Comment by eftychis
2 years ago
Monopsonies require a single buyer with a stick to work. Economics teaches that to us since inception.
I am not sure why this is even a divisive topic. Sure discuss how a doctor decorates their office. Who cares. When you are dying or are in pain, nothing but treatment at any cost matters.
While there are arguments for and against a variety of systems, this one is weak and specious.
Oh, sure, in a crisis you need care immediately. What about all the other circumstances? What about the possibility of making pre-arrangements in event of crisis, some sort of “insurance” even? Not to be confused with the comprehensive health care delivery product called “insurance” in the US (which, hey, also exists as a model and could persist in a market.) Maybe some markets are still monopsonies, but surely not all. I can surely find a variety of GPs, allergists, physical therapists, …
A sound argument for or against a market health system recognizes that emergency care is only one circumstance of many, a minority of health care costs, and it’s possible we might be better off if it does not drive the overall design of healthcare.