>>Capitalism as we know it played a big role in the abundance we’ve had here, but it has also left the US with the most expensive medical care and alienated individuals.
Healthcare is one of the least capitalistic parts of the economy, in the US and the rest of the Western world, and consequently, suffering from increasing costs.
In contrast to the increasingly regulated and subsidized major medical fields, the most capitalistic fields of medicine, like cosmetic procedures, have actually seen prices increase at below the rate of inflation over the last several decades.
The more regulations you have, the less market freedom you have, so it is either or. Of course it's on a spectrum, from total government control, to total market freedom, but that doesn't change the fact that these are mutually exclusive properties, that exist in inverse proportion of each other.
Supermarkets and the food supply chain are far less regulated than hospitals and the healthcare supply chain. That's why they've seen far greater gains in efficiency.
Claiming that "free" markets improve healthcare is just ignorant of the facts. These things are pretty much uncorrelated.
Many countries make regulated healthcare markets work. Many countries make non-market healthcare work. The quality of a country's healthcare system is predicted by 1. how much it spends 2. if it's the USA.
The evidence we have, of medical fields where market forces are more dominant, compared to medical fields where market forces are less prominent, suggests market forces reduce prices in medicine.
In the US, the increase in healthcare costs is directly the inverse of the percentage of the population covered by insurance. Insurance removes the market force of consumer price consciousness and bargain-hunting. Government regulations encourage the provision of healthcare through insurance. The increase in insurance coverage is an artificial outcome of government intervention.
>>Many countries make regulated healthcare markets work. Many countries make non-market healthcare work
No, they don't. The healthcare systems of all developed countries I've seen have severe problems. Case in point, Canada:
The problems with the US healthcare system originate in regulations. There was a 3,200 percent increase in the number of healthcare administrators between 1975 and 2010, compared to a 150 percent increase in physicians, due to an increasing number of regulations:
I think you're calling cosmetic procedures a "capitalistic sector" of the medical industry because insurance companies won't cover these elective procedures, so folks have to pay for them out of pocket, so the providers have to price the service at a level that people are willing to pay for. That all seems like a good example of companies that are competing on price, classic capitalism, fair enough.
But if we pick any other particular area of medicine where prices are out of whack -- say drug companies that raise prices by exorbitant amounts, or hospitals charging hundreds of dollars for an aspirin -- isn't that still classic, unchecked capitalism in action? Aren't these just ordinary companies, working to optimize their profits by cornering a market on certain products or services and charging the maximal value they can extract from their customers?
I don't think anyone is arguing that the market for health care is functioning well. The question is - why is it broken?
Prior to consumer protection laws, you would take your car in to an auto mechanic, they'd "fix it", and then they'd charge you whatever they felt like. Now we have laws requiring written estimates in advance. How about we start with that?
Healthcare is one of the least capitalistic parts of the economy, in the US and the rest of the Western world, and consequently, suffering from increasing costs.
In contrast to the increasingly regulated and subsidized major medical fields, the most capitalistic fields of medicine, like cosmetic procedures, have actually seen prices increase at below the rate of inflation over the last several decades.