Image Source
The United States healthcare system, and the current method of paying for it, are both highly inefficient. As things are, insurance companies are able to profit massively off the illnesses and injuries of others. This is deplorable and needs to be quickly remedied. In the talk, a plan for remedying this terrible situation was proposed that I believe has an actual chance of working. In the talk, it was proposed that healthcare in the United States be provided in such a way that simultaneously would not bankrupt patients yet would also encourage them to shop around for the best prices. This would allow market forces to take over, and in effect, the prices would lower, and the quality of care and customer service would increase. Because of the This would be good for everyone except for the companies that currently turn a profit by exploiting the sick and injured for financial gain. I believe that organizations that do such cruel things should not be allowed to continue, so the cost that would be borne by these organizations is worth the benefit to my personal belief set.
When the topic of hospitals competing in the same ways as normal businesses is brought up for discussion, the opposing reactions are usually divided into two main factions: one being that local, small-town hospitals would have a monopoly on their local area, causing those areas to continue suffering, and the other being that even if people began to have an actual economic choice, the prices and quality would not change much, due to most of the population having already come to expect that such services should be this expensive. This first argument seems valid at first glance, and to a slight extent it may take hold, but when you consider a single, rural, locally owned grocery store, that business has just as much opportunity to become a monopoly, and yet it does not. The prices of such a store are often slightly higher than the prices at superstores, but this is to compensate for the lack of in place infrastructure and lack of mass production practices. Since there are already examples of isolated businesses that have the chance to monopolize but don’t, it is reasonable to expect that another business in similar circumstances would behave in much the same way. The second argument against this plan, being that people have already come to accept the way things currently are, causing the prices to remain the same, is completely false. It is basic human nature to always want something better for less. Once people begin having the choice and motivation to actually choose cheaper and better options, the places that are cheaper and better will quickly begin receiving much more business than they had before, motivating others to follow suit.
