Free markets are characterized by voluntary exchange between buyers and sellers. Mapping that relationship is absurdly simply, as this image indicates.
Indeed, the only reason I even bothered to include that image was for purposes of comparison. Here is a new flowchart prepared for the Joint Economic Committee showing the healthcare system under Obamacare.
It’s worth noting, by the way, that the system already was a disaster even before Obamacare was enacted. In the health care sector, free markets are only allowed to operate in very rare cases, such as cosmetic surgery, laser eye surgery, and (for better or worse) abortion. The rest of the sector was heavily distorted by government intervention. Obamacare simply makes a bad situation worse.
[...] Dan Mitchell points out, real health care reform would have just two parties to most transactions: buyer and [...]
[...] Dan Mitchell points out, real health care reform would have just two parties to most transactions: buyer and [...]
Very interesting post; however, your simple illustration has one undermining flaw – it assumes that the healthcare insurance market was open to a simple, open exchange between those selling and those seeking health insurance before the reforms. It wasn’t and was distorted in the favor of the insurance companies, their owners, and the heavy, unnecessary internal overhead they carry and had to support.
As a libertarian, if the thought of being forced to purchase health insurance (though I’m sure you have some anyway) to line the pockets of insurance companies now forced themselves to take on “high risk” people to help them essentially maintain their profit margins (a form of state-sanctioned corporate welfare in and of itself) bothers you — then by all means say so and I’m sure you would have many nods of concurrence.
However, to misrepresent the Health Care reforms (although agreeably imperfect) as an overall state take over of the entire health care system of the likes of Canada or the UK (as you have in other posts) is wholly disingenuous.
[...] Romney and other squishy Republicans, not a sign of Obama’s moderate conservatism. Obama has radically expanded the role of government in a sector that already has been screwed up by government intervention. If this is conservative, [...]
[...] of Romney and other squishy Republicans, not a sign of Obama’s moderate conservatism. Obama has radically expanded the role of government in a sector that already has been screwed up by government intervention. If this is conservative, [...]
[...] this chart shows how Obamacare is turning the health care system into a Byzantine [...]
[...] Keep in mind, by the way, that each small pink circle actually represents an entire field of regulation. So when you see, for instance, the “Obamacare” circle, what you’re really seeing is this nightmarish image of regulatory complexity. [...]
[...] Keep in mind, by the way, that each small pink circle actually represents an entire field of regulation. So when you see, for instance, the “Obamacare” circle, what you’re really seeing is this nightmarish image of regulatory complexity. [...]
[...] Keep in mind, by the way, that each small pink circle actually represents an entire field of regulation. So when you see, for instance, the “Obamacare” circle, what you’re really seeing is this nightmarish image of regulatory complexity. [...]
[...] Keep in mind, by the way, that each small pink circle actually represents an entire field of regulation. So when you see, for instance, the “Obamacare” circle, what you’re really seeing is this nightmarish image of regulatory complexity. [...]
[...] shared a nightmarish flowchart to show the Byzantine complexity of America’s healthcare system under Obamacare. Sort of [...]
[...] shared a nightmarish flowchart to show the Byzantine complexity of America’s healthcare system under Obamacare. Sort of makes [...]
[...] shared a nightmarish flowchart to show the Byzantine complexity of America’s healthcare system under Obamacare. Sort of makes [...]