Econlib Resources
Subscribe to EconLog
XML (Full articles)RDF (Excerpts) Feedburner (One-click subscriptions) Subscribe by author
Bryan CaplanDavid Henderson Arnold Kling More
FAQ
(Instructions and more options)
|
|
||||||||
|
|
Blogging software: Powered by Movable Type 4.2.1.
Pictures 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.
|
||||||||
Please correct me if I am wrong here. My understanding is that if you are part of Medicare you are not allowed, by law, to use your own money for treatments if Medicare has denied coverage. Is that correct or am I thinking about something else? If my understanding is correct, then there is a problem with Bryan's statement.
See also interfluidity on the property-ness of Medicare.
Matt,
As far as I know, your impression is wrong. That is, if Medicare will not cover procedure X, you can pay for procedure X yourself and nobody will come and arrest you.
In Canada, my understanding is that it is against the law to use medical resources without the government's permission. The fear is that if people could spend their own money, they would use up the available health care providers, taking away availability from the government-run system.
"I have said before that as individuals, we want unrestricted access to medical services without having to pay for them."
Except we pay for them, with every paycheck.