Yaron Brook's Call to Action - July 2009

http://www.aynrand.org/

Yaron Brook discusses the consequences of healthcare reform being currently discusses.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Yaron
• Brook
• Ayn
• Rand
• Institute
• Center
• for
• Individual
• Rights
• Objectivist
• Objectivism
• Free
• Market
• Capitalist
• Capitalism
• Healthcare
• Socialized
• Reform
• Not
• Right
• Obama

[dannidandannikins]

errrr. are you serious? you say there is a free market even though hospitals have to treat anyone that comes into A&E, regardless of whether they have insurance. There are laws prohibiting insurance companies offering policies to out-of-state consumers. The FDA regulates what drugs can be used. I could go on all day listing ways in which there is not a free market in healthcare, but you would spend that day not listening. oh, don't forget that you pay tax, that's not very free market either.

[broeman]

What free market? If you're thinking of the US system, it is filled with government influences (taxes, subsidizes, laws) and they keep pushing the price up.

[greenghost2008]

i think she ought to comb her hair maybe?

[markhurt1956]

Capitalism in medicine is not only practical, it is also moral. Patients deserve the right to make a contract with their physicians. A contract is a voluntary agreement on behalf of both parties, patient and physician, that determines the conditions by which they will interact. Any other system requires victims The governments purpose is to protect the contractual agreement between patient and physician, nothing more and nothing less will do.

[charlessmyth]

I was thinking of the student loan as simply a loan and its obligations, and avoided the complications which arise because of the moral hazard of a mixed economy. But, the argument is still sound enough, to the extent that the medical professional does not have endure being a slave to the state, if he/she chooses not to. Being aware of this, he/she may decide to not study medicine at all, and sidestep the problem. Thus market forces, such as they are, will bring Big Government to its senses.

[p0rq]

By contractual obligations, do you mean that when a med student accepts his student loan, he also signs away his right to freedom from government interference?

Or do you mean it in a more esoteric manner, that he ought to pay the Gov. back for any help it might have given him?

If the latter: I disagree. By its myriad taxes and interferences in the economy, the Gov forces you to be dependent on it for help, after financially crippling you. (For a great example: see the Auto industry bailouts)

[Boomer1949]

Fine keep living in your make believe world, no sweat of my back. You were the one to pick this dam fight you little piss ant!! If you don't want to dance, don't invite me.

[dannidandannikins]

This is my last post in reply to you. Just think for a moment: if government applies a regulation, and the cost of compliance is $1million dollars (e.g. a statutory period of safety testing on a new drug) then a small company attempting to generate a new product is not going to be able to afford to bring that product to market, is it? Now think who benefits from keeping small companies from entering the market.

And don't swear at me you revolting, stupid, little cunt.

[charlessmyth]

Healthcare professionals are only subject to government interference, for so long as they have certain contractual obligations to honour: Student loans and fees, for instance. But they have the option to choose an alternative line of work, since they would be more intellectually mobile. As is the case for teachers, when confronted with intolerable classroom conditions. In addition, the study suggested, would make democracy work better, via more informed voters, who actually went out to vote.

[Boomer1949]

Oh bullshit!! Do you even know what Lobbies do in Washington? For the most part they fight every dam regulation or law that WOULD influence their bottom line and share holders. The BIG BOYS don't need Washington to squeeze out the little guy..grow up!! Think Microsoft or Walmart. Just yesterday, during the mark up on the Health Bill you could see their influence in every amendment put forward.

[dannidandannikins]

The issue you've raised is a very simple example of why you should not have political influence on the economy - it allows the big corporations to use political clout to cement their position so they are insulated from competition. If you can get a law passed regulating everyone in your industry then you, as a big company, can absorb the cost of compliance, but it keeps out smaller competitors who don't have that luxury who would otherwise chip into your market share.

Do you understand?

[Psy500]

Yet the US government is a representative of the capitalist class thus itself is a free-market agent in that the highest bidder gets to influence the government they are just no open about. It would be free-market if the government openly held auctions for people to buy influence in the government.