Why not post the rest of that announcement? Is it because it harms your point?
These hospitals will be private but are clearly not an attempt to privatize the healthcare industry there. They are only permitted in a few of the already designated special economic zones. In order for them to be able to be covered under China’s payment they have to price everything according to China’s pricing policy. In other words, they don’t get to set any prices. They have to subject themselves to direct supervision by regulators. They don’t even have the ability to do any transplants, no psychiatric hospital stuff, and so on. Additionally, they have to be plugged into everything any other hospital has to be plugged into in China for medical record keeping. On top of all that it’s not like China sells the land to these companies and lets them run wild. They give them a conditional land-lease. If they don’t live up to all the expectations given to them it will be revoked and their facilities appropriated by the Chinese government, as should happen.
Functionally, this is NOTHING like western capitalism except a private company is going to be building these hospitals. If they can make a profit then they will get that but if they don’t China will literally not give a shit and just take them over.
I think making comparisons is fine. I think there are comparable things. But cherry picking the parts of a news release you like to try and make your point is cheap and you know it.
Before I respond to your post, just think about what much be going through the mind of the policy and planning staff that think this will be deliver better care.
The CPC approach to healthcare makes it very easy to put the critical in critical support and it’s entirely unnecessary.
On cutting off the article - No? It supports my point. Assuming you’re talking about the following paragraphs, the approach is unfortunately entirely consistent with the business model of private hospitals in countries with a decent public hospital sector - private hospitals suck up resourcing while only overtreating the rich for simple procedures. Then planners will point to the lack of incentives and do more opening up to help these foreign firms.
In 2023, the number of hospitals in China topped 38,000, with public hospitals accounting for less than one-third of the total. However, public hospitals accounted for 83.5 percent of the total number of patient visits nationwide, according to official data.
Since 2000, China has allowed the establishment of joint-venture medical institutions with foreign investors. After more than 20 years of development, there are currently over 60 foreign-invested joint-venture medical institutions in the country.
The work plan explicitly excludes traditional Chinese medicine hospitals and prohibits the foreign acquisition of public hospitals.
Aiming to introduce high-level international medical resources, improve the supply of medical services, and optimize the business environment, the document specifies pilot requirements, management measures, and other related terms.
The plan permits wholly foreign-owned hospitals to operate as general, specialty, and rehabilitation hospitals.
It also includes restrictions. For instance, such hospitals are barred from performing medical activities with significant medical or ethical risks, such as human organ transplantation.
On to your post
These hospitals will be private but are clearly not an attempt to privatize the healthcare industry there
Didn’t say the CPC was wholesale privatising the healthcare sector
They are only permitted in a few of the already designated special economic zones
We can have a little profit driven healthcare as a treat
China’s payment they have to price everything according to China’s pricing policy. In other words, they don’t get to set any prices
So take a guess how they’ll make profits
They have to subject themselves to direct supervision by regulators.
Literally the bare minimum
They don’t even have the ability to do any transplants, no psychiatric hospital stuff, and so on.
Private hospitals don’t tend to go for expensive, complex procedures. You want to churn through stuff like joint replacements and arthroscopies
To the other points mentioned, none of these are inconsistent with capitalism. 99 year leases and a stronger state reflect most of the 20th century until the rise of neoliberalism capitalism.
this is NOTHING like western capitalism except a private company is going to be [running] these hospitals
So this is nothing like western capitalism except you have a private company being paid to deliver essential healthcare, with the idea that this hospital will deliver better services than public hospitals and be competitive because of the increased focus on productivity due to the profit motive?
Why not post the rest of that announcement? Is it because it harms your point?
These hospitals will be private but are clearly not an attempt to privatize the healthcare industry there. They are only permitted in a few of the already designated special economic zones. In order for them to be able to be covered under China’s payment they have to price everything according to China’s pricing policy. In other words, they don’t get to set any prices. They have to subject themselves to direct supervision by regulators. They don’t even have the ability to do any transplants, no psychiatric hospital stuff, and so on. Additionally, they have to be plugged into everything any other hospital has to be plugged into in China for medical record keeping. On top of all that it’s not like China sells the land to these companies and lets them run wild. They give them a conditional land-lease. If they don’t live up to all the expectations given to them it will be revoked and their facilities appropriated by the Chinese government, as should happen.
Functionally, this is NOTHING like western capitalism except a private company is going to be building these hospitals. If they can make a profit then they will get that but if they don’t China will literally not give a shit and just take them over.
I think making comparisons is fine. I think there are comparable things. But cherry picking the parts of a news release you like to try and make your point is cheap and you know it.
Before I respond to your post, just think about what much be going through the mind of the policy and planning staff that think this will be deliver better care.
The CPC approach to healthcare makes it very easy to put the critical in critical support and it’s entirely unnecessary.
On cutting off the article - No? It supports my point. Assuming you’re talking about the following paragraphs, the approach is unfortunately entirely consistent with the business model of private hospitals in countries with a decent public hospital sector - private hospitals suck up resourcing while only overtreating the rich for simple procedures. Then planners will point to the lack of incentives and do more opening up to help these foreign firms.
On to your post
Didn’t say the CPC was wholesale privatising the healthcare sector
We can have a little profit driven healthcare as a treat
So take a guess how they’ll make profits
Literally the bare minimum
Private hospitals don’t tend to go for expensive, complex procedures. You want to churn through stuff like joint replacements and arthroscopies
To the other points mentioned, none of these are inconsistent with capitalism. 99 year leases and a stronger state reflect most of the 20th century until the rise of neoliberalism capitalism.
Not sure they can take them over either without compensation, China keeps signing things with ISDS provisions. Here’s an article about China doing the thing to South Korea https://isds.bilaterals.org/?aborted-for-profit-hospital=&lang=en
So this is nothing like western capitalism except you have a private company being paid to deliver essential healthcare, with the idea that this hospital will deliver better services than public hospitals and be competitive because of the increased focus on productivity due to the profit motive?