• psvrh@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    184
    ·
    7 months ago

    The market has solved it.

    You just don’t realize what the market has solved for. It didn’t solve the problem of expensive healthcare, it solved the problem of how to maximize profits for the wealthy.

    That’s what people don’t understand about “the market”. What you think it’s doing isn’t what it’s actually doing.

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yup, the free market and health care are not compatible because the free market works on principles of supply and demand. But when you have a limited resource that people will literally pay anything for (their health) - well you can see where the problem is.

    • tetris11
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      If the free market had any real competitors, the problem would genuinely solve itself in favor of the consumer. We see this with any new tech where a bunch of new firms try to win customers by any means necessary in those first few years.

      The problem as always is: where are the competitors after X years, and are these “competitors” actually competing anymore?

      The solution as always is: regulate. Ensure competition. Ensure cartels aren’t price fixing. But no one wants to hear that

      • callouscomic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The streaming market has tons of competition. So then why are prices endlessly rising and content being removed and the value being made worse with ads?

        The video game market also has tons of companies in it, and yet most of them are making the experience worse with ads and service-based games.

        • InputZero
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m so old I used to install my games on 5 1/2" floppies. I dispise how the video game market changed from an ownership model to service-based and micro transactions models that are popular today. Don’t even get me started on mobile games. What I have noticed is that I am paying almost the same price for a video game today as I was 30 years ago. A game that I paid approximately $75 for in 1994 I should be paying approximately $150.00 for a new release today. Yet I’m still paying $75 for a game, they have to be making up that difference somewhere. Now the tools needed to make a game have had an enormous impact on reducing costs, and there’s a whole bunch of other economic stuff I’m ignoring. Regardless, it’s still kind of amazing the price of games hasn’t inflated.

      • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I want to hear it. I want to hear it in my music. My daily discussions. My podcasts. On my television. In my social media. I cannot hear it enough. It’s gives a joyous and wonderful feeling.

        • tetris11
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m not sure if you’re replying to right comment

      • MrEff@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I have an honors minor in medical humanities and took several medical policy courses. We looked at this exact graph from previous years as well as several other huge sets of data/graphs/studies and anything else related to insurance you can imagine. Insurance is not a standard market commodity and does not follow the same trend or logic. The only way you can lower premiums in insurance is by reducing the risk in the pool, or increasing the pool size to dilute the risk. This is either increasing the total pool size by increasing premiums, getting more people, or being selective about who joins the risk pool. The third one was what was called “preexisting conditions” and kept high cost people from entering the risk pool and draining the funds. This got banned and increased premiums. By increasing competition you end up splitting up the pools, making everyone’s premiums go up. This happened multiple times post ACA after the GOP started stripping out the funding and safeguards to prevent this. More and more competition opened up with artificially low premiums being subsidized by federal dollars, but then when the subsidies ended the premiums started jumping. Then when the premiums were jumping, new companies opened up to make more competition advertising lower rates, but then further fractured to pool sizes, leading to premiums skyrocketing. If you look back just 10 years ago there was a 3-5 year stretch of premiums increasing almost 30% year after year. It was due to all the competition opening up every year. This is why single payer systems have the lowest rates. If you have even one private company monopoly with a regulated cap on profits you would still end up with lower premiums. Then, if this single paying company was nationalized to take out the profit making middle man, the premiums are that much lower because your risk is spread across a massive pool. More competition in insurance makes the problem worse. I would agree with your stronger regulation though. There is a lot that can be done there.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        By the time the system has consolidated enough that there is little effective competition, those companies have also become so large that they can lobby for regulatory capture. It’s not zero regulation, but rather a form of regulation that solidifies their position while still providing the same shitty service they always have.

        Regulation won’t work. The system is too far gone.

        • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          have you tried not voting for thieves porn stars and real estate developers? Maybe get someone in who could possibly know what they’re talking about

        • tetris11
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          What other tools are there for ensuring a fair market? Government intervention seems like the only avenue

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Stop expecting politians to be the source of change. The results will be lackluster, at best.

    • callouscomic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Everybody knows this. You don’t have to state it so pretentiously like you’re the only jerk who knows it. It’s been said on the internet billions of times for 2 decades at least.