if people get ill they get a lot of money.
Now I know that if a person has an illness that could have been prevented by $20 jabs and now has one which costs $20,000 to treat then free market healthcare providers suffer by leaving people to get seriously ill before they treat them.
if they spend a lot they can still make it up in how much they are paid.
what if the cost of the treatment is expensive so cost of healthcare paid by customer covers lots of potential treatments so the healthcare provider wants people to get seriously sick and potentially leaves them to get this sick?
would there be incentives to prevent this? except reputation? or maybe that healthcare would be cheaper so this couldn't happen?
now I know this situtation is possible and that possibility alone is not condemning but I just wonder about it.
I don't really want to comment or read anything here.I have near zero in common with many of you.I may return periodically when there's something you need to know.
Near Mutualist/Libertarian Socialist.
Car mechanics make more money if cars are malfunctioning, therefore free market car repair could never work. Seems silly, doesn't it?
Healthcare providers would have to compete for your business, and therefore would have to provide adequate service. Consumer demand and reputation would prevent them from not caring about your health.
"Free market healthcare" isn't just some abstract, impersonal system; it's a matrix of acting individuals. Doctors usually tend to care a great deal about their patients. Otherwise they probably wouldn't be in such a difficult, time-demanding profession. I recall from Ron Paul's manifesto that he mentioned in his practice he would often treat patients pro bono if they couldn't afford an important treatment. This natural tendency for doctors to care combined with the cleansing fires of competition in free markets would very likely result in quite high quality of care.
In India, low cost medical care units are spread all over the nation.
Considering that India's population has been able to rise so much, and that people don't die en masse of illnesses as they did in the beginning of the century, there are even assholes who complain that these medical care units did too good a job.
In fact, Amartya Sen gets irritated by private low-cost operators in medicine, because he feels they push away the room for a single standardised state-run system. Indian economists like Sen are used to thinking that their education will allow them to make the best top-down policy enactments, which will normatively do the reforms that they want to do.
These bottom-up units hinder their reformist purposes.
Great points.Yes that thought was quite silly.Just a passing thought.
here in los angeles we had a charity medical treatments in the staple stadium(where the lakers play) where those who are uninsured and needy get dental , medical and eye check ups for free
all without government assistance