From the New Yorker:
This is an appealing vision. In most areas of the economy, free-market
principles insure that products and services keep improving, and that
consumers get better and better deals. But the free market, though it
may be the best way of allocating new TVs and cars, falters when it
comes to paying for bypass surgery or chemotherapy. The reasons for this
were established nearly fifty years ago, by the economist Kenneth
Arrow, in a classic article entitled “Uncertainty and the Welfare
Economics of Medical Care.” Arrow showed that health care is distinctive
in ways that limit the power of the market. Because people don’t have
the expertise to evaluate doctors, hospitals, or treatments, it’s hard
for them to comparison-shop. Because they can’t pay for major care out
of pocket, they must rely on insurance, thereby often losing the final
say in what to buy or how much to spend. More fundamentally, markets
work only when consumers have the power to say no if the price isn’t
right. Yet it’s very hard for people to say no in the case of things
like end-of-life care or brain surgery.
Let's look at the emboldened points in a bit more detail. I'll use my recent hip surgery as an example.
1.) Lack of expertise to evaluate. I saw three doctors about my hips, with the second two being members of the same practice. The first doctor was a member of my network -- which is why I called him -- and he had all the bedside manner of an SS Trooper. So, I asked my wife's doctor to make a recommendation to another practice. The first doctor was very nice, but he recommended a second doctor because my problem was really more in the second doctor's area of expertise. In all of these examples, I was really going with personality; I have absolutely no ability to evaluate any of their skill sets. And I still don't.
2.) At no point did I ever ask for a price from any of the surgeons. And the reason is it was covered (mostly) by insurance. I assumed it would cost a ton (it does). And I also know I'm responsible for a deductible. But, overall, my out of pocket expense is a small part of the overall cost.
3.) I did not have the ability to say no. OK -- I could have and faced the possibility of a continually deteriorating condition that would eventually leave me crippled. But, that really wasn't an option. In short, I had to have the service -- like everybody else in my position.
The ability to say no is crucial to keeping prices down as it exerts a downward pressure on prices by forcing those who provide goods or services to not charge too much for their services as doing so would drive people out of the market. As such, point number three is crucial and noticeably absent from the health care market. The lack of an ability to say no places service providers in a far more advantageous negotiating position -- one more akin to an oligopoly rather than a pure market environment.
This is just a short example the highlights the basic problems of using the free market to contain health care costs. And, for my money, it's really number 3 -- the fact that health care has to be purchased, placing all the bargaining power in the providers hands -- that really highlights the fundamental problem with this approach.
9 comments:
thanks for the interesting post and blog...
when I got my knees replaced it was after years of problems . something had to be done.. my primary sent me over to a surgical office.. The guy who does knees talked to me and said.. "if they were my knees I would have them replaced" and I was like yep.. both of them!
He was a good surgeon .. did old ladies hips on wed and knees on fri.
I don't think I paid anything than the initial $40 co-pay.
Hale, hope you and your hip recover fully. I have noticed an inverse relationship between people who name 'the free market' when arguing a point and those that actually understand what a free market is and how it works.
This is where the healthcare problem lies. There are two philosophies, in my opinion. One is make it a public service, much like Canada or other developing nations. The downside to this is obviously innovation suffers as does quality, the reason many of the worlds medical products come from the US and many foreigners come here for services. The other option is to encourage competition and self pay options. HSA's are a huge step in this direction as many providers will grant discounts if you pay in cash, granted many can't afford a $15k or more Doctor bill right now (build up your HSA first), but if prices are competitive because people have choice and pay attention to the price, unlike our current employer funded insurance where individuals only care about a small deductible. Unfortunately it comes down to if you believe healthcare is "a right" or product/service. Everyone has a choice, just like you said, ultimately it was your choice to get the hip surgery at the doctor you chose, we need to push the HIE (health information exchange) to make educated decisions and force more of the cost onto the individuals to prevent poor utilization without damaging quality and innovation.
On a separate note, love your blog and your work, keep it going!
There are many thing that should have be an open/free market system but somethings should not be (healthcare).
My criteria for a free market is whether you can do without the service or product.
I can live without an ipad (or whatever) but I can't if I have an issue with my body.
Should I prolong until one has enough money. If your answer is yes, then that was the system in the dark ages.
I rather pool our resources together and share the burdern equally (single payer or public option). Should I give all my money to an intermediate party (health insurance company) or to the doctors directly? I don't know about you, but healthcare company is predicted to earn over billions of dollars in a decade to come. Where do you think these company is getting their money? Will the profit they use to seek better medicine? Market theory would suggest no because it is not profitable. Remember public service (supported by govt) that help eliminate polio in US and a host of other. A free market system would not do it.
Health Care has never been an open/free market. Most states protect the profitability of hospitals & outpatient business with certificates of need. Getting a certificate of need often means showing to the existing health care facilities that your new health care facility won’t adversely impact their ‘profits’ (wither they are non-profit or not) There are many other things that also protect the existing providers of health care.
That said... why hasn’t the cost of medical equipment come down? I mean things like x-ray machines, MRIs, lab equipment & things like that.
Or has it? Every dentist office has an x-ray machine. Do most doctors’ offices all have basic lab equipment that a decade ago they would send things out for tests.
wow nice! Why the Free Market Doesn't Work For Health Care
interesting post i like ur blog
thanx share this post
<a href="http://www.sunlike-tools.com/>tooth extracting forceps</a>
Hello every one am here to share about my home business experience with you guys as am earning much more income in short period of time that too without any investment as i just joined the GDI group Global Domains International this group provides the free training and teach us how to earn easily from the without affecting your current business so to see the presentation just go to freedom.ws/webincome5 and use username webincome5 as access code to see the presentation believe me it really works for you have good luck.
One more nice script to learn. Very Glad that you shared this to us. It's some pretty great info and pretty good post. I'm sure some people will really like this information cause this have genuine information for the readers.Thank you for sharing with us.
wow nice i really ... yours site is so informative. we provide cheap dental instruments.. all clients easily affordable
tooth extracting forceps
dental forceps
dental instruments
dental elevator
Post a Comment