I want to address the hostility to “socialized medicine.” Why does the word “socialized” work people up into a frenzy? I think it is because of our deeply-held belief in the basic features of capitalism, which I would agree is the best economic system (although it must be contained by the government, as I argued a few weeks ago). Capitalism works because it throws a harness around each person’s desire to better his own economic circumstances. Here’s an example of healthy capitalism: if there were only one, state-controlled computer manufacturer, then we could expect that computers would become sub-standard rather quickly. There have to be several computer manufacturers that are in competition for my business, because the result of the competition will cheaper and more powerful computers.
Conservatives argue that medical care should work essentially in the same way. Hospitals should remain privately-controlled because in an effort to get me to come to their hospital rather than the other guy’s hospital, each hospital will do its best to control costs, provide a clean environment, and offer effective care. Health insurance companies should work in the same way: there should be many private insurance companies competing for my business, because then those companies will work to offer the better and more affordable insurance than their competitor.
Next week I want to develop more of an argument for “socialized medicine.” But for now, I will simply point to a glaring dissimilarity between the case of say, computer manufacturing, and that of medical treatment. The conservative has made the same capitalist analysis in both cases, but the cases are not the same. Let’s say I am making a decision to purchase a new computer. So I look at the selection, read some consumer reviews, and discover that the computer market is not to my satisfaction. I have other options: I can decide to refurbish my current computer, to do all my work at a computer lab or at a work computer, to share a computer with my wife or roommate, etc, etc, etc. The point is, the consumer has options, and he can decide to leave the marketplace if he does not find current market conditions to his liking for whatever reason.
This is when capitalism is great. Computer company A notices that sales of new computers are down to people in my socioeconomic demographic, and so the board members at computer company A get together and figure out how to make their computers better, faster, cheaper, prettier, etc., so that I will change my mind about buying a new computer.
The situation with health care is quite different. If I become dissatisfied my insurance company, or that the cost of a check up is too high, then I can look around for a new provider or new doctor. But I cannot reasonably be expected to opt out of the marketplace entirely in most cases. I know and you know that it does not cost $16,000 to bring a healthy baby in this world with no complications. Somebody is getting rich at my expense. Now, if this were like the computer situation, I would just decide tosuch as that of giving birth, it is just not reasonable to ask someone to forgo treatment entirely until costs come down. The insurance companies have you, because I can’t leave the marketplace. The computer manufacturers have to get you, because I can leave the marketplace, and so they have to work hard for my business.
I understand that I have not yet argued for socialized medicine. But I hope I have shown one difference between a company a hospital.
