Econlib Resources
|
TRACKBACKS (3 to date)
The author at Truck and Barter in a related article titled Podcast of the Day-Crisis of Abundance writes:
COMMENTS (1 to date)
Jadagul writes:
I believe the argument is that nationalized healthcare causes someone else to make decisisons; if you believe that the consumers are irrational but doctors and politicians are rational, you might want to move the decisions to some sort of bureaucratic apparatus. This actually ties in with you post on the flat of the curve. I might be willing to spend virtually unlimited amounts of money to only slightly prolong my life; similarly, it's hard to say, "Oh well, Grandma's gonna die in the next year or so anyway; go ahead and pull the plug." But if we have a nationalized system, the doctor can tell me "there's nothing else we can do," and that's that. So we'd eliminate the treatments that typically aren't very cost-effective altogether, and save money. As I said in the link above, I find this position morally offensive. It also has some other issues, like the potential impacts on pharmaceutical research. But it's not nuts. Posted September 2, 2006 3:52 PM
Comments for this entry
have been closed
|
||||||||
|
|
Blogging software: Powered by Movable Type 4.2.1.
Pictures of Bryan Caplan and Arnold Kling courtesy of the authors. All opinions expressed on EconLog reflect those of the author or individual commenters, and do not necessarily represent the views or positions of the Library of Economics and Liberty (Econlib) website or its owner, Liberty Fund, Inc.
The cuneiform inscription in the Liberty Fund logo is the
earliest-known written appearance of the word
"freedom" (amagi), or "liberty." It
is taken from a clay document written about 2300 B.C. in the Sumerian city-state of Lagash.
|
||||||||