the US political state of affairs…. Meaning that I am not uniquely informed on these topics. I do however find myself – attention attracted by the actions of Rep. Ron Paul (I think because he appears honest – and motivated to reduce the power of people in the middle) and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (as his politics appear to be somewhat aligned with what I think).

I notice that Rep. Kucinich did not vote for the healthcare bill.

I notice that you did not mention – or did not go far enough in your article to explain reasoning that he might have used for not supporting the existing package/amendments.

I find that your article was useful, informative but complete enough. It seems to me that a healthcare program such as Canada’s would be of most use to the Americans. Of course, there are issues as to how to get there – that is how to remove the healthcare industry from control, but I really do not see the value in the current Reid bill.

I watched a video recently form California in which Rep. Nancy Pelosi avoided answering a question about enforcement policies for the healthcare bill. The question was generally along the lines of – if someone does not purchase healthcare will they be prosecuted. She heard the question – she understood and you could see in her body language that she was uncomfortable with it. She could have said, no of course not. She said nothing.

From this perspective, it looks to like fascism. I do not like this term as it places the speaker (me) in the position of appearing extreme. But if people will be forced to purchase a corporate product then I think it is fascist.

My point in writing is that I think your article is insightful… I think you could go further as I sense that you have deep understanding of the matters.

Thank you for the article.

John

Answer by R.T.

I keep my articles short because most people don't like to read long and technical articles.

Thank you for raising Rep. Ron Paul's and Rep. Dennis Kucinich's positions on U.S. health care reform. As you know, these two congressmen are at the opposite ends of the political spectrum. Paul is a libertarian who is opposed to most government interventions. Kucinich is a progressive who considers the government an agent of change and of social progress.

The reason why Rep. Kucinich voted against the House bill, is because he thought the bill did not go far enough to counteract the lobbying influence of the health insurance industry and did not have a true public option in it.

The Canadian health system is not perfect. It relies more and more on rationing by queuing. This is because it has no deductible or coinsurance features in it, and because of a high inflow of immigrants. Sooner or later, with the arrival of aging baby-boomers, the Canadian health system will have to be reformed also.

Back to blog