common sense

"there is no arguing with one who denies first principles"

Sunday, March 12, 2017

"Not My Precedent"

Image result for replacing the aca

The Obamacare precedent is that the government SHOULD be responsible for the medical coverage of all Americans.

Not knowing a ton of information about health care industry I’m reluctant to wade into this topic. But here it goes…

 I don’t like the idea of government sponsored health care or health insurance because it uses public money for private business. This distorts the market because public money is an endless buffet of ‘promises’ never completely delivered. As a society we can carry some debt on interstates and bridges or disaster relief and war but not private health insurance. Hospital visits will get more frequent and medical plans will cover more ailments as long as taxpayers are funding the bill. Medicare runs out of funding consistently.

I can’t imagine the Republican plan to overhaul the ACA (Affordalbe Care Act) will be much cleaner than the original Democrat plan. They don’t do minutia and shouldn’t be asked to. We wouldn’t ask long haul truckers to race their rigs in the Indy 500. They weren’t designed for it. This is a job for markets. Congress can help by removing restrictions on levels of coverage or by allowing some interstate commerce to increase competition among insurers.

Officials don’t help us buy food or gas, why do we need them for health care?

 Obamacare puts taxpayers on the hook for individuals’ health care, or at least the price of it.
It might sound mild but it is a significant change of course for Americans who think and act in market based terms for most goods and services. I get that the market is decidedly less free than it used to be. New homes, cars, food and energy are all frequently subsidized through direct payments and rebates. Both the ‘Cash for Clunkers’ program and the new home tax credits were forms of subsidies. A subsidy is just money from the government to help with the cost of a good or service. Often we come out ahead, like I did on the housing credit, occasionally we lose out.

 How well did used car dealers do under Cash for Clunkers?

 Economists (good ones) hate market intervention because it distorts the real value or price of an item. If your corner Quicki Mart owner gets a 50 cent rebate from Pepsi for every bottle, he can sell pop cheaper than everyone else. Pepsi made the pop at Quicki Mart cheaper than at both EZ buy and Save More. The real market value of Pepsi is something closer to what EZ buy and Save More sell it at. Pepsi distorted the real value of the pop sold at convenience stores by subsidizing Quicki Mart.

No serious person thinks we need a government subsidy so EZ buy and Save More can sell Pepsi at the same rate as Quicki Mart. Or that either shop couldn’t try to sell it cheaper to compete with Quicki Mart. We do treat health care this way though.

Large insurers with thousands of members offer plans at lower rates than small insurers. The reason is simple; the coverage they offer is broader and comes with rebates on hospital and clinic visits. Big health insurers can afford to sell cheaper than their competitors because of the rebate they get from providers. Governments have no more business regulating this than the price of Pepsi at corner stores.

Yes I understand that health care is much more serious than carbonated drinks, but not recognizing this as something for private industry to handle is what leads to high prices. Laws insisting everyone have coverage puts pressures on employers and insurance companies to cover everyone. The only way it works is because of the rebate the insurer gets from the government for offering a plan they couldn’t afford without it.

This is like insisting everyone buy Pepsi. If you can’t afford it the government will help you pay for it by giving you special coupons for EZ Buy and Save More.

The president wanted to get a massive health care law done before he left office, so bad in fact that the framework was built to fall apart. A federal pyramid with mostly older and sicker Americans at the top collapses of its own weight eventually.

 Obamacare was exactly that kind of precedent, one that made official the belief that governments should be the ultimate judge of life and liberty.  

I don’t think the Republicans will improve things much because we’ve crossed the Rubicon between roles of government and roles of citizens. We now think health care just needs to run better, a massive shop with an efficient manager. Republicans will save money and cut costs, probably. It misses the real point. They have no business selling it or regulating it, beyond some very minor things. Let the hospitals, doctors, drug companies, hospice centers, insurance providers and specialists figure it out. They know how.

This isn’t my precedent.
.  


No comments:

Post a Comment