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.
[…] And look at these two visuals to grasp the difference between a free market and […]
this shows how one of these systems is knowable and the other is only knowable at an ideological level of abstraction
[…] on, I try to explain to them that an unfettered market involves consumers and producers directly interacting with their own money in an open and competitive […]
[…] on, I try to explain to them that an unfettered market involves consumers and producers directly interacting with their own money in an open and competitive […]
[…] on, I try to explain to them that an unfettered market involves consumers and producers directly interacting with their own money in an open and competitive […]
you’re an idiot. If you’re going to present an argument, at least have the stones to present both sides correctly. Any moron can say, “look, this is really bad, but look, this is really good….. the end!” You are not helping human discourse, only fueling an already shitty fire. The end
[…] the law was implemented, I repeatedly explained that more spending and more intervention in the health sector would worsen a system that already was suffering from too much […]
[…] shared a nightmarish flowchart to show the Byzantine complexity of America’s healthcare system under Obamacare. Sort of makes […]
[…] But not just our chance to repeal Obamacare. We may actually have a chance to deal with the larger government-caused problems in our healthcare system, all of which lead to third-party payer and undermine the efficiency and low costs that exist when there is a genuine free market. […]
[…] But not just our chance to repeal Obamacare. We may actually have a chance to deal with the larger government-caused problems in our healthcare system, all of which lead to third-party payer and undermine the efficiency and low costs that exist when there is a genuine free market. […]
[…] 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 […]
[…] shared a nightmarish flowchart to show the Byzantine complexity of America’s healthcare system under Obamacare. Sort of […]
[…] 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. […]
[…] this chart shows how Obamacare is turning the health care system into a Byzantine […]
[…] 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, […]
[…] 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, […]
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.
[…] 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 […]