It has become obvious to me that the American health care industry regularly price gouges the sick. I have come to realize this from comparing our health care system with national health care programs in other countries that should cost far more than our aid programs but in reality cost less. While I initially thought that this was a good argument for national health insurance, I now realize that the underlying problem, the absurdly high prices charged for medical care, would not be solved by such a plan and that the government simply could not afford to provide national health insurance, not even if it cut the military and/or raised taxes. After thinking the matter over, there appears to be only one major reform that might work: Price controls. First, since companies that provide medical care and prescription drugs are charging far more than they need to charge to stay in business, price controls would not unreasonably lessen their profit incentive. Second, price controls on all medical care and prescription drugs could lower government medical aid costs without hurting the poor, and, by helping the poor remain healthy, would give them something closer to true equal opportunity and so help them escape from poverty, helping the overall economy thereby. On the other hand, I fully recognize that there might be negative effects that I am not aware of, so I ask experts on such topics (MerlinX, stekim, Zoe and others) for input on what a price control plan would do to health care. I appreciate all replies. Thank you very much.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

Does anyone have any information on this subject? Thank you very much.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

Okay, since obviously no one has any grave objections to the idea of medical price controls, I now support them.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

I don't know a lot about drug companies profit margins, but I know companies like Pfizer have been taking some big hits from lawsuits and what not. Pfizers stock has dropped almost half since it peaked around 2000 I believe.


And in regards to economics 101, price ceilings always lead to shortages, and nobody likes old people to go without their heart medication. Price ceilings are a very complicated subject and it would be extraordinarily difficult to pick exactly what price for each individual drug should be. Historically, no one has been smart enough to figure out what price ceilings should be set at to weigh the benefits of lower prices vs. the cons of shortages.

Actually, there are a lot of price caps already in place. Every managed care plan in this country caps the price they will pay for every service they cover. As does medicare and medicaid. The caps vary depending upon the insurance company and the procedure, but we already have them.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

I believe Force was talking about price caps on the pharmaceutical companies themselves. As in Pfizer can't legally sell Viagra for more than $5 a box etc...

Having "price caps" in the sense that medicare/medicaid/insurance companies won't pay for a service if it costs more than a certain amount is a normal restraint that all buyers have in their demand for a good. This "price cap" is a normal action in a free market while Force's proposal is a restraint on the free market system.