Comments on: Equity vs Efficiency in Health Care: Let’s Pretend There’s A Third Way http://wallstreetpit.com/12483-equity-vs-efficiency-in-health-care-lets-pretend-theres-a-third-way Tue, 22 May 2012 19:21:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Citizen K http://wallstreetpit.com/12483-equity-vs-efficiency-in-health-care-lets-pretend-theres-a-third-way#comment-486310 Citizen K Mon, 24 Jan 2011 18:22:00 +0000 http://wallstreetpit.com/?p=12483#comment-486310 Most European countries do not have socialized medicine, wherein the government owns and operates the health care system. Those that do (Ireland, Italy, Scandinavia, Spain, UK) made the decision to go that way out of pragmatism and not ideology: They drew the conclusion that the free market couldn't provide value-driven care on a population basis -- not an unreasonable view. Their health care bang for the buck is high because basing a system on taxpayer dollars encourages preventive medicine to minimize expense. That's why each of these countries puts a strong emphasis on primary care and public health policy, which is the real reason for the economy of their outcomes. (Singapore is no different, in this respect.) We don't need socialized medicine to accomplish this, but we do need to reverse the grave shortage of primary care physicians and clinics, and invest in robust public health policies at the federal, state, and community levels. Together, these would save billions each year and give the lie to Brooks' myopic view of the economic pie, which would grow as a result. Most European countries do not have socialized medicine, wherein the government owns and operates the health care system. Those that do (Ireland, Italy, Scandinavia, Spain, UK) made the decision to go that way out of pragmatism and not ideology: They drew the conclusion that the free market couldn’t provide value-driven care on a population basis — not an unreasonable view. Their health care bang for the buck is high because basing a system on taxpayer dollars encourages preventive medicine to minimize expense. That’s why each of these countries puts a strong emphasis on primary care and public health policy, which is the real reason for the economy of their outcomes. (Singapore is no different, in this respect.)

We don’t need socialized medicine to accomplish this, but we do need to reverse the grave shortage of primary care physicians and clinics, and invest in robust public health policies at the federal, state, and community levels. Together, these would save billions each year and give the lie to Brooks’ myopic view of the economic pie, which would grow as a result.

]]> By: Jordan Levine http://wallstreetpit.com/12483-equity-vs-efficiency-in-health-care-lets-pretend-theres-a-third-way#comment-83720 Jordan Levine Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:54:42 +0000 http://wallstreetpit.com/?p=12483#comment-83720 This is a fantastic post and I couldn't agree with you more. There is a reason why policy is not dominated by economic thought. 40+ million Americans uninsured while others consume expensive experimental treatments is both inefficient and unequal. Foreign systems achieve greater measures of both equality and efficiency than ours, so why are people framing the debate as being mutually exclusive between the two measures? The free-rider issue is a key point. Few people expect to be sick - a large number of those who are uninsured feel that based on a cost-benefit analysis that they have little to gain by paying into the system and if something catastrophic were to happen, they could go to the emergency room where the cost would be passed on to those of who did our due diligence by paying into a plan. The current legislation may not be the most inefficient or the most equal but I would argue that it increases both equity and efficiency and stronger legislation would increase both measures further. In addition, by covering more healthy people the exchanges and some sort of affordable public plan, the system can afford to take on more sick people, in fact the legislation forces them to be able to gain coverage. When they can get treatment early on rather than waiting till it gets to a crisis stage, we again increase equity and efficiency. The issue is all in how the debate is framed and I think communication is the biggest issue. You do a great job of it, but neither house of congress nor the President is. For more on this notion, check out the following article: http://www.songofsibyl.com/2009/11/28/can-somebody-paint-me-a-decent-picture-part-1-health-care/ This is a fantastic post and I couldn’t agree with you more. There is a reason why policy is not dominated by economic thought. 40+ million Americans uninsured while others consume expensive experimental treatments is both inefficient and unequal. Foreign systems achieve greater measures of both equality and efficiency than ours, so why are people framing the debate as being mutually exclusive between the two measures? The free-rider issue is a key point. Few people expect to be sick – a large number of those who are uninsured feel that based on a cost-benefit analysis that they have little to gain by paying into the system and if something catastrophic were to happen, they could go to the emergency room where the cost would be passed on to those of who did our due diligence by paying into a plan. The current legislation may not be the most inefficient or the most equal but I would argue that it increases both equity and efficiency and stronger legislation would increase both measures further. In addition, by covering more healthy people the exchanges and some sort of affordable public plan, the system can afford to take on more sick people, in fact the legislation forces them to be able to gain coverage. When they can get treatment early on rather than waiting till it gets to a crisis stage, we again increase equity and efficiency. The issue is all in how the debate is framed and I think communication is the biggest issue. You do a great job of it, but neither house of congress nor the President is. For more on this notion, check out the following article: http://www.songofsibyl.com/2009/11/28/can-somebody-paint-me-a-decent-picture-part-1-health-care/

]]>